Quote
"Vestigial" does not mean "useless". It is a descriptor used in identifying parts that no longer perform their original function. The bones that evolutionists claim were parts of legs in ancestors of whales are identified by their similarity to the leg and hip bones of land animals. Coupling that with the fossil lineage of the whales that shows the changes through generations, evolutionists categorize those bones as vestigial


In other words, they are now useless to the creature, because they do not serve them in anyway right? A similarity to leg/hip bones does not mean they were hindlimbs, if it's there it serves a function and it most certainly does serve a vital function towards reproduction. I've repeated this now for the third time. What lineage of whales? There isn't one, just the evolutionary wish list.

The whale has many incredibly complex mechanisms that makes it vastly different than land-dwelling mammals. For example, whales have a huge chamber of sperm oil that allows adjustment of buoyancy at different depths, and are equipped with features that allow them to withstand the enormous amount of pressure they encounter at great depths. Their eyes have a far higher refractive index to allow them to see in water, and their ears can pick up airborne sound waves under high pressure. Whales also possess very complex sonar capability.


Quote
They just happened to keep finding fossils that, as the age of the fossils was greater, the legs were bigger, the flippers were less like flippers, the hip bones were more like a hip....etc.


I'd like to see photographic fossil evidence of these stages. The flippers being less like flippers, etc, and the gradual evidence for the transition from land dwelling creature to the mammals we see today. There are variations within kinds that my have bigger or smaller aspects of their anatomy....that's not evolution. Using other variations or other creatures that existed and pinning "earlier ancestors in transition" on them is not proof for evolution. Coin tossing? Just wishful thinking and lots of assumptions. You must be able to prove that the fossils are definitely transitional forms of earlier whales, rather than other kinds of creatures or variations.

If evolution were true, the fossil record should be inundated with evidence of transitional forms. Yet there is not even a "single" example. And now you're onto penguin evolution when you haven't even provided proof for the whale. I don't accept animated pictures as proof for anything.

Quote
Dog breeds are evolution. Yes it is directed by man and forced to occur more rapidly than in nature. However, the breeding of dogs to make a cairn terrier that can go into gopher holes shows that animals have the capability to change and become better than others of its species at obtaining a food source. If man can change animal populations, why can't changes in the environment cause changes in the animal populations?


This is not evolution. If you really want to use the word - micro evolution, then I guess you can but guess what? The dogs didn't become anything else, they stayed dogs. What is the evolutionist to do? Not even intentional breeding can make a dog a "non dog", yet he/she wants us to believe that nature can do it all by itself. Why are you asking me questions? Evolution should have provided the proof without question. Changes in the environment? What changes in the environment have caused one kind of animal becoming an entirely new species over time? We know that animals develop thicker coats, but I've not yet seen any animal changing into something else as a result of the environment. Again, no evolution here. Variation/breeding is not one kind becoming something else given lots of time and chance.

Quote
Common design does not account for the same changes caused by endogenous retroviruses in animals that are related to each other. Quick explanation:


I do not know enough about viruses to comment on your list here Linear, perhaps someone more familiar with this can? I'd still like to know how one kind of animal has become another kind of animal and I'd like to SEE proof of the entire transitional stages.

If you want to side-track me onto viruses and all those things, it's pointless. You should be able to give solid evidence that one kind of animal has become an entirely new kind of animal. Not just tell me "well it's possible because of this" or "how do you explain this?" We've already been told it's happened, why are you resorting to stuff to explain that is might be possible if it's already "apparently" taken place? you don't need to resort to the virus stuff, just give plain evidence and visual proof of one kind of animal becoming something else. Very simple.


<img src="http://herballure.com/ForumExtras/Images/fevuilrhio.jpg">

"This water's kinda cold, but I sure would like to be a sea creature. Maybe I'll find Atlantis"

<img src="http://herballure.com/ForumExtras/Images/lzklemkvvo.jpg">

Poor wolf, foiled again! This aquatic lifestyle just doesn't seem to want to take hold. Time to go back to the Designer and demand swimming and scuba lessons!