pt 3 Richard Dawkins was asked the question "Can you think of an example of a mutation that increases genetic complexity" He was totally silent for 19 seconds, then answered, "Shut the tape off please" Because he even knew there aren't any. There are no mutations that increase genetic complexity. You might shuffle genes around but you are never adding new genetic material. Some text books will call it DIVERGENT Evolution. They give it a fancy name, but still a dog will never evolve into a whale or corn will never grow to produce tomato buds. Fancy names do not change the facts. In a 100 years of selective breeding the Kentucky Derby finish times went from 127 seconds to 123. Millions and millions of dollars spent on this selection of traits suited for racing speed. I don't know if they reached the limit of horse speed or not, but I suspect they are reaching the limit. IF you really want to win the derby, why don't you breed wings on your horse and fly around the track in 12 seconds ? Sure variations happen but there are limits. Why can evolutionist not see this ? Because there is an agenda (NWO). They want to believe that there is enough variety that a rock can turn into a human after millions of years. The only evidence to support evolution is known lies. I'm sick of it. Suppose I had a theory that the moon is made of green cheese. It's a dumb theory but I don't care. Then suppose I said NASA proved it when they went there on a secret mission in 1973 and drilled a hole and found that the moon is made of green cheese. Now we have a problem. I have a dumb theory that the moon is made of cheese, which is fine, but I have created LIES to support my theory. That's not fine. It's worse to get paid by tax dollars to preach this lie. You have evidence for evolution I want to see it, I really do. NO evidence ? I'm sorry, get a new theory. It works this way with everything but not for evolution, why ? It's the only way they can get rid of God. More lies in the text books... They say they have evidence from fossils. This is silly. No fossils could even count for evolution. No fossils count. They would not even hold up in a court of law. You can prove bones had any kids. And you sure can't prove they had different kids. If you want to believe these bones are our ancestors, go ahead...now your off to religion and not science. Some people have a hard time letting it go, and will lie to you . The text books will use fruit flys as examples for evolution. They put those flys in microwaves, they x-rayed them and did a lot of this kind of stuff to them in labortories...and those flies mutated. They got flies with curled wings, they could not go anywhere. From this they also got a fly with no wings...it crawled. And yet, fruit flys have yet become anything but fruit flys under anything YET devised (like microwaving). Conclusions from the fly experiments: 1. all mutations observed were inferior to the original fly. But they also concluded that fruit flys have evolved as far they can go. There is another conclusion: maybe fruit flys were doing fine until you got ahold of them in your laboratory. God made them right to begin with. Is this something you can even consider as an option ?