Tetrapod Tracks Overturn Reigning Evolutionary Theory

[Gman]

New page.. Comments?

"The existence of a fully land-adapted tetrapod 395 million years ago has completely destroyed the reigning evolutionary paradigm of the fish to land dwelling animal evolutionary hypothesis. Not only did this creature exist before its "transitional" ancestors, but it was already fully adapted to living on land, with feet, toes and claws. Evolutionary biologists are stuck with trying to find the ancestor of this creature, perhaps existing at least 420 million years ago. Their excuse is the classic one - "ghost lineages," according to the authors of the new study. The alternative, but not "scientific" explanation is that God created tetrapods in fully formed ecological communities as part of His preparation of earth for habitation by human beings."

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/ ... 5TKfhXozwt

[Swimmy]

Hm, is there any way to get a actual article. I checked the pages source but the source is barely a paragraph long

[BavarianWheels]

.
.
I did a google search on "Tetrapod Tracks" and it returned a bunch of hits...
.
.

[kmr]

Yeah, me too... this really shocked me, because even evolutionary biologists are admitting that this is unusual.

[UsagiTsukino]

I don't think all evolution is a lie. Some parts changes and others don't. You do see certain changes amount species

[Audie]

New page.. Comments?

"The existence of a fully land-adapted tetrapod 395 million years ago has completely destroyed the reigning evolutionary paradigm of the fish to land dwelling animal evolutionary hypothesis. Not only did this creature exist before its "transitional" ancestors, but it was already fully adapted to living on land, with feet, toes and claws. Evolutionary biologists are stuck with trying to find the ancestor of this creature, perhaps existing at least 420 million years ago. Their excuse is the classic one - "ghost lineages, according to the authors of the new study. The alternative, but not "scientific" explanation is that God created tetrapods in fully formed ecological communities as part of His preparation of earth for habitation by human beings."

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/ ... 5TKfhXozwt

Comments" Sure. The words in bold are those one would find in such as a negative political campaign, some hit piece of that sort. I for one dont like someone trying to manipulate me.

This is a science / evidence / God forum, not a "misrepresent science" forum, surely!

"Fully adapted" is not a real term, it has no actual meaning, tho it implies much.

"Stuck with'..? Seriously! New information is a delight to a scientist, not a burden.

The "completely destroys" is silly hype; the thing about "reigning evolutionary paradigm"
is nonsense. Non-sense, something made up by the author.

The"traditional" is well to put as they did, in quotation marks. It too, is nonsense.

Then again the "fully adapted" canard.

"Excuse". Need i even comment.

"The alternative". No. Its not an either / or. Not remotely. There are many alternatives to consider.

I will though agree that the alternative proposed is not scientific, in that it is not supportable with any actual data.

If a person wishes to make a case against ToE, that is good sport and entirely reasonable to try. Science thrives on being tested. But anything other than data really is worthless.

Cant and hyperbole are not the way to do it tho, it only shows the alternative explanation to be feckless.

I think a fair analogy to this kind of discovery disproving ToE would be if someone discovered a WW2 U boat at the bottom of the ocean in some unexpected place.

That would add to the history of it but would certainly not show WW2 never actually happened.

[abelcainsbrother]

How much longer can evolutionists teach as a scientific truth dinosaurs evolved over time to be birds when it cannot and has not been demonstrated by any evolutionary scientist that dinosaurs can evolve over time into birds?Their own evidence shows and demonstrates to us that life does not evolve from fruit flies,bacteria,viruses,frogs,salamanders,finches,etc life never evolves according to their own evidence.How long can they continue to sign on to evidence and peer review it and see life evolving when it isn't and get away with it?They love evolution so much and want it to be true so bad that they see life evolving when it isn't evolving at all.They think they are so smart confusing reproduction and life adapting as evidence for life evolving but they are not tricking me.They are going to lose their credibility as scientists in the end for promoting science they cannot prove.