More evolutionary absurdity

It still amazes me that anyone can take the theory of evolution by natural selection and various other forms of selection seriously anymore. No matter how many of their hypotheses are demonstrated to be wrong, nothing falsifies it.

In 1890 Belgian palaeontologist Louis Dollo postulated that evolution could not run backwards – something widely accepted by the scientific community. But now a study has claimed that the changes induced by evolution can be reversible, meaning certain animals can return to an earlier biological trait. The remarkable discovery was made by finding birds had regrown a bone previously discarded by dinosaurs millions of years ago.

They found that 230 million years ago, two-legged dinosaurs no longer required the strong wrists of their four-legged brethren, and thus they became weak. The number of bones in wrists shrank from 11 to three, with one in particular of interest to disappear being the pisiform.

But according to research by Dr Vargas, the bone reappeared when dinosaurs evolved into birds and took flight. The new bone, called the ulnare, appears in the same place as the pisiform once did.The pisiform allowed bird wings to remain rigid on the upstroke. The study found it disappeared in bird-like dinosaurs, but modern birds later evolved to once again use this tiny bone.

So now we have parallel evolution, backwards evolution, and presumably soon circular evolution. Amazing what a RANDOM process – yes, contrary to what Richard Dawkins keeps telling everyone, beginning with a random element such as genetic mutation means that the process is random; the genetic mutations required precede the environmental pressure and are not a result of it – is supposed to be able to produce.

What this tells me is that biologists don’t understand how probability works. At this point, it is becoming obvious that if life was found on every single planet in the Solar System, they would claim that we simply happened to hit a very, very unlikely biological jackpot.

At this point, given their rejection of falsification, I don’t see how evolution can possibly be considered science anymore. Can you detect the flaw in the logical syllogism?

1. Evolution can’t run backwards.
2. A supposedly evolutionary change is reversed.
3. Therefore, evolution can run backwards.