Ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny <<<<< I am glad we agree that strict recapitulation is gone. All that is left is a series of connections that are just as easily construed as evidence for a common Intelligent Designer as for a proposed evolutionary relationship.
The exceptions to Ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny are so numerous as to point to a common designer as the most logical explanation. In other words, sometimes He used the same code, but He but inserted otherwise inexplicable code segments in it that made a new being.
There are many ways to interpret evidence. For example, claiming this study is evidence for the evolution of feathers from scales. Hey, maybe they did, but how does this experiment support the idea????
All that is left is a series of connections that are just as easily construed as evidence for a common Intelligent Designer as for a proposed evolutionary relationship. Anything at all can be argued as the product of an Intelligent Designer, even if it doesn't look intelligently designed. "After all, who are YOU to question?" Happens all the time on these threads.
The exceptions to Ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny are so numerous as to point to a common designer as the most logical explanation.
Unfalsifiable does not equate to "most logical." As for exceptions: stricly speaking, you were never a fish. But you were a unicellular, then a simple colonial multicellular, then a primitive chordate, then a fairly simple vertebrate, etc. And although you weren't a fish, you once had pharyngeal clefts that looked like gill slits.
For example, claiming this study is evidence for the evolution of feathers from scales. Hey, maybe they did, but how does this experiment support the idea????
It points out a more detailed genetic scenario than previously existed.
The exceptions to Ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny are so numerous as to point to a common designer as the most logical explanation. In other words, sometimes He used the same code, but He but inserted otherwise inexplicable code segments in it that made a new being.Great explanation! Similarities which are not due to descent prove intelligent design. It is like a kid with an erector set, he will use the pieces in many different constructions, even on those which have nothing to do with each other.