Some very weird creatures or similarities do not represent problem for many darwinists. We have discussed here similarities between skulls of marsupial and placental wolf. I quoted Dawkins that students at Cambridge have had problem tell them apart. Yet some darwinists here have obviously no problem to tell them apart whenever they like.
Of course. It's easy once you've learn the marsupial synapomorphies.
So one have to wonder how is it possible that scientists misdeemed parts of skull of homo heidelbergis and bear in Germany if it is so simply to tell apart even very similar skulls. And why there are manuals (available on inet) how to distinguish bones of bears of that of humans.
What are you talking about?
As to platypus - I have read that when first delivered (dead and padded) to England the most prominent zoologists of that time (I suppose of Royal academy) considered it to be faked. No such creature on their opinion could exist
Yeah, Creationists are so dumb, aren't they?
If only they'd known about evolution, they could have diagnosed it as a specialised monotreme.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
