Apologize for the amount of time it took to find it. It is from "Evolution A Theory In Crisis" by Michael Denton. His source is ‘Dayhoff Atlas of Protein Structure and Function [1972 edition]’.
That book isn't peer reviewed science and wouldn't be taken seriously by anyone who cares about the veracity of their statements.
It is not that simple. It is estimated that it takes 10x10^21 mutations to get five codons to mutate in the right order to fold in the right form to accomplish the function.
I have already explained the basics of how evolution actually works and why it works to eliminate harmful mutations, if you are going to keep on stating the same things and ignoring the replies then the other posters who are calling you a troll are right.
But that is not what we see. The difference between a cyclostome and fish [75%], amphibian [81%], bird [78%], marsupial [76%] and mammal [73%]. Notice mammals are closer to cyclostome than a fish. What this leads to is that all living things appeared at the same time.
I am only interested in hard scientific data not creationist flim flam.
They seem to all have died in one cataclysmic event.
Unfortunately for you I studied geology and you couldn't be more wrong, I live not far from the jurassic coast, fossils are very common there. Perhaps you could come and point out those fossil rabbits because I (and everyone else who has ever actually studied fossils) have never found one.
You should do yourself a favour and actually read some proper reference books on geology and fossils because you clearly know nothing about the subject. Do you really think that scientists just make up things, do you know how the scientific method works and how peer review works? Do you know what I mean by empirical data, falsifiability or reproducability? Do you know what scientists mean by hypothesis and theory?
Since Natural Selection has become an all-purpose explanation of anything and everything, it becomes an explanation of nothing.
Really? What makes you think you are remotely qualified to make that statement?
If it was transitional the feathers would be half way between scales to feathers, but it is not.
Feathers didn't evolve from scales, do some research.
Lecomte du Noüy believed in the supernatural and even if he believed in evolution his hypotheses were roundly discounted by the scientific community of his day.
