quote:
I read mostly in order to refute. ...
... and refuting arguments against evolution (...) helps me clarify the evidence in my own mind.
I'm not sure how that works, can you give me an example?
Hi RAZD,
as an example, I was discussing the origin of whales in EvolutionFairytale with someone alleging that evolutionists could produce no
facts in support of whale evolution - that all was mere assumption and supposition. So I researched some of the
facts, and put a reply together.
I learned something about whale evolution. But also I made a connection in my own brain between two lines of evidence that supported each other in a way I hadn't previously seen.
These were the fossil record and genetic studies. Both of these, as I think you know, point to the origin of whales from a common ancestor with ungulates 55mya.
Normally of course, creationists are able to make the point that genetics and fossils align because the morphology of species is obviously aligned with their genetics - so under creation, we should also expect morphology and genetics to line up. Similar looking species will have similar genetics.
But with whales, the morphology of whales is radically different from that of the common ancestor. We should NOT therefore expect the a creator would give them similar genetics to ungulates. But this is what we actually find. The fossil record and the genetics line up in this unexpected way.
So for me, this was an 'Aha' moment - this is really good evidence in favour of ToE and against creation and helped increase my emotional belief in ToE.