file:///E:/Harun%%20Yahya%%20-%%20An%%20Invitation%%20to%%20The%%20Truth.htm

Evolutionists assume that the sea invertebrates that appear in the
Cambrian stratum somehow evolved into fish in tens of million years.
However, just as Cambrian invertebrates have no ancestors, there are
no transitional links indicating that an evolution occurred between
these invertebrates and fish. It should be noted that invertebrates
and fish have enormous structural differences. Invertebrates have
their hard tissues outside their bodies, whereas fish are vertebrates
that have theirs on the inside. Such an enormous "evolution" would
have taken billions of steps to be completed and there should be
billions of transitional forms displaying them.

Evolutionists have been digging fossil strata for about 140 years
looking for these hypothetical forms. They have found millions of
invertebrate fossils and millions of fish fossils; yet nobody has ever
found even one that is midway between them.
An evolutionist paleontologist, Gerald T. Todd, admits a similar fact
in an article titled "Evolution of the Lung and the Origin of Bony
Fishes":

All three subdivisions of bony fishes first appear in the fossil
record at approximately the same time. They are already widely
divergent morphologically, and are heavily armored. How did they
originate? What allowed them to diverge so widely? How did they all
come to have heavy armour? And why is there no trace of earlier,
intermediate forms?38

The evolutionary scenario goes one step further and argues that fish,
who evolved from invertebrates then transformed into amphibians. But
this scenario also lacks evidence. There is not even a single fossil
verifying that a half-fish/half-amphibian creature has ever existed.
Robert L. Carroll, an evolutionary palaeontologist and authority on
vertebrate palaeontology, is obliged to accept this. He has written in
his classic work, Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution, that "The
early reptiles were very different from amphibians and their ancestors
have not been found yet." In his newer book, Patterns and Processes of
Vertebrate Evolution, puslished in 1997, he admits that "The origin of
the modern amphibian orders, (and) the transition between early
tetrapods" are "still poorly known" along with the origins of many
other major groups. 39

Two evolutionist paleontologists, Colbert and Morales, comment on the
three basic classes of amphibians-frogs, salamanders, and caecilians:

There is no evidence of any Paleozoic amphibians combining the
characteristics that would be expected in a single common ancestor.
The oldest known frogs, salamanders, and caecilians are very similar
to their living descendants.40
Until about fifty years ago, evolutionists thought that such a
creature indeed existed. This fish, called a coelacanth, which was
estimated to be 410 million years of age, was put forward as a
transitional form with a primitive lung, a developed brain, a
digestive and a circulatory system ready to function on land, and even
a primitive walking mechanism. These anatomical interpretations were
accepted as undisputed truth among scientific circles until the end of
the 1930's. The coelacanth was presented as a genuine transitional
form that proved the evolutionary transition from water to land.

Why Transition From Water to Land
is Impossible

Evolutionists claim that one day, a species dwelling in water somehow
stepped onto land and was transformed into a land-dwelling species.

There are a number of obvious facts that render such a transition
impossible:

1. Weight-bearing: Sea-dwelling creatures have no problem in bearing
their own weight in the sea.

However, most land-dwelling creatures consume 40%% of their energy just
in carrying their bodies around. Creatures making the transition from
water to land would at the same time have had to develop new muscular
and skeletal systems (!) to meet this energy need, and this could not
have come about by chance mutations.

2. Heat Retention: On land, the temperature can change quickly, and
fluctuates over a wide range. Land-dwelling creatures possess a
physical mechanism that can withstand such great temperature changes.
However, in the sea, the temperature changes slowly and within a
narrower range. A living organism with a body system regulated
according to the constant temperature of the sea would need to acquire
a protective system to ensure minimum harm from the temperature
changes on land. It is preposterous to claim that fish acquired such a
system by random mutations as soon as they stepped onto land.

