Hello Bex (and others ...)

Quote
Evolutionists, when confronted by evidence that contradicts their theories (pictures of the fossils themselves) will find any means possible to vindicate their theory, ...
Except for one small detail:

Not one of those pictures of fossils contradicts any of the theories of evolution.

This is a common misunderstanding for people that don't understand science and evolution, and it is another example of the "All A is B, B! therefore A" logical fallacy. Evolution does not HAVE to happen, nor does it HAVE to affect all species in any major way -- species that are in a stable niche can - and do - remain virtually unchanged (certainly unchanged enough for the average person to see little difference). The blue-green algae that lives today is similar to the fossils that are found in rocks 3.5 billion years old, the oldest known fossils.

This does not mean that evolution does not happen.

Even when species appear unchanged this does not mean that evolution has not occurred -- that these species were not also descended from common ancestors to other species that have changed visibly while they remain well suited to a stable niche.

Take the coelacanth example given previously. The ones living today are not only different species from the ones from 65 million years ago they are not the same GENUS. This is because "coelacanth" is the name for an ORDER of related fish, much the same way we are members of the Order Primates, and this is like using a 60 million year old primate fossil to claim that humans are unchanged since then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanths

Quote
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Sarcopterygii
Subclass: Coelacanthimorpha
Order: Coelacanthiformes
Families See text.
:
Although now represented by only two known living species, as a group the coelacanths were once very successful with many genera and species that left an abundant fossil record from the Devonian to the end of the Cretaceous period, at which point they apparently suffered a nearly complete extinction. No fossils dated after this point are known to have been found.[citation needed] It is often claimed that the coelacanth has remained unchanged for millions of years but [color:"red"]in fact the living species and even genus are unknown from the fossil record.[/color] However, some of the extinct species, particularly those of the last known fossil coelacanth, the Cretaceous genus Macropoma, closely resemble the living species.[citation needed] The most likely reason for the gap is the taxon having become extinct in shallow waters. Deep-water fossils are only rarely lifted to levels where paleontologists can recover them, making most deep-water taxa disappear from the fossil record. This situation is still under investigation by scientists.
You can find lots of similar information from other sites for those that are squeamish about WIKI

http://www.dinofish.com/biologyandbehavior.html

Quote
The living coelacanths, Latimeria chalumnae,and Latimeria menadoensis are possibly the sole remaining representatives of a once widespread family of Sarcopterygian (fleshy-finned) coelacanth fishes (more than 120 species are known from fossils)all but one of which disappeared at the end of the Cretaceous, 65 million years ago. The classification of coelacanths is a murky business with more than one vairation in the class category, but we'll give it a shot. Kingdom: Animalia, Phylum: Chordata, Class: Pices (fishes), Sub class: Gnathostomata- jawed fishes, Sub class: Teleostei- bony fishes (though cartilaginous, coelacanths are usually classed with the teleosts), Sub class: Sarcopterygii (lobed-finned fishes), Order: Crossopterygii, Family: Actinistia (coelacanths), Gennus: Latimeria, Species: chalumnae and menadoensis.
These are not the same species, or genus, or even family, of fish.

I would not be surprised to see fish, turtles, frogs, bugs trees and other generic TYPES of life in the fossil record, as they are part of the evidence FOR evolution. The difference between a scientist and a layperson looking at the fossils is that the scientist sees the differences and trends over time, while many a layperson can barely distinguish one bird from another, other than by colors (we have some red birds and some blue birds and lots of brown birds ...).

For you to show that evolution can not work with this kind of "evidence" is that you need to show that speciation does not happen and that there are no common ancestors between each of the different forms of life we know.

Problem is: we know speciation happens, we know that there are common ancestors, and thus your evidence is not evidence that evolution does not, has not nor can not happen.

Quote
Adaption to ones environment is simply "adaption" (e.g. thicker coat in the cold, shedding in the heat etc). We have been through this before on this forum.
And what you have failed to show is that there is any limitation to adaptation. For creationists to claim that there is only "adaptation" within "kinds" you need to demonstrate that there is some barrier to the amount of variation that can occur.

Enjoy.
[color:"green"]
Note: my time is limited, so I only choose threads of particular interest to me and I cannot guarantee a reply to all responses (particularly if they do not discuss the issue/s), and I expect other people to do the same. Thank you for your consideration.[/color]