"'Natural Selection' is 'Micro' evolution: VARIATIONS WITHIN KINDS. The survival of the fittest as Darwin described it etc."
This is the only evolution that has been observed.
THIS IS SCIENCE AND PROVABLE. 
HOWEVER, THE >ONLY EVIDENCES< OF EVOLUTION GIVEN ARE ALWAYS THIS >MICRO< EVOLUTION; variations within KINDS. Canines= more canines, felines= more felines, cats do not produce catfish and can NOT interbreed. If we were descended from monkeys why can't we interbreed?
Now the question is: Somehow, you evolutionists imply that this micro evolution is evidence for the other five types of evolution. If the hypothesis has any validity at all why, or at least how is that possible that you cannot show a
SINGLE instance of the other types?
[/quote]
OKAY, too hard a question. Why is it that this easy question is ALWAYS the conversation stopper with Darwinists? I thought "science" was supposed to be based on observable phenomena.
