/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16169612
>It's not unfalsifiable. See >>
It is unfalsifiable. The change in allele frequency over time cannot be falsified. It's an axiomatic a priori fact. It's like saying we can falsify change itself. We can't.

>>16169620
>So what is a possible explanation of this inconsistency?
There is none. It egregiously violates the very core concepts of fossilization

>>16169623
>How can a lack of fossils (an argument from silence, and you've overstated the dearth of monotreme fossils) be evidence for anything?
Have you really never heard of the concept of evidence of absence?
It is an informative condition which can invalidate an hypothesis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence

>like archeopteryx and tiktaalik?
They spent 150 years fabricating a nice transition of fossils leading up to tiktaalik then found alligator-like footprints allegedly 20 million years before tiktaalik with absolutely nothing in the fossil record showing where it came from. Pic related.
It is a theory-ending paradox that we can find fossils for 150 years showing a supposed lineage, then find NOTHING for a lineage of another. There should be thousands of fossils showing the supposed gradualism leading to the Zachelmie tracks mystery species. We have found none. It would be like finding a human footprint from 20 million years ago. It blows the theory to unrecoverable pieces

>>15807557
>Animals slowly grow and lose limbs all the time.
Lose yes, in extremely rare occasions
>It takes tens of thousands of years for a structure as large and complex as an arm to develop and before it's used as an arm
I don't share your religious assumption based on a flawed and biased interpretation of fossil homology.
>it will be used as a flipper. That flipper will represent an advantage, a disadvantage, or a neutral change and selected for or against accordingly
The Zachelmie tracks blow this religious belief to pieces. They are proof of terrestrial appendages that are missing 25 million years of supposed evolution to create them. There is no possible excuse for the missing transitional forms other than the fact they never existed. It's not logically possible to not find a single fossil among allegedly hundreds or thousands of species that supposedly existed. It's like finding a 25 million year old human footprint.
>Look up vestigial organs
lol. Look up punctuated equilibrium
>A assume you're talking about genes
For an evolution lecture I'm giving you? Galaxy brain conclusion you came to there.
>When you get older and go to college you w
You think "most" evolution is "structural". That is so egregiously wrong it's proof you have not taken high school biology. The vast overwhelming changes produced by evolution are merely non functioning mutations and genetic drift.
Like I said, I proved you wrong on every count and it's laughable you keep pretending you haven't made a fool of yourself