any chance of saying what the evolutionary explanation for marsupials being concentrated mostly in one area is, and why you suggest it superior to the creation migratory theory.

Please be patient. I am getting you to agree with every step of the argument. Once we have collected all your agreements I will assemble them in the right order and you will have said what the evolutionary argument is!


yes, dmcg, that seems what I understand the theory entails, though I cant get my head as to what the very last clause is saying.

By the very last clause I assume you mean "the new species that the theory claims occur (even if you disagree with the theory, I can't see how you can disagree the theory claims it) will share characteristics of the ancestor that were not those giving rise to the different species" Now I agree I've expressed that in a complex way, so let's see if you agree with this bit: even if you disagree with the theory, I can't see how you can disagree the theory claims it


Let me give an analogy. Not one atheist in this thread will agree with the statement "God made the world". On the other hand, every one of them will agree with "The Bible claims God made the world". You see the importance of the distinction? So I am not asking you to agree that the evolutionary theory is true, but I am asking you to agree that is what it claims.

If it is other part, I think that is fairly straightforward. Suppose we have a blue-haired small creature and a natural selection pressure to become taller - creationist model or evolutionist model matters not. I am saying that when it does become taller you would not expect it then to become pink. It could, but it is far more probable that it remains blue.