They're still just as much of a poster child. Clearly, they aren't used for walking and yet that's clearly their original purpose, that's the point.
Some scientists might say anything used in the reproduction is part of its original purpose, mightn't they?
You understand we are being told now that these small bones are attached to muscles that are attached to primary sex organs, right?
And that these little bones have grown bigger and bigger over time even though the ribs of the same creatures have not grown bigger, right?
IF anything, according to the way some are spinning this discovery, the bones are examples of evolutionary pressure on whale's sex parts - and this has nothing to do with walking or land dwelling - in fact apparently exists because these creatures are competing and reproducing in a watery environment.
(But yes, they ain't letting go of the "vestigial remnants" either.
They would like their modern example of evo and their evidence of deterioration as remains to both survive this.)
Talk about extra miracles.
No, not miracles. If He told the creatures to fill the earth after the flood - then He had the means for them to do so.
And it would have been quite natural, I think.
Massive abilities to change would have been built in - just like scientists are finding now regarding tetrapods:
The complex, weight-bearing hips that humans and other walking animals have were once thought to have evolved through a series of complicated processes. Now, though, scientists have discovered that the evolution from the basic hips of fish to these weight-bearing hips may have been a far simpler process.
...
They found that, surprisingly, the differences between human hip bones and fish hips aren't nearly as great as they first appeared.
In fact, it turns out that most of the key elements that are necessary for the transformation to human hips were already present in our fish ancestors.
"Many of the muscles thought to be 'new' in tetrapods evolved from muscles already present in lungfish," said Catherine Boisvert of the Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute at Monash University in a news release. "We also found evidence of a new, more simple path by which skeletal structures would have evolved."
So exactly how would these bones have evolved?
The researchers discovered that the sitting bones would have evolved by the extension of the already existing pubis. The connection to the vertebral column could have then evolved from an iliac process already present in fish.
From: The Fishy Origins of Human Hips: Evolution from Sea to Land
Science World Report/ First Posted: May 14, 2013 01:54 PM EDT
In other words, we showed the transition from a simple fish hip to that of a complex weight-bearing one could be done in a few developmental steps, and that most of the key elements for the transformation of our hips as we waddled onto land were already present in our fish ancestors.
Dr Catherine Boisvert is a research fellow based at the Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute at Monash University.
From A dip in your hip, a glide in your stride? You have fish to thank
Monash University/5 June 2013
So for me it was already in their make up to have the ability to become land animals - before they ever did. If that is how it went. But in spite of all the ability to change - it happened for a short time after the flood to fill the brave new world and then it stopped. DNA, RNA - everything became more or less stagnant. Portions were dropped, or became damaged, and just plain non functioning for the most part.
See? No miracles. Just nature. (In God's world)
...
Frogs are amphibians. Amphibians were the first group to branch off from fish ancestors. They still have a lot of fish-like traits. You act as if metamorphosis disproves evolution somehow. That really makes no sense.
They were the first group to branch off? Yet they have only gotten this far in millions of years? That is a stretch for me to accept.
Do you really believe in a theory that tells you that?
