Darwin proposed his theory and then told what would falsify it and people have been looking for fossils to do that.
It’s gotten to the point where some people are so convinced of the truth of theory that whatever they see, they interpret as evidence supporting it.
Similarities between fossil remains are just that, similarities. Some creatures are related to others, that is true.
But to demonstrate common descent to a reasonable degree, one would have to see direct *father to son* every generation descent and catalog it. Otherwise, it’s assuming that what you want to see is what happened because of similarities.
Otherwise, it’s just analysis and deduction based on forensic evidence.
I’ve see people who look like about twins to other people they’ve never even met and are not related to and seen wider variation within families.
And there has never been a fossil to falsify it. Not a modern equine in the Jurassic period.
Its gotten to the point where some people are so convinced of the truth of theory that whatever they see, they interpret as evidence supporting it.
I once again invite you to provide an alternative scientific theory.
Similarities between fossil remains are just that, similarities. Some creatures are related to others, that is true.
And my cousin looks a lot like me. Your point?
But to demonstrate common descent to a reasonable degree, one would have to see direct *father to son* every generation descent and catalog it. Otherwise, its assuming that what you want to see is what happened because of similarities.
Over millions of years producing billions of artifacts.
Otherwise, its just analysis and deduction based on forensic evidence.
By millions of scientists, most of them brilliant, analyzing billions of artifacts which together have produced one of the most solid Theories in the scientific world.
Ive see people who look like about twins to other people theyve never even met and are not related to and seen wider variation within families.
And your 2 or 3 anecdotal lay observations mean exactly what?