Couldn't help but notice that none of the most active times are about Evolution, so I thought we should start a thread on a hot topic.
Additionally, I ran into this quote on one of the threads:
you evos assert birds descended from dinosaurs. This is counter-intuitive: very large animals (dinosaurs) evolving into predominantly small animals (birds) = nonsense.
So, while this topic has been covered in the past, it clearly needs to be gone over again.
Creationists / IDers frequently ask for "evidence of macro evolution" or "transitional species". For my money, archaeopteryx is hands down the prettiest, most glaringly obvious example of this.
Here is a particularly pretty example - one of several
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/...ids/birds/archaeopteryx.html
You'll notice even from a passing glance that this animal had feathers.
Feathers today are a feature completely unique to birds. All birds have feathers, and only birds have feathers.
And, yet, here is a creature which is certainly not a bird. If you couldn't see the feathers, you'ld think this was simply a small dinosaur. It has teeth, a lizards breastbone, a long lizard-like tail, claws on it's wings.
How creationists can look at this and still claim that there are "no transitionals" or that "there is no evidence of macro-evolution" is beyond me.
Perhaps they could explain here. Hopefully, at least, the original poster of the above argument can use this thread to make himself clearer.
™ Version 4.2