This is typical evolutionist nonsense. There is absolutely no connection between ears and the mammary glands. One cannot surmise from a coincidental feature another totally unrelated feature. It is called jumping to conclusions. Something which evolutionists are very good at. They build whole animals from a footprint. Such surmissals are not called science, they are called wishful thinking.
Ouch. No fair. I was busy reviewing my thermodynamics. So far I have seen very little evidence, much less "proof". Plus I have to put up with seeing a couple hundred scientists every day and they say all kinds of things. They still need evidence.
The above shows how wrong you are. If they did not know the theory behind it, they never would have been able to make a working cathode ray tube.
The cathode ray tube was invented by Sir William Crookes in 1855. Sir J.J. Thompson discovered electrons in 1897. Fortunately I can still keep track of the calendar.
One of the people quoted in that list was the guy all you evos have orgasms about - Stephen Jay Gould. He himself says that the fossil evidence does not support evolution.
I think we covered this mis-quote on the last thread. Actually the guy I have orgasms about is Brian McGuire. In 1982, he discovered evidence that frogs were replacing neurons during his graduate work at Vanderbilt. Unfortunately, he didn't publish because everybody knows "organisms don't grow new neurons." Some days you're the dog, and some days you're the hydrant.
There doesn't have to be. A mammal is a mammal, not just by definition, but by a common history with other mammals.
If it has a single dentary-bone mandible and hammer-anvil-stirrup ear bones, it's a mammal.
One cannot surmise from a coincidental feature another totally unrelated feature. It is called jumping to conclusions. Something which evolutionists are very good at. They build whole animals from a footprint. Such surmissals are not called science, they are called wishful thinking.
Don't take this as a slime, but what a total bozo you are!