No, design in a process. There is no intrinsic quality of design that we can identify independently of the process. This is why you can't answer my challenge posed earlier without reference to other things you are already aware of the creation process of.
Say again? I'm not following you.
How?
The fact that everything we find in the fossil record fits perfectly with a nested hierarchy based on predictions drawn from evolutionary theory. If evolution and common ancestry were true, we would expect to find a diverse fossil record that homologizes as we go further into the past, with nested hierachies and physiological similarities shared the closer in geological region and strata we find the fossils in.
That's exactly what we find. Not only that, evolutionary theory is now so reliable that we can literally predict in advance what kinds of fossils we will find in which geological strata.
I see this as no different to what you said here:
You aren't using evidence to reach a conclusion - your conclusion is already set. You're just making baseless assertions to try and support your conclusion.
Merely assuming based on mens ideas.
Note.
A hypothesis starts with an idea. Where did you think it started with - a discovery?
Assertions are made.
Assumption follow.
Inference is applied. That's the evidence of evolution.
Scientists have no way of proving that their digging up fossils in geographic column, or similarities in "species" prove changes from one form of animal to the other.
Yes, it is clearly observed - emphasis on clearly seen, that
we adapt.
If I took skeletal remains of one bird, and skeletal remains of another bird, of similar structure, and compared them, how have I proven that one evolved to the other? I've proven
they are similar.
A look at the fossil record show that all living things - from complex to more complex (there is no such thing as simple lifeforms) - appear suddenly and complete.
They are no fossils support the view that one organism evolved to another, over millions of years, in fact period. They are no fossils of organisms in a partially evolved state, or a poorly evolved state which random mutations would certainly have produced.
The founder of the theory of evolution said - in harmony with what we see today - (Origin of the Species):
Page 23
...
one form is ranked as a variety of another, not because the intermediate links have actually been found, but because analogy leads the observer to suppose either that they do now somewhere exist, or may formerly have existed; and here a wide door for the entry of doubt and conjecture is opened.
Page 55
... during the process of modification, represented in the diagram, another of our principles, namely that of extinction, will have played an important part. As in each fully stocked country natural selection necessarily acts by the selected form having some advantage in the struggle for life over other forms,
there will be a constant tendency in the improved descendants of any one species to supplant and exterminate in each stage of descent their predecessors and their original parent. For it should be remembered that the competition will generally be most severe between those forms which are most nearly related to each other in habits, constitution, and structure. Hence all the intermediate forms between the earlier and later states, that is between the less and more improved state of a species, as well as the original parent-species itself, will generally tend to become extinct.
Page 58
Natural selection, as has just been remarked, leads to divergence of character and to much extinction of the less improved and intermediate forms of life.
Page 80
... must assuredly have existed; but the very process of natural selection constantly tends, as has been so often remarked, to exterminate the parent forms and the intermediate links.
Consequently evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains, which are preserved...
Page 125
By the theory of natural selection all living species have been connected with the parent-species of each genus, by differences not greater than we see between the varieties of the same species at the present day; and these parent-species, now generally extinct, have in their turn been similarly connected with more ancient species; and so on backwards, always converging to the common ancestor of each great class. So that
the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But assuredly, if this theory be true, such have lived upon this earth.
-----------------
For over a century, none of these so-called intermediates have been found.
If the theory were true, this would be the proof required. Hence,
the fossil record alone long falsified the evolution theory.
Living fossils testify to this fact, and do not at all support the theory of evolution.
Evidence that the process is not ongoing also disproves it.
I know they don't accept this, and they continue to promote their ideas, despite, but there is a reason why that happens.
That's just the fossil record - the evidence that would have been strongest - if it existed.
All the other evidence is also asserted.
I thought I just went through that.
Maybe go back and re-read through the thread yourself.
I'm aware of what I wrote Skeptic. I understand what i wrote too. I think what may be happening is that you may be trying to make a connection to where it's not connected.
