Monsieur Lynx says:
quote:
But have we ever heard of an egg-laying creature giving birth to something that produces live young? Or could there even be a transitional form?
It may surprise you to learn that some sharks lay eggs and others give birth to live young. Does this mean they don't share a common ancestor? Is this another evolutionary fairy tale?
I responded to a post of yours in another thread with
this post, which deals with descent with modification.
MrHambre writes:
Crabs only produce other crabs, right? Here's where the creationists get into their classic double-bind. There are nearly five thousand known species of crabs, all ten-legged crustaceans that walk sideways. Were all of these species 'created' specially? I mean, hermit crabs produce other hermit crabs and rock crabs produce rock crabs, but there's no problem visualizing that all crabs share a common ancestor, wouldn't you agree? Small changes have accumulated among these species to make them as different in size and habitat as the tiny white-tipped mud crab (which never grows over 20 mm) and the monstrous Japanese spider crab with its twelve-foot leg span.
However, the diversity isn't limited to size. Marine crabs breathe through gills located in cavities underneath the carapace, while land crabs have modified cavities that act like lungs and allow them to breathe air. Either these closely-related species descended from a common ancestor and one branch evolved the ability to breathe outside water, or else marine crabs and land crabs were 'created' separately. Considering how demonstrably similar these species are in their morphology and their genes, which is the more plausible explanation?
regards,
Esteban Hambre
™ Version 4.2