You vastly oversimplify aerodynamics, Mom2Angels.
The part about a bird's weight and its wing size needing to grow in comparative increments is not necessarily correct. Increase in muscle strength can make up for an increase in wing size, for example.
As for a bumblebee not being able to fly solely because of its aerodynamic qualities (I think someone else posted this) and the fact that it can fly being evidence of a creator... this claim too, is inaccurate. A bumblebee's aerodynamics much more resemble a helicopter's than an airplane's, whereas birds resemble airplanes (well... moreso than bumblebees.)
I take it, whoever quoted the part about bumblebees, that since they "shouldn't" be able to fly, that God himself gives assistance to each and every one of them, every time that one takes off... that is highly irresponsible, from a scientific standpoint, to assume such a thing... when more unconventional aerodynamics models can be substituted. Occam's Razor, you know; when two hypotheses explain something equally, go with the more rational one.
Now, for transitional species. I can name plenty.
Nearly everything Homo, for example. Homo habilis, H. rudolfensis, H. heidelbergensis, H. erectus, H. neandertalensis, etc. These were all extremely similar to, but genetically different from, modern H. sapiens. We ourselves could in fact be a transitional form towards the best developed hominid. Apart from human transitional forms, however, we have Archaeopteryx, a flying reptile; showing the transition between reptile and bird. Dinosaur species Avimimus, too, shows feathers in its fossil remains that were most certainly not used for flight, and would have served little to no purpose by themselves.
Andd then we've got the lungfish, probably very similar to the very first creature which stepped onto land so many aeons ago.
Finally, to whoever said that one species cannot arise from another, I refer you back to my post about the speciation experiment at Woods Hole O.I.
There was some disagreement when I first posted that as to the definition of speciation, so I'll ask this question instead.
Who can prove speciation can't happen?
The part about a bird's weight and its wing size needing to grow in comparative increments is not necessarily correct. Increase in muscle strength can make up for an increase in wing size, for example.
As for a bumblebee not being able to fly solely because of its aerodynamic qualities (I think someone else posted this) and the fact that it can fly being evidence of a creator... this claim too, is inaccurate. A bumblebee's aerodynamics much more resemble a helicopter's than an airplane's, whereas birds resemble airplanes (well... moreso than bumblebees.)
I take it, whoever quoted the part about bumblebees, that since they "shouldn't" be able to fly, that God himself gives assistance to each and every one of them, every time that one takes off... that is highly irresponsible, from a scientific standpoint, to assume such a thing... when more unconventional aerodynamics models can be substituted. Occam's Razor, you know; when two hypotheses explain something equally, go with the more rational one.
Now, for transitional species. I can name plenty.
Nearly everything Homo, for example. Homo habilis, H. rudolfensis, H. heidelbergensis, H. erectus, H. neandertalensis, etc. These were all extremely similar to, but genetically different from, modern H. sapiens. We ourselves could in fact be a transitional form towards the best developed hominid. Apart from human transitional forms, however, we have Archaeopteryx, a flying reptile; showing the transition between reptile and bird. Dinosaur species Avimimus, too, shows feathers in its fossil remains that were most certainly not used for flight, and would have served little to no purpose by themselves.
Andd then we've got the lungfish, probably very similar to the very first creature which stepped onto land so many aeons ago.
Finally, to whoever said that one species cannot arise from another, I refer you back to my post about the speciation experiment at Woods Hole O.I.
There was some disagreement when I first posted that as to the definition of speciation, so I'll ask this question instead.
Who can prove speciation can't happen?
Upvote
0