I can actually reply to that message straight away. I had scrolled through this thread a number of times, but it appears that if you scroll too fast, pictures don't show up and you miss them. I can address other things there as I get time; CTD is needing a reply here too.

The message to which you refer simply points out that there are organisms existing now which have changed little over time. This is well known. Why the discovery of a coelicanth, or even a living dinosaur if that were to happen, is supposed to be a problem for evolution, I'm not sure. We've been talking in other threads about how this can be the case when an organism is particularly well-adapted to its environment. It's when the environment itself changes that the organism is forced to adapt or become extinct. What these examples do not explain is why mammals don't show up in the fossil record before a certain time, for example, or why marine invertebrates are consistently the only fossils to be found in strata of a certain age.

I found the last bit of the post quite interesting.

Quote
In claiming that mammals are descended from reptiles, Darwinists point to fossils of certain reptiles that are now extinct. The fact that these creatures are extinct lets Darwinists engage in whatever speculations they like.


The study of rocks and fossils is not speculation, unless we're getting into "were you there?" territory again, which suggests other silly things like the necessity to throw out all court cases which do not involve eye witnesses, and to dismiss forensics because the detectives "weren't there." Rock "detectives," for example, can use radiometric dating (among other things) and cross-check their results.

Quote
However, scientific research and investigation has revealed the invalidity of their claims. For example, as a result of the investigation of the brains of such reptiles, it was concluded that these life forms did not possess mammalian characteristics, but bore a complete resemblance to reptiles.


Gosh, this really needs some evidence. I can give you some to the contrary, if you would like to look here. The entire page is worth reading, but as far as the reptile-mammal transition is concerned, scroll down to "Jaws to ears: an example of tracking missing links."

As far as what they say about investigating the brains (presumably they mean the brains of living animals?) -- I have no idea what they're on about, though you're welcome to enlighten me. This link talks about a recently-discovered mammalian ancestor whose brain case has been CT-scanned. It is a good example of one of the last steps along the path of evolution from reptile to mammal. There's loads of stuff like this on the internet -- presumably you're not just taking someone's word for it that none of this happened and it's all lies?

Quote
The fossil record has also revealed that the different mammal species emerged with all the characteristics they possess and never changed thereafter.


It reveals nothing of the kind and this definitely needs some evidence to back it up. I'd be very interested to see what they're basing this on.