christians, how is it not plausible?

New specie (or perhaps more accurately sub-species) can be produced in a much shorter time than millions of years. Not only is it plausible it is observable.

However, the formation of a new genus due to natural selection with or without mutations has never been directly observed or produced in a laboratory. Because this requires not only selection but the introduction of new alleles natural selection alone does not account for this no matter how much time you give it.. Richard Dawkins has asserted that the allele is the basic unit of selection and this experimentally testable. As result the minimum amount of new information necessary for the process to work is the allele. Thus for no known process including mutations has been observed to produce novel alleles or experimentally demonstrated to produce novel alleles. As result the formation of novel genus by say of natural selection and mutations is an unproven hypothesis.

Evolution can be said to explain variation withing a genus, including the occasional formation of new species, but the empirical evidence supporting the assertion that it also can produce novel genus is lacking. I reject this assertion made by proponents of evolution because of a lack of empirical evidence. A valid question related to this is - is there other evidence supporting the claim. The answer is yes, there is anecdotal evidence however while anecdotal evidence is sometimes accepted as a basis for more examination of a hypothesis, generally it is considered to be insufficient to graduate a hypothesis to the status of a theory.

Plausible? logic and reason are below:

Do you or can you know all things before you die? Can you see all things before you die? Are there things that we have not found that exists? Are there things that we are not meant to understand? Or can we understand all things?

Answering these honestly, one can deduce that we will never know or understand it all as a human.

So this being true, how can one say that there can not be a God? For we already admit we can not know it all, and understand it or see it all.

So denying God is for one who has no knowledge and/or no understanding of much of anything.

For when we know all this, and its truth. Then a God can exist.

Whether you believe one does is up to you, but a God can exist.

Which means honestly there can not be an atheist, agnostic but not atheist. We just proved a God can exist, so saying one can not when one can is foolish.

bless you.

So calling oneself an atheist is saying they are dumber than a rock. So are you atheist?

Something about how survival of the fittest can account for genetic mutations within species but does not account for complete different species.

If your serious about understanding this then explore Thomson Jay Hudson. Any way, for an absolute fascinating read, get into him.

Some species adapt to their environment, true, but they do not mutate into other species. Animals of one species cannot reproduce young with another species. God says He made the animals AFTER THEIR OWN KIND. And God don't lie.

If that were not so, we would have chickens with possum heads, and skunks with beaver tails, etc. Nope, I don't buy it.

I never said it wasn't, I don't deny evolution as a valid theory about God's Method of creating life on earth

I think that it's not only plausible but actually very probable. Please stop generalizing us.

Because bible say we come from dust. Not fishes.

LALALALALALA I can't hear you!! My common sense has been corroded due to Brainwashing and Fear LALALALALA!!