Shimrod, did I claim that lemski claimed his experiment proved bugs to biologist evolution?   Of course he might well have hoped that fast reproducing organisms observed over several decades might give evidence of that, but be it his hope or not, my contention is that a experiment that might equate to a evolutionary timeframe, did not produce anything but bugs reproducing after their kind.....as the bible predicts. Not enough time you may say......well , how many decades do you require, or you might say that ecoli may be an example of evolutionary stasis.....double talk saying nought but an excuse for no change over alleged myo!.       This is what I mean by show me some evolution......you will have to ask snail, if he means something else!. Evolutionism is probably the only area of science where the conclusions are reached , and then the evidence is searched for to verify the conclusions.    You will of course...as shimrod implies....reply that creationists do that, but as I often say, evidence and data don't speak for itself, It is interpreted. And quite frankly, even I can see that evolutionism has to contradict otherwise accepted scientific laws to even get off the ground.    Shimrod claims that positing the eternal, spiritual God of the bible removes me from the discussion, is IMO, ridiculous when he posits an explanation he has provided no evidence for, and actually contradicts observable and experimental science.    If there is a god, then creation is logical. If there is no god, creation ...loosely termed.. is not logical.   All that can be done by God deniers is hope that something turns up to make it logical. Till such time, most will retain their philosophical position, while only a few, like Anthony flew, abandon it when examining the evidence.