| |
22. Flight |
|
|
| 174 |
Insects are the only
invertebrates with the ability to fly. |
So what? |
Irrelevant |
| 175 |
Their flight is
different from other fliers in that it involves a sculling motion
similar to rowing a boat, where other fliers use straight flapping (one
exception is the hummingbird). |
Untrue - they use a
variety of methods. They certainly don't scull like rowing a boat!
Flight in many insects is possible from the way they control the
formation of vortices along the edge of a flexible wing. Butterflies
flap their wings. |
FALSE |
| 176 |
What makes flight so
interesting for creationists is that flight did not "evolve"
just one time as evolutionists would have you believe. |
False - they most
certainly wouldn't have you believe that. It arose independently in at
least four groups. |
FALSE |
| 177 |
There are 4 different
fliers in the fossil record. The odds of parallel evolution is a
statistically impossible number. |
A completely meaningless
statement - the underlying premise is false. 'Parallel evolution' has
little to do with statistics. |
misleading |
| 178 |
The different groups
are: reptiles, as represented by pterodactyls, modern birds, mammals, as
represented by the bat and flying insects. There are too many different
characteristics for all of these to come from a common ancestor. |
Nobody is suggesting a
common ancestor, other than at a relatively early stage of tetrapod
evolution. If you want to fly, you need wings. What is interesting is
that each of these groups developed wings using different anatomical
components, a clear example of parallel evolution. |
FALSE |
| |
23. Laetoli
Footprints |
|
|
| 179 |
These footprints were
found in the same strata as the "Lucy" bones. Johanson and
other evolutionists have claimed these were made by lucy-like animals,
yet when studied by foot doctors, both secular and non-secular, they
found them to be completely human and modern. |
This is disingenuous. 'Lucy'
was a human ancestor with an upright gait, as shown by the form of the pelvic
girdle. It is perfectly reasonable to associate the human-like footprints
with 'Lucy'. |
misleading |
| |
|
Link
- Laetoli Footprints |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
24. Fossil Horse
Series |
|
|
| 180 |
This is still taught to
our children today as proof of evolution. |
No it's not - it's shown
as a demonstration of an evolutionary series. |
FALSE |
| 181 |
However there are a
number of problems with this series. |
True, and evolutionary biologists
will readily admit to it. Science isn't perfect or infallible. |
TRUE |
| 182 |
(a) A complete series of
horses has never been found in any rock anywhere in the world. |
Why should we expect to find
such a series? |
misleading |
| |
|
Link
- Horse Evolution |
|
| 183 |
(b) The sequence of
small toes to big toed horses does not exist anywhere in the fossil
record. |
I'm not sure what is
meant by this. There are many examples of each type. |
incomprehensible |
| 184 |
(c) All of the teeth
found are either grazing or browsing types. There are no transitional
teeth. |
Untrue. |
FALSE |
| 185 |
(d) Two modern horses
have been found at the same level as that of the very earliest types.
|
I'm not aware of this.
Perhaps something could be offered to substantiate the claim. |
unsupported assertion |
| 186 |
None of this proves
evolution! Just the opposite! |
The premise and form of
argument are false. |
FALSE |
| |
|
|
|
| |
25. Vestigial Organs |
|
|
| 187 |
These are organs that
were formerly thought by evolutionists to be remnants of our past
evolution and not needed any more. |
Incorrect. The term "vestigial"
is used in the sense of an organ no longer or not being used as it is in
most other animals. It may still have a function. |
FALSE |
|
|
Link
- Vestigial organs |
|
| 188 |
In fact, at one time, it
was believed we had over 200 vestigial organs. |
So what? |
irrelevant |
| 189 |
In actuality, all the
organs have been found to have important bodily functions. |
All the organs?
See the link above! |
FALSE |
| 190 |
This is true for the
appendix also. Doctors have quit removing it willy-nilly-, as it has
been proven to be a great aid in digestion. |
So what? |
irrelevant |
| 191 |
None of this proves
evolution |
Neither does it prove
creation. However, it provides good supporting evidence for evolution. |
irrelevant |
