Skip for a moment the implied premise (later elucidated) here that macro evolution (i.e. evolution from one species to another) is occurring right under our noses (mine’s only 48 years old), even though we have been told by scientists that this process would have had to have taken many billions of years, assuming this was even possible. Of course compounding the problem, ever naïve media lumps macro & micro evolution together as if they were the same. They are not. One is proven: micro evolution. One is not: macro evolution.
The reason for my incredulity is that these estimates of years are always thrown out as factoid bearing as much weight as would the date we are going to hit the US debt ceiling. It’ like the reporter checked his day planner “a few billion years ago” and said, “Yep, that’s when “The Process” started.” We are schooled from this paradigm time and time again when bones or rocks have been excavated. In every case, reporters state unequivocally in terms of “thousands,” or “millions,” or even “billions” of years. Almost never is even a source quoted, such as “Joe Scientist stated”. To me it begs the question, “How do you know… Were you there?” Yet, without eye witness account or some other objective criteria to provide proof, these kinds of dates can only be estimated. At most, it’s current science’s best guess. But, make no mistake, even the scientific community does not know with the kind of precision reported.
Later in the article we’re told about ever-evolving, white-footed mice that arrived in “the New York City region after ice age glaciers retreated 12,000 years ago.” Ok fine. Since I had lunch that Tuesday in Los Angeles, 12,000 years ago I cannot verify this. So I want proof.