It's a fool's game

[PIX]

I was waiting on the archeoptryx debate.

There is another problem with the so-called transitional fossils. They do not distinguish between the evolution and creation models. The often cited Archeopteryx does nothing to distinguish between the two models because it could just as well be just another created species. Our experience of living species indicates that there is a vast variety of species on the planet filling just about every possible ecological niche. Kathleen Hunt says that "the exciting discovery of Archeopteryx in 1861 showed clearly that the two groups (diapsid reptiles to birds) were in fact related" italics mine. It does nothing of the sort, unless you assume that evolution is true, it does nothing to prove that one group is related by descent to the other. To do that requires a series of fossils that show the development of a new adaption.

THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS out of the millions of fossils found...NONE. Why not. Were they just unlucky enough to never be fossilized? Why couldn't dinosaurs have walked with man? Isn't there a fossilized piece of ground somewhere with human footprints beside dinosaur prints?? YUP..