So I think we can't read too much from this trial.
The one thing you can read is ID is not science. The second thing is that ID is just creationism in different clothes, and thus a religion and therefore an infringement on the 1987 ruling. The third thing is that evolution is science. From the theory comes predictions and these predictions were borne out.
Read more on the chimp-human chromosome. As I said, crushing argument based on a prediction based on evolutionary theory.
The fish-amphibian transitional fossil was another prediction. Fish fossils are found in layers about 380 mill. years old. Amphibians are found in layers about 360 mill. years old. Therefore, Dr. Neil Shubin said "We should be able to find a fossil that has characteristics of both if we look in layers that are about 370 mill. years old.
They checked their geological maps, and found that a layer of the right age and right type (sedimentary) was exposed in the Canadian Arctic on Ellesmere Island. They flew in, did some exploration and there it was,
Tiktaalik, a great example of a transitional form right where it was predicted to be.
I see you haven't read that article on a Christian response to radioactive dating techniques as you're still confused on the issue.
Note this though. If dating techniques were unreliable or wrong then Dr. Shubin would not have been able to correctly identify which layer of rock he needed. It would have been a needle in a earth-sized haystack. He didn't find Tiktaalik and decide the rocks must be between 380 and 360 because Tiktaalik looked like it fit in between fish and amphibians. Instead evolutionary theory and radioactive dating pointed him to the right aged rocks he needed to check.
This is not an isolated incident either. We now have hundreds of transitional species from land mammals to whales, from reptiles to mammals (some are so transitional they're not sure if they're mammals or reptiles), from dinosaurs to birds. We have many feathered or partly feathered dinosaurs now.
Many of these aren't found by random digging in the dirt, but are found because radioactive dating tells them which layers to check. If you want to look for dinosaur-bird transitions, check rocks of this age. You want land to aquatic mammal transitions, check rocks of that age, etc.
As I've said many times these things are not just backed up with one bit of evidence, but from multiple lines of (independent) evidence all saying the same thing. And the fact that it successfully tells us where to look to find the fossils we want is even more evidence (on top of all the other evidence) that radioactive dating works.
Evolution is confirmed by the fossil record, by geology and stratification, by cell biology, by molecular biology, by anatomy, by genetics (including mtDNA and insertion points of endogenous retroviruses).
Pretend no fossils had ever been found, and any one of the other areas by themselves would still lead scientists to propose common descent. Any one of those disciplines could have toppled evolution if they provided radically different answers. They didn't. Instead they spectacularly confirm it, and continue to confirm it.
Previous Topic
Index
