The goal of this profile is to point out that Kirk Cameron, Ray Comfort and Todd Friel either don't understand evolution (and therefore should not be allowed to misinform people on the subject) or DO in fact understand it but are purposefully being disingenuous.
Crocodiles and ducks are in fact related, but that doesn't mean that there needs to have existed some sort of hybrid between them. The MRCA (most recent common ancestor) of crocodiles and ducks probably resembled a lizard more so than a crocodile or a duck. (Similarly, the MRCA of sheep and dogs more closely resembled a shrew, and the MRCA of bulls and frogs more closely resembled a newt.) The specific characteristics of ducks and crocodiles didn't come about until long after the demise of this original common ancestor.
In fact, Darwin even commented on how intermediate forms like the crocoduck shouldn't exist.
"In the first place it should always be borne in mind what sort of intermediate forms must, on my theory, have formerly existed. I have found it difficult, when looking at any two species, to avoid picturing to myself forms directly intermediate between them. But this is a wholly false view; we should always look for forms intermediate between each species and a common but unknown progenitor; and the progenitor will generally have differed is some respects from all its modified descendants. ... So with natural species, if we look to forms very distinct, for instance to the horse and tapir, we have no reason to suppose that links ever existed directly intermediate between them, but between each and an unknown common parent."
(Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, Oxford University Press, 1998, p396)
It is also important to mention that in order for evolution to be true, there needn't be a unique MRCA for every single combination of any two animals. For example, the MRCA of crocodiles and ducks is the exact same MRCA as that of alligators and hummingbirds, and indeed for ALL birds and crocodilians.
In addition to misrepresenting evolutionary theory on television, Ray Comfort also endorses The $10,000 Offer which states:
"A transitional form (or missing link) is an example of one species “evolving†into another species. Excited scientists thought they had found one when they discovered “Archaeopteryx.†The fossil led to the theory that the dinosaurs did not become extinct, but rather all turned into birds. The Field Museum in Chicago displayed what was believed to be an archaeopteryx fossil on October 4-19, 1997. It was hailed as “Archaeopteryx: The Bird That Rocked the World.†However, Dr. Alan Feduccia (evolutionary biologist at the University of North Carolina), said, “Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur. But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of ‘paleo-babble’ is going to change that.†[Science, February 5, 1993]. So here’s my challenge: I will give $10,000 to the first person who can prove to me that they have found a genuine living transitional form (a lizard that produced a bird, or a dog that produced kittens, or a sheep that produced a chicken, or even as Archaeopteryx—a dinosaur that produced a bird). Species do not cross, no matter how long you leave them. The whole of creation is proof that evolution is truly “a fairytale for grownupsâ€."
But evolutionary theory does not claim that one species of animal should ever be able to give birth to another species of animal. Never in the whole of history on earth has there ever been "a dog that produced kittens" or "a sheep that produced a chicken". Were such a thing to be found, it would actually DISPROVE evolutionary theory. So how does this contest demonstrate that evolution can't be proven? All it demonstrates is that offspring resemble their parents (something that evolutionists agree with and is actually the crux of evolution in a way). What Ray Comfort has done here is set up a straw man that's much easier for him to tackle than his true opponent, evolutionary theory. And by doing so, he is miseducating people into believing that evolution entails something as ridiculous as lizards giving birth to birds. If he's doing all of this knowingly, then he is being deceitful.
Another telltale sign that Ray Comfort has zero understanding of evolutionary theory is that he used the sentence, "The fossil led to the theory that the dinosaurs did not become extinct, but rather all turned into birds".
First of all, evolution does not occur by one animal "turning into" another animal. Evolution only occurs in the gaps between generations. It is in no way any sort of metamorphosis or anything like that. Secondly, not ALL of the dinosaurs "turned into" birds. Most of them did in fact go extinct, but even if they had been able to survive the KT boundary, it's not as if they'd have convergently evolved to match their cousins. One almost gets the impression that Ray thinks the phylogenetic tree established by evolutionists maintains that the different dinosaurs evolved into different birds (i.e. tyrannosaurus evolved into hawks while triceratops evolved into pelicans, etc).
In reality, the most recent common ancestor of all birds was a bird itself. (this is true of all monophyletic clades - the MRCA of a group of living animals must belong to the same group that all of its descendants belong to. For example, both bulls and frogs are tetrapods, therefore the MRCA of bulls and frogs must have been a tetrapod as well.) And this protobird from whom all extant birds are descended in turn evolved ultimately from only one type of dinosaur (namely a type of dromaeosaur). Birds (as with all cladistic groups) are a one time thing. We should not expect any current reptiles to evolve into birds. That boat has sailed. Some reptiles might one day evolve into a new type of animal that is somewhat bird-like, but it would be false to call these new animals birds as they would actually belong to an entirely different clade.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the MRCA of all modern birds lived over a hundred million years ago, long before the extinction of the dinosaurs. Birds lived among their other dinosaurian cousins (like tyrannosaurus and triceratops), some of whom were also feathered. The KT extinction event 65 million years ago simply killed off some dinosaurs (like the sauropods) and didn't kill off others (such as the birds).
..
[ Copy this | Start New | Full Size ]