Kirk, you owe me 10k USD

10k USD for a living example of a transitional form.

He does not want an example of a real transitional form otherwise he would have been satisfied with the answer from the other side that all life forms are transitional in the sense that they are different from all their ancestors.

What he wants is an example of something that looks like its half one thing and half another, which is not a definition of a transitional form, but never mind, lets see if we can give him what he is asking for.

How about this little chap? Doesnt he really look like a transitional form? Of course Kirk is going to say "but its still a fish" and hed be right, it is. But this flying fishs DNA is different from the DNA of every single one of its ancestors going back to the first flying fish, going back to the first fish, going back to the first single celled organism. If it has descendants then its DNA is different from their DNA as well, so in that sense it is a transitional form. But OK, returning to the spurious "find me something thats half one thing and half another" request... Just look at this beautiful creature! Doesnt it look as if one day perhaps 100s of millions of years from now one of its descendants is going to take off from the crest of a wave and never return to the water again?

I cant prove thats what will happen, in fact I expect its unlikely, but here is an imaginary scenario:

The flying fish gilds out of the water to escape predators like Tuna and Swordfish. Lets imagine that what evolutionists call and "arms race" developed in a million years from now between the descendants of a predator fish and the descendants of flying fish. Im imagining that the new predators have evolved the ability to hunt the flying fish either by jumping and gliding after it or by some sort of pack like behaviour where one fish chases the flying fish and the others leap out of the water in front of the flight path.

This arms race could result in the flying fish genes selecting for the ability to stay out of the water for longer and longer periods and to gain more and more height until eventually the new creature would need to gain the ability to breathe air.

If the arms race continued for long enough further descendants might go on to develop the ability to perch on land so they did not even have to return to the water to rest.

At this stage the creature would still have to return to the water to breed, but its further descendants might lay eggs in puddles and eventually evolve the ability to lay a pre-fertilized hard shelled egg.

Would the final creature be called a bird? Definitely not, it would have no bird ancestors. But we probably would not call it a fish either since it breaths air. A new term would be required to describe it.

So, Kirk, you owe me 10k USD.

But Ill give you a chance to make your money back if you want to make it double or quits.

Since your so keen on quoting the fossil record, and since the literal truth of the bible tells us that man has been around since week one. My offer to you is that I will give you the 10k USD back if you can find any human fossils in the Cambrian.

Rules are that it has to be certified as a human fossil by the Royal Geographical Society and they have to agree that it is a Cambrian fossil.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• fossil
• transitional
• forms
• Rational
• Response
• ABC
• Does
• God
• Exist
• NightLine
• Debate
• Ray
• Comfort
• Kirk
• Cameron
• Kelly
• Brian
• Sapient

[LOGICandREAS0N]

I hate when people say you never see a half-duck-half- crocodile. This is fucking retarded and isn't even what evolution is.

[kandtell]

@LOGICandREAS0N agreed. Trying to explain that:

1. Transitionals don't have to be on the main line of decent.

2. Don't need to look 1/2 way between 1 thing and another.

3. Are a fulfilled prediction of Natural Selection.

Is all uphill work.

I made another video on this subject "Transitional Fossils and Ancestral Fossils, what's the difference?"

[purpletree11]

There is something wrong with the logic you are applying. You can't say that evolution explains the transitional being... You should be able to prove that the transitional being is one/ " transitioning" and thereby supporting the theory of evolution. That is a fish... it has DNA different from it's ancestors because you want to believe so from the EVOLUTIONARY TREE. Take away the tree and what do you have? A BEAUTIFUL FISH!

[kandtell]

@purpletree11

Sorry, but you misunderstand what transitional means, as does Kirk, as does almost every YEC I've ever come across.

Please watch my other video: watch?v=CHS_AqBArwc

[kandtell]

I read the "19 problems" article you linked too.

Every single one contains at least one falsehood.

They show a spectacular ignorance of Natural Selection and the current state of our knowledge.

[kandtell]

@MrLeviaFUN This video was made to show up the massive misunderstandings of Natural Selection made by Kirk et al and the fact that they set up Straw Man competitions by asking for evidence of something which is *not* Natural Selection then insisting that when the thing that they have asked for is not provided that means there is no evidence for Natural Selection.

The fact is there *is* evidence for Natural Selection. Mountains of it. Pretending it's not there will not make it go away. Cont...

[MrLeviaFUN]

pathlights(DOT)c0m(FORWARD SLASH)ce_encyclopedia(FORWARD SLASH)Encyclopedia(FORWARD SLASH)12fos03(DOT)htm

[MrLeviaFUN]

This is NOT proof of a transitional creature at all ! All that you say is just "assumptions" and "WHAT IFs". Nothing factual at all ! Just a lot of talking.

[kandtell]

@LurchibaldBioshock

I did.

Like it :) thanks!

[LurchibaldBioshock]

Google Binturong