What evidence do you have it ever happened without fossils?
Sigh, the theory was first developed with no fossil knowledge. How can you be arguing about evolution if you don't even know that???
Have people ever found a fossil of a sphinx?
Have people found fossils of dinosaurs?
Think before posting, please.
The point was that art is not 100% proof of what humans have seen. Was my meaning not clear there???
Just because it "fits" doesn't make it evidence.
Again, think first. The fact that human artifacts depicting accurate images of dinosaurs hows that the fossil record not chronological.
Before I discuss this with you any further you need to go to wikipedia and find out what a scientific theory is.Ã‚Â You said, "just because it fits doesn't make it evidence", but that's exactly what it does.Ã‚Â
I hate to be a stickler here but we need to be cautious how we define an increase of information. Evolutionists want to believe that an increase in code equals an increase in information. Otto's example can be used as a trap if things aren't defined properly because we do see mutations where code is doubled but it still doesn't constitute an increase of information any more than copying the same dictionary page over and over again would multiply the available information.
Adam, I have asked repeatedly how exactly information is quantified, and I have yet to get an answer.