[Junior]

I never said bones alone make a relationship; indeed, bones are simply another clue to the relationships between organisms.

[AndrewC]

I never said bones alone make a relationship; indeed, bones are simply another clue to the relationships between organisms.

No, but their imagined relationships are continually touted as prima facie evidence for Darwinian evolution. So how do you answer the questions I posed?

[gore3000]

I never said bones alone make a relationship; indeed, bones are simply another clue to the relationships between organisms.

Hmm, guess the above is the reason why evolutionists do not like to discuss the scientific basis of their theory. Each time they do they stick their foot deeply in their mouths. If evolution is based on the fossil record and bones are only a clue to relationships, then clearly the fossil record cannot substantiate the truth of evolution.

Thanks for finally, after some two years, agreeing with my point, often made, that bones do not prove evolution.