Home
» Intelligent Design » Back to School, Part 3
Back to School, Part 3
| August 17, 2010 | Posted by Cornelius Hunter under Intelligent Design |
We continue to examine the work of authors George Johnson and Jonathan Losos in their biology textbook, The Living World ((Fifth Edition, McGraw Hill, 2008). In their chapter on evolution and natural selection, these accomplished evolutionists begin by (1) misrepresenting the relationship between microevolution and macroevolution and biological variation here, (2) making a non scientific, metaphysical, truth claim that just happens to mandate the truth of evolution here, and (3) making the grossly false statement that the fossils themselves are a factual observation that macroevolution has occurred here and here. Read more
2 Responses to Back to School, Part 3
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Whale evolution? Embryos? Appendix? ,,, If evolutionists are teaching those things as evidence for evolution then they have no evidence for evolution!
Whale Evolution Vs. Population Genetics – Richard Sternberg PhD. in Evolutionary Biology – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4165203
Current Textbooks Misuse Embryology to Argue for Evolution – June 2010
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....35751.html
Haeckel’s Bogus Embryo Drawings – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecH5SKxL9wk
Haeckel’s Bogus Embryo Drawings – The faked drawings compared to actual pictures
http://www.newworldencyclopedi.....ogeny2.jpg
Appendix has purpose:
Excerpt: The appendix acts as a good safe house for bacteria,”said Duke surgery professor Bill Parker.
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Sc.....as_purpose
Should Intelligent Design Be Taught as Science? Michael Behe debates Stephen Barr – 2010 – video
http://www.isi.org/lectures/fl.....4/lectures
Intelligent Design – The Anthropic Hypothesis
http://lettherebelight-77.blog.....is_19.html
This biblical creationist welcomes water mammals as first land creatures who after the flood adapted to a empty sea.
In fact my line is always that these creatures don’t make the evolution case but against it.
If evolution was true then all or most creatures should be crawling with vestigial bits showing their evolutionary stages from millions of years of action.
Yet there are just a few ,or less, critters with actual evidence of previous lifestyles in the bones.
Water mammals are the few.
they really were on the land once.
They have lots of evidence of being first landlivers.
Yes bits of bones. Maybe fossils of types a little more like the full land livers.
Yet they are the few and still evolution uses them as a example or as a mean. Indeed they make the case against vestigial parts as evidence of evolution.
What are the odds of vestigials remaining in creatures?
Any math guys around!