Iridium Nightmare and Living Fossils

quote:

---

Originally posted by ksc:
I really enjoyed reading the evo responce. For all you out there this is it in a nut shell

​

"No one says animals have to evolve."

​

Funny though, even the evo logic dictates that they do. In my post I presented an example of evolution they tell us occurred, (wolf to whale) in a time frame according to evo time frames much shorter than the coelacanth ghas supposedly been around. Image all the mutations that they say would have occcured in all of those millions upon millions of years and the coelacanth is still the same......What's wrong with their pcture? They want the cake and eat it too.

---

'They' who? Evolutionary biologists do not say that it was wolf to whale. Darwin speculated on bear to whale, but was clear that it was speculation. The current science? It suggests a common ancestor to the whale and the ... hippopotamus (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20020506/whale.html). But, then, I wouldn't expect a Creo to get it right. And no, there is nothing in evolution that states that a particular species MUST evolve -- although its members must adapt to conditions, and mutations may produce a new evolutionary route. And has been noted, there is nothing to keep a parent species and an offshoot from both continuing to exist, perhaps in the same habitat if the they exploit different resources. But old Karl, here -- he just keeps asserting that evolution posits an imperative to evolve. Neither evidence, nor theory, nor logic mean anything, apparently.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ksc:
Edge posted:Actually, the coelacanth did evolve somewhat and it is not clear that modern versions would actually be the same species as the Cretaceous coelacanth by some definitions. Nevertheless, there is no part of evolution that says an organism must evolve. If you think differently, then produce evidence to that effect.

---

You gotta love these evos! So much for mutational rates and theories. So much for genetic drift. So much for changing environments that would select differently. So much for extremely long time frames that would allow it all to occur in.....So much for evolution.

---

You gotta love these Creos! So much for natural selection acting on mutations at whatever rates. So much for genetic drift's application being to: (1) small populations, or (2) genetic changes that are neutral with regard to phenotype change. So much for diversity of environments, even in times of world-wide environmental stress. So much for extremely long periods of statis. So much for major changes in most of life, when a fairly-stable few can be picked on.....So much for Creationism.