3. Water: Essential to metabolism, water needs to be used economically
due to its relative scarcity on land. For instance,, the skin has to
be able to permit a certain amount of water loss, while also
preventing excessive evaporation. That is why land-dwelling creatures
experience thirst, something the land-dwelling creatures do not do.
For this reason, the skin of sea-dwelling animals is not suitable for
a nonaquatic habitat.

4. Kidneys: Sea-dwelling organisms discharge waste materials,
especially ammonia, by means of their aquatic environment. On land,
water has to be used economically. This is why these living beings
have a kidney system. Thanks to the kidneys, ammonia is stored by
being converted into urea and the minimum amount of water is used
during its excretion. In addition, new systems are needed to provide
the kidney's functioning. In short, in order for the passage from
water to land to have occurred, living things without a kidney would
have had to develop a kidney system all at once.

5. Respiratory system: Fish "breathe" by taking in oxygen dissolved in
water that they pass through their gills. They canot live more than a
few minutes out of water. In order to survive on land, they would have
to acquire a perfect lung system all of a sudden.

It is most certainly impossible that all these dramatic physiological
changes could have happened in the same organism at the same time, and
all by chance.

However on December 22, 1938, a very interesting discovery was made in
the Indian Ocean. A living member of the coelacanth family, previously
presented as a transitional form that had become extinct seventy
million years ago, was caught! The discovery of a "living" prototype
of the coelacanth undoubtedly gave evolutionists a severe shock. The
evolutionist paleontologist J.L.B. Smith said that "If I'd met a
dinosaur in the street I wouldn't have been more astonished".41 In the
years to come, 200 coelacanths were caught many times in different
parts of the world.
TURTLES WERE ALWAYS TURTLES

To the side can be seen a 45-million-year-old freshwater turtle fossil
found in Germany. To the left are the remains of the oldest known sea
turtle, found in Brazil: This 110-million-year-old fossil is identical
to specimens living today.

Just as the evolutionary theory cannot explain basic classes of living
things such as fish and reptiles, neither can it explain the origin of
the orders within these classes. For example, turtles, which is a
reptilian order, appear in the fossil record all of a sudden with
their unique shells. To quote from an evolutionary source: "...by the
middle of the Triassic Period (about 175,000,000 years ago) its
(turtle's) members were already numerous and in possession of the
basic turtle characteristics. The links between turtles and
cotylosaurs from which turtles probably sprang are almost entirely
lacking" (Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 1971, v.22, p.418)

There is no difference between the fossils of ancient turtles and the
living members of this species today. Simply put, turtles have not
"evolved"; they have always been turtles since they were created that
way
Living coelacanths revealed how far the evolutionists could go in
making up their imaginary scenarios. Contrary to what had been
claimed, coelacanths had neither a primitive lung nor a large brain.
The organ that evolutionist researchers had proposed as a primitive
lung turned out to be nothing but a lipid pouch.42 Furthermore, the
coelacanth, which was introduced as "a reptile candidate getting
prepared to pass from sea to land", was in reality a fish that lived
in the depths of the oceans and never approached nearer than 180
metres from the surface.43

38 Gerald T. Todd, "Evolution of the Lung and the Origin of Bony
Fishes: A Casual Relationship", American Zoologist, Vol 26, No. 4,
1980, p. 757.
39 R. L. Carroll, Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution, New York: W.
H. Freeman and Co. 1988, p. 4.; Robert L. Carroll, Patterns and
Processes of Vertebrate Evolution, Cambridge University Press, 1997,
p. 296-97
40 Edwin H. Colbert, M. Morales, Evolution of the Vertebrates, New
York: John Wiley and Sons, 1991, p. 99.
41 Jean-Jacques Hublin, The Hamlyn Encyclopædia of Prehistoric
Animals, New York: The Hamlyn Publishing Group Ltd., 1984, p. 120.
42 Jacques Millot, "The Coelacanth", Scientific American, Vol 193,
December 1955, p. 39.
43 Bilim ve Teknik Magazine, November 1998, No: 372, p. 21.
http://www.evolutiondeceit.com/chapter6.php