That comic is an excellent example of the failure of some atheists to honestly evaluate the HUGE problems facing the theory of abiogenesis, evolution, and naturalism in general.
One ought to follow the evidence wherever it might lead. Interestingly, the more scienctific knowledge we amass, the less plausible abiogenesis and evolution from one proto-life form appears to be.
That comic is an excellent example of the failure of some atheists to honestly evaluate the HUGE problems facing the theory of abiogenesis, evolution, and naturalism in general.
One ought to follow the evidence wherever it might lead. Interestingly, the more scienctific knowledge we amass, the less plausible abiogenesis and evolution from one proto-life form appears to be.
Top row: Haeckel’s (fraudulent) drawings of several different embryos, showing incredible similarity in their early ‘tailbud’ stage.
Bottom Row: Richardson’s photographs of how the embryos really look at the same stage. (From left: Salmo salar, Cryptobranchus allegheniensis, Emys orbicularis, Gallus gallus, Oryctolagus cuniculus, Homo sapiens.)
Many modern evolutionists no longer claim that the human embryo repeats the adult stages of its alleged evolutionary ancestors, but point to Haeckel’s drawings (top row) to claim that it repeats the embryonic stages. However, even this alleged support for evolution is now revealed as being based on faked drawings.
Atheists with agendas makes for really bad science.