|January 30, 2006||Posted by Dave S. under Biology, Evolution, Intelligent Design|
In browsing the New Mexicans for Science and Reason site and the Oynate Man prank (which I’d seen before but since it’s so hilarious enjoyed reading again) I came across this statement in the April Fool article explaining what would constitute real evidence against evolution:
Pegasus, with its bizarre mix of mammalian and avian features, would also be Big Trouble for evolution. To date, none have ever been found. Evolution’s prediction: “None will be found. Ever.” Intelligent Design’s prediction: “Er…What was the question?”
Why are these examples of items that could disprove evolution? For one, both are uttterly impossible according to our current understanding of the theory. Additionally, in “Intelligent Design,” the Designer is alleged to have the ability to create life forms by fiat. Any one who could fill the Earth with teeming life shouldn’t have any trouble creating allosaurs at the same time as humans, or creating a horse with huge birds’ wings. If these situations existed, it would indeed spell trouble for evolution. But these finds, and any others that would clearly violate our concept of evolution, are curiously missing from the world. Apparently the Designer saw no need to include in his creation hard clues that would lead scientific thinkers to the realization that there is, in fact, an omnipotent, intelligent, and imaginative Designer out there.
Good grief! What kind of biologist wrote that? Did he ever hear of monotremes? “Mammals” that lay eggs, secrete venom from ankle spurs, have no nipples, and have a cloaca. A bizarre mix of avian and mammalian features to be sure, just like the doctor(?) above ordered.
Last year I asked Professor Davison, whose specialty is comparative physiology, about how monotremes fit into the Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis and he told me they are living proof of the PEH. I invite him to elaborate for you all how monotremes fit into the scheme, or dare I say prescription of things.