Comment

Black swans aside. I vigorously protest the idea that mammals descended from reptiles.

That idea is crude and even ridiculous assumption-based Darwinist hype and story telling.

It’s almost as bad as the “water breathers deciding to get out and live” on land stories. (??? a strange idea if ever there was one)

Of course the first fish that tried would die within minutes. So would all the others.

So how did that happen?

Di they evolve air breathing systems while still in the water? Think about how dumb that is for a second.

And why would creatures perfectly adapted to water ‘decide’ to get out and take a walk? Thus miraculously developing limbs as they kept trying!?

Try it yourself. Go ‘back to the sea’ (like whales and dolphins supposedly did!)

Just how many generations of humans drowning would it take before one succeeded? The answer is infinite, because none would ever succeed at all without the appropriate morphological mutations occurring before hand! This isn’t hard.

Darwinist fairy tales (frogs to princes - there’s no real difference, the mechanism is the same - it’s called MAGIC) aside where is reason in these bozo the clown scenarios?

The problems are stupendous.

And as always such tales of biological magic can’t be proven.

You have to demonstrate the possibility with a viable sequence of RM + NS steps and then show how it actually did work.

The whole concept is based on enormous assumptions and the number of required functional morphings involved from cell to fish to reptile to mammal is astronomically high.

And no one has the slightest idea of how such drastic changes could have occurred undirected. Gradualism sucks.

Thus the whole idea is not merely astronomically unlikely but just plain old dumb to the nth power.