Tiktaalik roseae is a genus of extinct lobe-finned fish from the late Devonian period, with features like those of four-legged animals. It is an example of an ancient sarcopterygian fish which adapted to a swampy oxygen-poor water habitat. The creature lived about 370 million years ago and is regarded by macro-evolutionists as a transition in the evolutionary Tree of Life from fish to tetrapod.
What I find so exciting about this discovery is the critical method and logistics of the exploration over four summers in the Alaskan Arctic. Tiktaalik was discovered through a well-conceived methodically launched project to find a predicted specimen and demonstrates the predictive capacity of palaeontology. Ahlberg and Clack’s review explains Tiktaalik's importance:
The Nunavut field project had the express aim of finding an intermediate between Panderichthys and tetrapods, by searching in sediments from the most probable environment (rivers) and time (early Late Devonian). Second, Tiktaalik adds enormously to our understanding of the fish-tetrapod transition because of its position on the tree and the combination of characters it displays.
Watch the featured video here. Ignore the arrogant headline: "Evolution is a fact; Quran and Bible are False". Harvard's claim to being an institution of critical thinking certainly isn't upheld by this ignorant headline.
Here macro-evolutionist, Martin Brazeau, gloats:
"Creationists haven't said a lot about Tiktaalik, and it's no surprise. However, a few responses have trickled out and they more or less run in the same vein.I thought this was a rather telling remark on Tiktaalik posted over on Dembski's blog. We're treated to an excerpt of the pre-transformation version of the DI's original response that goes:
I especially like Crowther’s last sentence which I present in its original form (bold type included): “There’s a problem with the Darwinist position that runs even deeper than this, however: If Darwinian evolution is an undisputed fact, as its chief defenders routinely claim, why is this fossil find being billed as such an crucial piece of evidence?”
Icing on the cake! I love it!!!
What I love even more is all this rhetoric and absolutely no reference to the actual fossil material. So, I'll take that as meaning that these guys have nothing to say about its transitional status. The real icing on the cake is all this puff and no real substance.
Unfortunately, the media's response to the discovery is not quite the same as the palaeontological community's interpretation of it. Therefore, by responding to these articles, creationists and their ilk are just blowing smoke. The importance of Tiktaalik has nothing to do with proving the fish-tetrapod transition. That's pretty much taken care of by a wealth of data from the past 100 years."
You have to wonder why macro-evolutionists even care what creationists think. Do they harbor a certain fear that maybe their scheme actually points to a Creator?
I believe in the scientific approach and have applied it over 30 years to the book of Genesis. I have methodically gathered data and have done extensive analysis of the kinship pattern of Abraham's people. About 10 years ago I too was able to use the data to predict certain patterns and beliefs among Abraham's Afro-Asiatic ancestors. My findings are based on science. I began as a skeptic and ended up convinced that the people of Genesis 4, 5 and 11 are historical. It is impossible to back write an authentic kinship pattern into a literary text.
The Busyness-Idleness Conundrum - Julien Dupre 1880 In his Works of Love, arguably his greatest ethical text, Kierkegaard uses an agricultural metaphor to describe busyness: ''…the busy ...
2 days ago