Yes, imaginations are good. Your point?
Its obvious. You have to try to miss it. Have you ever witnessed a creature's front legs move around to its back and become wings? Of course not a particular creature, I mean the way evolution tells us it did? No, its an imagined explanation. I dont mean that negatively. Using evolution's paradigm, scientists thought up that explanation. Of course we can't observe evolution . . . the kind of evolution we disagree about. All we have are our individual thresholds for whats a reasonable explaination, given present evidence, or not. See how this ties into being incredulous?
Could you explain the evidence,then? For example,why do humans have a gene for producing vitamin C, even though it is broken? Why do rats have the same gene (but it works)? Why do chimps have the same non-working gene that we have?
I think it is because rats, chimps and humans all got the gene from the same common ancestor, but it broke before chimps and humans split, but after chimps and humans split from rats. It is a simple copy error- easy to see how it happened, hard to argue design.
No, I can't explain it. It tips toward common ancestor. If we accept that the gene is useless, then it is fully in the common ancestor column of evidence. If it isnt useless then it could just as easily go into the common designer column.
