Between what and what?Lets face it. If Crocodiles had gone extinct and a darwinist dug one up it would be heralded as a transitional fossil as well.
Upvote
0
Between what and what?Lets face it. If Crocodiles had gone extinct and a darwinist dug one up it would be heralded as a transitional fossil as well.
The Dover trial? You mean the one where the conservative judge concluded that I.D. is just creationism with a new ribbon on it?I don't mind evolutionist rejoicing when they think they have found one of the many transitional fossils needed to support their faith. Since evolutionist predicted thousands if not millions of transitional fossils it's near impossible to not find a few fossils to fit their theory. (even a broken clock tells the right time twice a day) Yet as it's revealed in the Dover trial evolutionist has to cherry pick the features in order to support their tree. Homology is useless to evolution as a good example is how evolutionist cherry picking features when they compare thylacine vs wolf vs kangaroo.
The judge only judged if questioning Darwinism should be allowed in public schools. What I referring to is the actual scientist in the trial cherry picking features to fit their assumptions.The Dover trial? You mean the one where the conservative judge concluded that I.D. is just creationism with a new ribbon on it?
BTW, Sky, its the transitionals that we don't find that are the most telling.. like between mammals and birds or between lizards and fish... ones that evolution predicts we shouldn't find.
Y claim not to be required to answer my questions (because I am not a "chief inquisitor," yet you apparently are), even though you expect me to answer your questions. Double standard, anyone?
From now on, if you aren't going to even attempt to answer my questions, don't bother asking me to answer yours.
A) You have done nothing of the sort
B) you do not represent an authoritative "We" on this site
C) Talk Origin is an anti religious biased site not an authoritative scientific source
Still I can oblige your request for a demonstration of their hackery and simultaneously prove the site is nothing but an atheist promotion location
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH110.html
Sorry, what Dr. Shubin found was NOT a tetrapod, it was a fish with two bones in its fins that kind'a look like two of the many bones in the wrists of tetrapods.
Let's just face reality:
Lets face it. If Crocodiles had gone extinct and a darwinist dug one up it would be heralded as a transitional fossil as well.
I offered a couple of different possibilities for the footprints found earlier than the Devonian of what appear to be tetrapods. While its possible a case of convergent evolution, I actually think it is more likely that fishapods simply evolved earlier than the Devonian, before the creatures that left the footprints did. We just haven't found fossils yet in these earlier layers, just like we have no fossils of the actual creatures who made the footprints. The fishapods continued to survive until the Devonian and then went extinct. The fact remains that we don't know what these creatures that made the footprints actually looked like, so its hard to judge.
What realities do you want faced? What do you think so problematic with those species?
Nothing in the slightest. Yet I hear no talk of "transitional" anywhere.
Because such talk is "stupid?"
Likely.
Why do you think they should be considered transitional? List the physical features and your reasoning.
I don't believe in such talk.
I believe such talk is stupid.
We could start with this page, if you want.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/05/do_shared_ervs_support_common_046751.html
Do you think this stands up to the facts?
Do you have a problem with facts?
IN case you missed it I already indicated where we could start
http://www.talkorigins.org/features/whales/
specifically
"The vestigial features of whales tell us two things. They tell us that whales, like so many other organisms, have features that make no sense from a design perspective - they have no current function, they require energy to produce and maintain, and they may be deleterious to the organism. They also tell us that whales carry a piece of their evolutionary past with them, highlighting a history of a terrestrial ancestry........................Whales also retain a number of vestigial structures in their organs of sensation. Modern whales have only vestigial olfactory nerves. Furthermore, in modern whales the auditory meatus (the exterior opening of the ear canal) is closed. "
Now thats some tripe
"Why not?"
Why you can't you speak for "we" on a christian forum? Seriously? try to think why that would be. when last have CHristians appointed agnostics as their spokeperson?
"Where does TO attack religion? Why aren't peer reviewed research articles valid scientific sources?"
Oh please...only in your dreams is TO a peer reviewed scientific journal and them getting involved in discussions of the bible and prophecy show exactly that they are not a science based site and are hacks by using the watchtower article "which is published by JWs which many many consider a cult and citing their source as another atheist site. Pure hackery at its finest.
NO thats why I am still laughing at TO talking about Whales.
Why did you put those pictures up? What was the point you were trying to make?
Ay! Whoa! What's ya problem with whales all of a sudden?!
I'll restate. What's your problem with the TO article on whales?
I'll restate and specify - this is tripe
""The vestigial features of whales tell us two things. They tell us that whales, like so many other organisms, have features that make no sense from a design perspective - they have no current function, they require energy to produce and maintain, and they may be deleterious to the organism. They also tell us that whales carry a piece of their evolutionary past with them, highlighting a history of a terrestrial ancestry........................Whales also retain a number of vestigial structures in their organs of sensation. Modern whales have only vestigial olfactory nerves"
Still lost as to what I am taking issue with?