All of the evidence we have is consistent with the natural process of evolution. Every fossil we have fits the nested hierarchy. Nowhere do we find a fossil with derived mammalian features and feather impressions, as one example. Nowhere do we find modern mammalian species in Cambrian strata.
Every fossil fits into the nested hierarchy but its position is sometimes difficult. It is somewhat subjective in nature as well. New molecular data suggests that animal relationships are sometimes very different than what where compiled by older evaluations of morphology.
Considering that fossils are incomplete in many cases and can never have DNA analysis we can not be sure of their common ancestry to others and the fact that there are discrepancies in animal classification by morphology vs. DNA analysis we can see that it may not be as cut and dried as one might think. That does not mean it will throw the whole nested hierarchy out, it will just exemplify the past inaccuracy in some cases and will rearrange the system to accommodate the new findings.
Again, you are arguing that design should look exactly like evolution occurred. That makes zero sense.
Evolution did occur! I have never claimed it didn't. However, we are looking (if I am correct) back at creation. God designed living organisms with the ability to adapt and evolve to the circumstances they found themselves in, just like we see today.
So you have searched all of the geologic record across the whole planet and have found zero precursors? Really? Also, if evolution is true then we should find the ancestors to living species in the Cambrian. That's the whole point. Finding all of the phyla in the Cambrian is exactly what we should see if evolution is true since the ancestors of all life were there in the Cambrian.
There are no fossil precursors for most of the Cambrian fossils presently. It is necessary for common ancestors prior to the Cambrian fossils. However, that is not the case. If ToE is true we should have numerous lifeforms leading up to the complex life forms found in the Cambrian but that is not what we find and so it is a failed prediction of ToE so far. The timing on the appearance is also lightening fast in accordance with what we see today.
Even more, there are no fossils of flatworms anywhere in the fossil record. Does this mean that flatworms were created yesterday?
It does mean that something so common is not found in the fossil record, how does that compare then with other less common fossils and life forms of all kinds? How can we know what we are missing is more important than what we have?
So once again you are saying that if life was designed it should appear as if life was produced through an entirely different and natural process. That doesn't make sense.
Lets make an analogy here: The pyramids in Egypt. We are still trying to figure out how these were constructed. These were made with human intelligence and yet the technology we know they had just doesn't add up. If something that was so much more recent, made with intelligent design is hard to figure out, how do you suppose the creation of the universe is? We learn by taking the things we know and filtering them through our own understanding and knowledge. ToE is man's understanding of the natural world. Man has made connections and understands how the process works, but they also make their own interpretations on that knowledge.
So like the way we try to piece together information on the formation of the Great Pyramids, we still do not know how it was done. We are intelligent because we come from intelligence.
Why would God make it look like evolution:
1. Evolution was a process in which God designed into His life forms.
2. Why would it look "natural"? God knows intelligence. He knows that humans would need to KNOW. We would be bored to just have life without anything to learn. IF it wasn't the way it is, what would we do with ourselves? If we were like hamsters in a cage we would go insane. But, if God supplies life and intelligence, he supplies the natural world for us to explore and learn. IF there were no pattern or processes for the universe and it just was then it would not allow for our intelligence to grow.
For every transitional fossil that is found you will proclaim that there are now two more critical fossils, one on either side of the newly found fossil. We know how this game is played.
In this case we are talking about lack of fossil evidence all together for most of the cambrian life forms if not all.
At the end of the day, EVERY fossil we have found is consistent with evolution. ALL of the fossil evidence indicates that life evolved. ALL of the fossils fall into a nested hierarchy that the theory of evolution predicts.
No, in fact, the human linage continues to shift and the nested placement changes. That is why, no matter what is found, the system can be used to reflect the change.
Corvettes do not fall into a nested hierarchy, or were you unaware of that? Once again, you are making my point for me. Cars do not fall into a nested hierarchy just as we would expect from a design process. This is why a nested hierarchy is evidence for evolution and evidence against design.
I wasn't showing nested hierarchy but the design itself. What would preclude us from nesting the car design into a nested hierarchy on form and structural design?
