The evolution of the horse series is a fraud

In 1879, two well-knownevolutionists of the time went even further in
their activities intended to constitute evidence for the fictitious
evolution of the horse scenario and set up the equine series that
Darwinists would maintain on the agenda for many years to come. The
American fossil researcher Othniel Charles Marsh and Thomas Huxley
(known as Darwin's bulldog) established a series by setting out
various hoofed fossils on the number of nails on the front and rear
feet and the structure of their teeth. One small mammalfossil
previously named Hyracotherium by Sir Richard Owen in 1841 was renamed
in such a way as to echo evolution, being given the name Eohippus,
meaning "Dawn Horse." The pair published their claims and diagrams in
the American Journal of Science, thus laying the foundations of the
horseseries laid out from Eohippus to the present day in museums and
textbooks as supposed evidence of evolution. The main stages in this
fictitious series were Eohippus, Orohippus, Miohippus, Hipparion and
the present-day Equus.
This fictitious series was portrayed as the greatest supposed evidence
for the evolution of the horse for the following century. The decrease
in the number of toes and the regular increase in size, from smaller
to larger, was enough to convince evolutionists.
Shortly afterward, inconsistencies within the horse series began
manifesting themselves. New fossils dug up and attempted to be
insertedinto the false horse series became a problem. Because
characteristics such as the fossils' location, age and toe number
formed inconsistencies and impaired the series, which turned into an
inconsistent and meaningless mass of fossils in the face of these new
specimens.
Many Darwinists were gradually forced to admit that the Darwinist
horse series scenario was not based on any genuine evidence. In
November 1980 a 4-day conference was held in the Chicago Museum of
Natural History, which was attended by 150 evolutionists and
considered the problemsfacing the theory of evolution. Boyce
Rensberger, who spoke at the conference, described how the horseseries
had no basis in the fossil record and thatno such gradual process as
the evolution of the horse ever happened:
The popularly told example of horse evolution, suggesting a gradual
sequence of changes from four-toed fox-sized creatures livingnearly 50
million years ago to today's much larger one-toed horse, has long been
known to be wrong. Instead of gradual change, fossils of each
intermediate species appear fully distinct, persist unchanged, and
then become extinct. Transitional forms are unknown. [i]
Hyracotherium, placed at the beginning of the so-called horse series,
was originally identified by Richard Owen, an anti-Darwinist. But
later paleontologists sought to conform this creature to evolution.
Another problem in the fictitious evolution of the horse series is
that ofdating. Doctor Nicholas Comninellis comments:
An additional challenge to the proposal of horse evolution is that the
timing is inconsistent. The theory of evolution is based on the
concept that one species is proneto evolve into another because it is
better adapted for survival. This leads to extinction of the first
species. In thecase of horses, the three-toed must not have beenas
hearty as the one-toed. Evolution demands millions of years for
transition to occur between species—plenty of time for the first
species to die out.
However, today we know that the three-toed and one-toed horses lived
together in North America. The fact that varieties of horses
co-existed is completely inconsistent with evolution's explanation.
Add to this the fact that missing links between Hyracotherium,
Miohippus, and Equus have never been identified. Rather than lending
support for evolution, the history of the horse is more consistent
with special creation—fully formed beings that were created
simultaneously. ii
Although the invalidity of the evolution of the horse series has been
brought out into the open day and Darwinistshave admitted this state
of affairs, this mythical series is still used, like other Darwinist
frauds, in Darwinist publicationsand text books. The series is
depicted as concrete fact and placed on display in museums of natural
history curated by world-famous paleontologists and scientists. Dr.
Niles Eldredge, an evolutionistand paleontologist who served as
director of the world-renowned American Museum of Natural History,
admittedsome 20 years ago that evolutionist claims regarding the horse
series on display in his own museum were based solely upon their
powers of imagination. Eldredge also criticized the way that this
speculative series was portrayed as scientific fact in such a way as
to find its way into school books:
I admit that an awful lot of that [imaginary stories] has gotten into
the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous
example on horse evolution prepared perhaps fifty years ago. That has
beenpresented as literal truthin textbook after textbook. Now I think
that is lamentable, particularly because the people who propose these
kinds of stories themselves may be aware of the speculativenature of
some of the stuff. But by the time it filters down to the textbooks,
we've got science as truth and we've got a problem. iii
Huxley, known as "Darwin's bulldog," was the first theoretician of the
imaginary horse series. The Darwinist Eldredge's analysis is a most
accurate one. Since deliberate distortions represent the essence of
the system of the dajjal, this system engages in all kinds of lies,
deceptions, hoaxes and distortions. All the examples of Darwinist
deception listed above have been exposed, and their false nature has
even had to be admittedby Darwinist scientists. These examples are
sufficient to show the true face of the system of the dajjal. But it
will still be useful to issue thefollowing reminder: the theory of
evolution, Darwinist ideology in other words, is built on alie
intended to deny the existence of Allah. Therefore, all the claims,
suggestions and evidence produced by Darwinism are false. All the
statements to the effect that "proof of evidence has been discovered,"
"living things evolved," "or "human beings are descended from apes"
are lies. Darwinists espouse a lie. Their illogical obedience and
devotion to the system of the dajjal is blind devotion to the religion
of Darwinism solely in order to be able to oppose belief in Allah.
The fact is that they espouse a superstition, aterrible error.
Almighty Allah, the Lord and Creator of All, says in His verses:
If anyone desires anything other than Islam as a religion, it willnot
be accepted from him, and in the Hereafter he will be among the
losers. (SurahAl 'Imran, 85)
Everyone in the heavens and everyone on the earth belong to Allah.
Those who call on something other than Allah are not really following
their partner-gods. They are only following conjecture. They are only
guessing. (Surah Yunus, 66)
i Boyce Rensberger, Houston Chronicle, 5 November 1980, Part4, p. 15
ii Nicholas Comninellis, Creative Defense, Evidence Against Evolution,
Master Books, 2001, p.168
iii Colin Patterson, Harper's, February 1984, p. 60

--
/-
-
- - ▓███▓ Translator:-> http://translate.google.com/m/ ▓███▓ - - -
●▬►
-
I welcome, My Blog Readers Openions. So write your comments and
Suggetions any time, below each Posts or Write to my Email -
aydnajimudeen@gmail.com/-
Thanks my Readers.
-
*.*.*.*.*.
-
¤ Assalamualaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa barakatuh ¤
●▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬●
-