All good points. That's another debate: which version/translation is the most accurate.

When someone has an encounter with God, like I've heard many people have, including myself, they would be sure it is true.

I can't think of how to respond

Yep. I agree.

Oh, here's for offering something to think about. "Radioactive elements like Uranium generate heat—but they are heavy elements. Because of its estimated lower density, Pluto must be made primarily of lighter elements." But I don't know how accurate those estimations are.
http://www.icr.org/article/new-horizons-at-pluto/

Haha

Cool, just read your comment @finntrino. I live in NZ so it's getting late too.

@geluregis, yes those changes do happen. These adaptations can be observed, resulting in what we call micro-evolution. The birds with larger wingspan are still birds of that kind. The insects with different genitalia are still insects of that kind. We cannot observe macro-evolution, like a dragonfly turning into a butterfly.

And thanks for sending your comments, even when I don't respond right away. I appreciate your point of view. I will look up some of the opposition's points to get a balanced view. And maybe quote them too.

Seeing as we have such a limited amount of fossils we can observe, why aren't there tons more? If old age evolution were true, shouldn't we see billions of dead fossilised animals? Millions of years would sure give plenty of time for many generations to come and go, so why don't we see more evidence of the incredible amounts of life? Unless there was not that much time.
And not everything during Noah's Flood would have been fossilised. Only life caught in vast mudslides in the water. Other animals that simply drowned would have rotted away. Some biological matter would be quickly put under immense heat and pressure and become oil.
As a side note, as humans and other mobile animals tried to escape the flood, they would have tried to get to the highest possible point, so the humans would die last. This sets up the appearance of a 'geologic column'.

Now if you're not still mad, sorry :( I will respond to your points.
Yes, Pluto is volcanically active. But if it were really billions of years old, shouldn't it be an icy world with no form of heat whatsoever? All heat would have radiated away from the planet in that long amount of time. The fact that it is still giving off heat is a good indicator that it is very young.

Dear guest, I am sincerely sorry for not responding within 21 hours. I wrote those points just as I was going to bed and I did not get a chance to read your further comments until now.
I am quite a slow reader.

And who defines morals? Humans? Society? Individuals? Or maybe God. How can we have a moral compass with certainty without believing in a God?

Okay, so is anything in the Bible untrue? Because if even the smallest lie is in that book, how can you be sure that the parts you believe are actually true? We must have faith that the Bible contains no lies, and that what we find in the real world should support it.

Oops not geludaris, @stream_42

@geluregis, well how about the current theory that sonar developed independently in bats and dolphins, without a common ancestor with sonar?
@chu, yes that is micro-evolution.

Religion and science can go hand in hand. But, do you believe that Jesus was completely truthful in all his teachings? Did he ever lie?

Not to mention that 5 out of the 6 types of evolution are not scienctific, by definition. Science must be observable, testable, and repeatable. We cannot witness a monkey turning into a man within our lifetime. And even if we did it in the lab, we would have used intelligent design to do so (and the early evolution had no human intervention).
Also it disobeys the scientific natural law of biogenesis, life coming from life. Evolution says we all had a common ancestor, but where did that ancestor evolve from? A rock? Primordial soup? If so, that is abiogenesis, life coming from non-life.
It is even mathematically impossible for the first amino acids to have formed and survived long enough to become a part of a functioning life form.

And many many many polystrate fossils. Trees and such that were fossilised through many vertical layers of rock. Given evolutionary estimated extremely slow sedimentation, "it would have taken 100 000 years to bury a tree 10 m high, which is ridiculous." It would have deteriorated and rotted way beforehand. Finding these all over the globe give good indication the layers formed rapidly. Such as in a global flood. Noah's flood.
http://creation.mobi/polystrate-fossils-evidence-for-a-young-earth

Well first there's Pluto's atmosphere, measured within our lifetime. "Scientists measured the escape rate of nitrogen at 500 tons per hour. That’s 500 times the rate at Mars. All of Pluto’s nitrogen should have been depleted eons ago." Yet it still has an atmosphere to lose.
And its surface. "According to the secular scientists, Pluto has been bombarded by other objects in the Kuiper Belt for billions of years. The “most stunning thing” about the initial image of Pluto’s southeast quadrant is that not a single impact crater was found."
Both these facts are good indicators that Puto is way younger than even hundreds of thousands of years.
http://creation.mobi/the-new-pluto

Okay. What strand of bacteria are we talking about? I know 'Bacteria' is a class of life.
I also know some dog species can no longer interbreed. But they are still dogs. They have not become cats or bears.

That's OK guest. Now the real question is are you willing to take a fair look at the evidence I present? Most 'anti-creationists' react in the same way as the creationist depicted in the image. But if you are simply an 'evolutionist' who is interested in seeing my point of view, then I will present my evidence. Please respond soon! :)

Yes, that is micro-evolution. The bacteria evolve into... Bacteria. They do not evolve into viruses, nor multi-cellular organisms. And when they are returned to their original environment they de-evolve back to their original form.