
SALAMANDER LARVA
Age: 290 million years
Period: Permian
Location: Rheinpfalz, Germany
Evolutionists claim that fish are the supposed
forerunners of amphibians like the salamander, even though they are
completely unable to substantiate those claims.
There are three different types of fish that Darwinists
point to as the ancestors of amphibians. One of these is the famous
"living fossil," the coelacanth. However, when a living specimen was
caught in the Indian Ocean in 1938, it was finally realized that all
the evolutionists’ speculations regarding this creature had been
invalid.
Another fish group come from the class Rhipidistia
which—like the coelacanth—have thick tissue and bones in their fins.
On account of these different structures, evolutionists claimed that
these appendages developed into feet. The fact is, however, that these
structures bear not the slightest resemblance to the fore and hind legs
of terrestrial animals.
Evolutionists’ third candidate for the role of
amphibian ancestor is the lungfish. In addition to breathing through
gills, these fish can also come to the surface and breathe air. However,
the structure of these fishes’ lungs again bears no similarity to that
of terrestrial life forms. The fish’s skeletal structure is also
completely different from that of amphibians.
No matter which species of fish evolutionists may
choose to regard as the supposed forebear of amphibians, an enormous
number of changes would be needed in order for that fish to be able to
transform itself into an amphibian. Therefore, there should be an
equally vast number of intermediate forms between the two: There must
have been odd-looking creatures with half-formed feet and half-fins,
with both half-gills and half-developed lungs, or with semi-developed
kidneys etc, numbering in the millions.
However, not a single one has ever been encountered in the
fossil record. Among the countless fossils in existence, there are
fully formed fish and fully formed amphibians, but no intermediate
forms. This is something that evolutionists do admit from time to time,
even though it totally refutes their theory. |