Yes, "vestigial organs" were used as supporting evidence. In my high school anthropology class in 1968, vestigial organs were used as a supporting evidence to demonstrate the viability of evolutionary theory. I remember vividly the instructor pointing a fold in his ear and claiming that it was a vestigial "gill".
The point is that evolutionists engage in "wishful thinking" in cases where they claim it is good science. Their science "evolves".
Yes, "vestigial organs" were used as supporting evidence. In my high school anthropology class in 1968, vestigial organs were used as a supporting evidence to demonstrate the viability of evolutionary theory. I remember vividly the instructor pointing a fold in his ear and claiming that it was a vestigial "gill". So, true to form, you ignore my argument. My point is, who cares if some vestigal organs have use? It doesn't invalidate anything.
The point is that evolutionists engage in "wishful thinking" in cases where they claim it is good science. Their science "evolves".
As do physists, mathemeticians, astronomers, etc. We know now that the ages-long theory of Gravity is wrong in many respects. This is because science KEEPS SEARCHING (which some may call "wishful thinking," I suppose). All branches, not just Biology. Or who do you think researched the vestigal organs more deeply? It sure wasn't Monks spending their time rereading John.
Mythos (religion) merely declares itself as truth and ends there.
Science "evolves." Mythos stagnates.