Agreed, insects and other arthropods are very well-represented in the fossil record, and the fossils are consistent with evolutionary theory in that lineage as with all the others. The evolution of insect flight is a pretty neat topic.
What makes you so "sure" there wouldn't be such fossils, skepticfaith?
In addition,I believe the first request was for the evolution of flight in insects which would be as SF guessed very hard to catch in a set of fossils that are scarce to begin with.
Well, SF said, "I am sure there are absoultely no fossils that could even suggest insect evolution." I took that at face value, but perhaps you're right about what SF meant. Certainly there isn't a perfect fossil record for insects (nor would we expect it), but fossils are there, and what we have found does support the nested heirarchy, and it lines up well with genetic evidence, etc.
Are there not any observed mutations at all ? Just give me the links to them whatever they are.
It's a bit of an odd question, and impossible to answer comprehensively - not because it's rare to observe mutations, but because they have been observed countless times. They happen essentially with every instance of reproduction. There's no way to keep a "list."
Just go to scholar.google.com and enter "observed mutation." If you only want ones that cause observable physical changes, try typing "observed mutation morphology" (but in either case, don't type in the quotes).
We never knew at some poing that during the Jurassic that mammals were quite tiny, until a recent discovery disproved this.. No problem..Evolutionists just push back the scales... Btw - during which era did mammals first arrive and when did they get large/start to flourish?
Same with the split between the common ancestors of chimpanzee and man - pushed back millions of years now ..Sorry - I don't remember the source but it was a farily recent development..
That's not shifting the goalpoasts. That's revising theory based on new evidence. That's how science works, and it's a strength, not a weakness.
"Shifting the goalpost" means that you set a criterion for the opposition to meet, and when they meet that criterion, you insist that it is insufficient, and what you really meant was this other criterion...