All arguments against Evolution is invalid.

I'm sorry to say this, but at this point, you are just making excuses. The level of evidence you are requiring hasn't been found for ANY scientific theory. We would never make any scientific progress at all if all of us thought like you did. "We observe an occurrence happening around us, and you assume it must be the cause of what happened in the past. Yet, we can not make that assumption. It is inherently unscientific to do so. That is my argument. "If we have seen evolution occuring in nature, and we know that all organisms have the same genetic mechanism for such a process to happen, AND we have at least suggestive proof of that it has been happening, then we CAN ASSUME that Evolution is what has been causing organisms to come and go over Earth's history. It is not "inherently unscientific". You are just blindly dismissing evidence because you don't want to believe in the theory. "That is just one of the holes. It attempts to generalize and compress millions of years of change into two steps, one species to another. It ignores any possibility that something may have happened in between the observed instances. "Well, if we FIND something like that, then the scientific community surely wouldn't just dismiss it. They would do further research into it to see if they can learn something from it. In other words, if we found evidence that a unicorn existed, then we would reconsider our stance on the issue, but until then, it is ridiculous to claim that unicorns exist, since no one has ever witnessed one before. Out of the small sample of fossils we have uncovered 100% of it is in support of Evolution. And once again, it isn't just the fossil record supporting Evolution; there is also a lot of other evidence which you have failed to address. "Evolution has not existed as a theory long enough for such large-scale changes to be observed. "So? We aren't going to wait for a million years before we proclaim it to be fact! There is plenty of evidence supporting evolution NOW, so why should we have to wait to actually observe it? We don't have to observe something firsthand to know that it is true. We can find evidence that it happened in the past and know that it is true. "You have no proof that the process you witnessed is the cause of the changes in the fossil record, and to claim you do is dishonest. "Fossil record alone would probably not be enough to prove Evolution. However, I have mentioned MANY times now, that there is MUCH more than that proving Evolution! !! "Evolution is insufficient in describing the development of living beings on Earth. "You cannot claim that until you either1) show definite proof against the theory,2) prove that there is a logical fallacy within the theory, or3) present an alternative theory with equally valid evidence behind itYou have done none if these. You made a pathetic attempt at disproving one form of evidence (transitional fossils) by saying it isn't enough, despite the fact that it IS enough and that there are many other forms of evidence out there that you didn't even mention. "Your system's evidence is flawed. I did not say that transitional fossils are "most certainly caused by some other process. " Rather, I said that Evolution has not been proven to be the certain cause of transitional fossils. And you never will be able to prove it. "You're right. I would never be able to prove anything to YOU. That's the beauty of denial; if you just keep saying "no, no, no, no, no, no, no" then I will eventually have nothing left to show you, since you denied all of it. And that, my friend, is what you have been doing this entire debate. You have just been continually refusing to accept the facts, instead saying that "no matter how much proof you give me, I will never accept it, because in my opinion it is not enough even though hundreds of thousands of scientists far more qualified than me, have verified that it IS enough. ""My logic is perfectly sound. My basis is the scientific law regarding correlation and causation. I have accurately described it, appropriately applied it, and defended it against your lack of understanding. You have not disproven my position. And you have still failed to show me that evolution is the true cause of the history of the development of life on earth. "Let me proclaim it loud and proud: you are an idiot. This may result in the loss of a conduct point, but I really don't care. Evolution is perfectly logical, has tons of evidence behind it, and has NO alternative theories. Your logic is flawed and you have no idea how to analyze evidence. You haven't disproved any part of the evidence backing evolution. All you have done is blindly claim that "it isn't enough". Con has failed to prove anything.