Thanks Robert A Cook PE for the ping.
Technically speaking, I see (again!) in this writeup a detailed “Intelligent Designer” who “looked at what was the problem (teeth decay, particles getting stuck in the cusps, a different/better way of chewing pieces of living meat from whales) and “deciding” to change the tooth to make it work better.
Rather, if “evolution” is correct, the changes were accidental and random, were only rarely successful at creating a new function or a more efficient shark or a better-fed shark, and all of the “failures” were never seen again. But, of course, “successful mutations” that were killed off by a different failure (good teeth but born with a short tail or no eyes) never got evolved either.
And that is the problem: The requirement that every successful random change be filtered out from the millions of simultaneous unsuccessful changes, and be kept in place through successive generations after randomly popping up fro nothing and not lost again, and that random changes actually improve things. NO item “evolves” to “do something” - It only happens.
Good photo’s - as always! Thank you ETL.
Thanks Robert A Cook PE for the ping.
