A and C are ten miles apart, and the satellite photos show a network of roads in between. You have not made the case that it is impossible to get from A to C.
Also, since you seem so dead-set on trying to disprove the central theory of biology, what do you propose as an alternative? C looks a lot like A, although it clearly is not A. Sufficient genetic material was preserved to determine that C and A share over 90% genetic homology; the next highest level of homology between C and any other organism is 75%. C is dated to be 20 million years newer than A. What alternative to evolution do you propose, keeping in mind that a viable alternate theory must explain and tie together all known facts, not just what I presented, and provide predictive power for guiding more hypothesis-driven research? Even more important, how does the story that ~6,000 years ago, God spoke and all of the plants and animals sprang into existence (no mention of the other three kingdoms, but nvm) explain those measurable quantitatable facts, and what useful predictive powers does that story provide?
That is just flat wrong -- if mutation and natural selection are merrily killing off cats you don't wind up with supercat, you wind up with nocat.
Nope, you end up with the cat that made it alive across the chasm. When you breed that cat, you'll multiply the number of cats with the extra strong leg gene that enables them to jump the chasm.
More handwaving. RNA Self Replication euphoria, as usual, ignores the actual chemistry involved.
The material at your link was clearly not written by scientists. I prefer articles backed up with scientific references, like this one.
“Nope, you end up with the cat that made it alive across the chasm. When you breed that cat, you’ll multiply the number of cats with the extra strong leg gene that enables them to jump the chasm.”
Alright, your 10,000 cats are on an island. An earthquake makes the 10’ chasm, leaving the food on one side and the fresh water on the other. Each cat tries to leap across, only your one cat makes it. Luckily, she is pregnant, from one of the deceased 6’ jumpers, and she gives birth to a litter of 8’ jumpers. The end.
No, I didn't. Behe and others have. Evolution science has failed to provide that map. You think that because you found B you have solved the problem, but that still doesn't provide a map.
Also, since you seem so dead-set on trying to disprove the central theory of biology, what do you propose as an alternative?
I do not need to propose an alternative. That will be your job when the scientific community realizes that evolution is implausible. It doesn't take a tailor to realize when the emperor is naked.
When you breed that cat, you'll multiply the number of cats with the extra strong leg gene that enables them to jump the chasm.
You killed the rest through natural selection. You can't breed one cat. But seriously, this illustrates an assumption evolutionists make: That all the many negative to neutral mutations will eventually add up to produce a positive change. While that may be possible, it produces a show your homework requirement. But rather than do the homework, you point to the cat on the other side of the chasm. You haven't ruled anything out, you are just claiming credit for what happened. You haven't demonstrated how the cat evolved.
The material at your link was clearly not written by scientists. I prefer articles backed up with scientific references, like this one.
Did you bother to read it? It basically repeats the link I posted as to the problems with RNA self-replication, it just doesn't stress them.