www.jeffthefish.com

Evolution says that a mouse becomes a moose, or a goose becomes a moose, a birch becomes a perch, a horsefly becomes a horse, and a frog becomes a Prince. Yes, it is a fairy tale too unbelievable for the brothers Grimm to include. [Source]

This guy is full of zingers, but this passage was the point where I was all, “ok, I have to post this, yo.”  I can’t link to it directly, so just do a ctrl+F for “Teno” or scroll down to comment #507.  There is a lot to read!

____
UPDATE!

I just had to add this one.  Holy shit!

Then comes the gap between soft creatures and invertebrates. Invertebrates have no backbone, so they instead have a shell like a lobster. How could soft tissue evolve into a lobster shell with no transitional phases on the way? Houdini could not pull that one off.

____
UPDATE II!!

Attn: Teno

I now feel confident in saying that you are stupid.

Think about this, how did sea life supposedly evolve up into mammals, and then the whales decided to go back into the water? Are whales backsliders?

“[A]n athiest cannot deny the creation of the universe and the world we live in without denying the creation of all the things in it. If the universe and everything in it is just random, then why won’t u conclude that our computers, calculators, and all the things we have in this world are just random?” [Source]

Unparsable!

“I find myself leaning toward a young earth. I definately don’t believe what “scientist” tell us. It just amazes me how scientist can speak with absolute authority on a subject they have no clue about. How can a scientist tell me that the earth and this universe is billions of years old, but yet that same scienitist can’t even tell me where he/she was at 100 years ago? Where’s the logic? You look at some rocks and do some “scientific” dating and presto you come up with some number telling us when the world was created?
Get real, mama aint raised no fool.” [Source]

Well, I’m amazed when anyone does it, not just Scientist. This thread is another veritable goldmine, but user ImGoingtoHeavenRU? gets the recognition.

“It is impossible for [transitional fossils] to be biologically related. The scientists KNOW this, but they have no other interpretation of the evidence. Why is it so impossible? Think about it! How does generation one give birth to generation 2? It is simply illogical.” [Source]

Special thanks to Alex Dolin of Lancaster, OH for giving me the most difficult HCQ I’ve ever had to do.  His entire blog post could have been one big HCQ, and I had a hell of a time narrowing it down to just one quote.  At first I thought this person had to be a parody, then I thought it could only be a know-it-all kid.  But no, this person is a youth minister. Spreading ignorance FTW!

Man Ray, when you right, you right. Chris can’t be Richard just as Charles can’t be Ray. An’ you also right - nothin’s more important than your eternal salvation. But if you think about it, we all the same - I can be Chris, and you can be Ray, and Richard is all of us - if we all think. [Source]

Wow. I’m not quite sure what’s going on here, but special thanks to Charles Reasonable for…God knows what. And is it just me, or does his profile pic look like a cross between Rod Stewart and Tony Danza?

Scientist have discovered through the fossil record what is called the Cambrian explosion, the sudden appearance of all living species all at the same time. [Source]

Special thanks to Kevin, who obviously doesn’t know how to look things up for himself and probably wouldn’t recognize a fact if it lodged itself in his urethra.

Today’s quote comes from Comfort Food / Soapbox / Atheist Central reader verandoug, responding to my explanation that blind cave salamanders still have the genes to create functional eyes:

I also wonder if some of the things we do do not directly effect our genome especially sin. It will be interesting as scientific evidence unfolds. [Source]

WHAT????????

If science and nature is truth and evolution is the opposite then evolution is a fraud or a lie. I rest my case. [Source]

I highly recommend checking out the source of this one.  The accompanying article is the same old recycled Creationist logical fallacies, but the discussion at the end (to which I contributed a few humorous remarks) is incredible, and, thanks to a scientist / blogger named Clostridium, highly educational.

Fact: Reptiles never stop growing. So if a lizard grew for 900 years you would have a really big lizard. Dinosaurs are just big lizards. [Source]

A conversation with a real life friend led me to this quote.

Transitional forms would possess true transitional features such as half scales, half feathers, or half feet/ half wings, not merely eye displacement. The absence of transitions in the fossil record remains strong evidence against evolutionary origins. [Source]

The eye displacement he mentions is in reference to a new transitional flatfish recently found in a museum. It really sounds like the ICR is feeling a little desperate.