More on the fossils of transitional species that some claim do not exist. The fins of fish had evolved to perform many of the functions in the water (moving along to bottom of shallow ponds or shorelines) that would be necessary to later creatures transitioning to land animals.
Yet another article where they find their evolutionary assumptions don’t hold up. Amusing.
In before the Finnish leg pictures...Dang it...Too early!
Some people make whole careers on hand-waving.
Whole fields of study seem to be hand-waving.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate your post.
Now I’d like to see these guys from Bath now make a prediction based on their theory that can be tested in a hard science way, eg comparative genomics.
Then see if their prediction holds.
Evolution does not exist.
Mutations affect what is already in the code.
You dont get a foot or a toe mutating wing dna. The mutations are either missing wing, an extra wing, or some other less beneficial outcome. If mutations were wonderful and evolutionary people would be flocking to Fukushima for all the wonderful mutation advantges that could be achieved.
***More on the fossils of transitional species that some claim do not exist.***
Evolution has always been and can never be anything more than conjecture. It is not observable, testable science. It is philosophy based on the premise that there is a natural explanation for everything..... an unprovable assertion that lies at the foundation of the evolutionary belief system.
We see what we want to see...if there is a Creator, we’re accountable to Him. Most do not want any part of that.
As for transitional fossils..... Gould posited punctuated equilibrium precisely because of the lack of evidence for them.
They’ve been irradiating fruit flies for thousands of generations trying to get mutations and selection to produce a new species. What they wind up with are fruit flies, dead fruit flies and damaged fruit flies.
Mmmeeeehhhhh, men on the left are going from having testicles to no testicles....doesn’t really seem all that far-fetched anymore.
Historical science is little more than a priori assumption and conjecture. It bears no resemblance to operational science.
You really stirred up a hornet’s nest of ignorance.
Best scientific answers coalesce when one can observe, measure, replicate by experiment, and compute formulas for a phenomenon. Examinations for many physical events have not reached this four-fold rationality.
One example is String Theory, or the “theory of everything”; everything for atomic, micro-processes. Elegant mathematical models utilize eleven dimensions to unify gravitational, electromagnetic, and nuclear strong and weak forces. Here is computation without experiment, measurement, or observation. Niels Bohr would say, “Yes, yes you have the mathematics. But does it make sense?” Notable critics say scientists utilize mathematics, but inadvertently venture into philosophy or religion. Rigorous debate continues.
At the other extreme is Darwinism, where all is observation. Rigorous measurements and experiments require 1,000 to 10,000 times recorded history. Scientists contemplate observed phenomenon, and decide evolution explains everything. Yet evolution fails computational testing with Thermodynamics covering macro-processes. Natural processes in open systems, required by natural selection, create increased disorder, release energy, and increase entropy. Even huge energy inputs result in Katrina, and not the Brooklyn Bridge absent intentionality. All debate prohibited.
One standard for good science is usefulness. Even if Darwinism stumbles in explaining physical phenomenon, it has already contributed vital social and political apologetics. Darwin’s life on PBS explained his important contributions to predatory nationalism, capitalism and socialism as seen through lives of Adolf Hitler, John D. Rockefeller, and Vladimir Lenin. Darwinism’s utility remains esteemed for convincing masses to relinquish control to elites.
They were fin-ished, to give us a leg up...
This article CLAIMS the fossils exist, yet they fail to produce them.
The reason is that they THEORIZE a change in function without actually finding fossil evidence.
My all time favorite evolutionary tidbit I think came from a BBC documentary on dinosaurs.
What I do remember is they said life on Earth was created when another planet hit Earth, broke it in two, and created what we now know as Earth and Earth’s moon.
A similar article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_impact_hypothesis
Now let’s assume this to be fact like those leftist nutjobs do, just how do they know this, other than computer modeling? Oh, sorry I asked, global warming is based on a model, so then it all has to be true.
Really, Hank Johnson’s theory about Guam tipping over is easier to believe.
Of what use were grossly malformed fins for millions of years, before turning into legs? Were they just flopping around in the shallows mating only with other malformed fish? Wouldn’t this situation equate to being very unfit from an evolutionary standpoint, entirely too exposed to prey, being neither able to swim or walk effectively?
Not for me, it wasn't.