Running is an existing characteristic. There is a limit to how much faster they can run. We believe this because there is evidence from the Kentucky Derby that they have reached the limit. But for evolution to be true, there must not only be no limit to existing characteristics, there must also be no limit to the appearance of entirely new characteristics. According to statement 4b, there is no fundamental reason why horses can t grow wings and learn to fly.
Evolution depends upon the idea that a land mammal evolved into a porpoise, complete with sonar.
As far as we can tell, the evolutionists reasoning is simply that bats exist. Since bats must have evolved from mice, there must be no limit to how much a species can evolve. Since there is no limit to evolution, mice could have evolved into bats. It is an obviously circular argument, which is why you don t hear evolutionists present it that way. Yes, we ve put words in evolutionists mouths.