Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 911: Line 911:     
::::The coelacanth is very likely the greatest example of how wrong the theory of evolution is.  Evolutionists are beside themselves trying to explain how this supposedly millions of years extinct animal showed up in modern times showing absolutely no evolution.  Are we to believe that the coelacanths' environment never changed in the millions of years since they were claimed to have died off?  That must be quite a stable part of the earth indeed! [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 13:04, 25 June 2008 (EDT)
 
::::The coelacanth is very likely the greatest example of how wrong the theory of evolution is.  Evolutionists are beside themselves trying to explain how this supposedly millions of years extinct animal showed up in modern times showing absolutely no evolution.  Are we to believe that the coelacanths' environment never changed in the millions of years since they were claimed to have died off?  That must be quite a stable part of the earth indeed! [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 13:04, 25 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
::::: You are both correct.  Evolution does indeed say that creatures in non-changing environments have no need to evolve.  bmalee is correct on that.  However, you are also correct with your example of the coelacanth.  Basically, the evolutionary argument that a given creature hasn't evolved because its environment didn't change is an ''ad hoc'' explanation without empirical evidence and without explanatory power.  I don't know that the coelacanth is the greatest example, though, as there are much older living things that show no sign of change either.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:18, 26 June 2008 (EDT)
    
==Peer Review Process==
 
==Peer Review Process==
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu