This is because the truth is biased against Christianity and conservative ideals.

You might like to send creationists here when then pipe up, It’s a tl;dr on the fossil issue: http://www.transitional-fossil.com.

–Besides, when the article published in 2006 describing Tiktaalik as an example of a transitional fossil, they plainly stated that they do not know the state of Panderichthys’ limb structure. From the article: “Unfortunately, the distal region of the best-known pectoral fin of the elpistostegid Panderichthys is covered by lepidotrichia and the complete distal endoskeleton is unknown”–

Now I am really confused — what does Panderichthys’ distal limb structure got to do with Tiktaalik’s quality as an example of a transitional fossil? And how well-preserved are Tiktaalik’s limb structures? That’s what counts.

I agree that Casey Luskin did some quote-mining but I think that he is partly right. Casey Luskin repeatedly implies that Tiktaalik is “poor” in general as fossil evidence of an evolutionary transition from fish to tetrapods. However, it appears that the Darwinists are not admitting that Tiktaalik is “poor” in general as such fossil evidence but are only admitting that Tiktaalik is poor as evidence of an evolutionary transition from fishes’ radial fin bones to tetrapods’ digital bones. Tiktaalik still has a lot of tetrapod-like features: a flat, crocodile-like head; a neck that can bend; a rib cage; and ear notches — see http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/meetTik.html That admission by Darwinists is certainly a big deal if they are making it for the first time, but Luskin should be clear as to exactly what they are admitting.

I think this is a fascinating development, and the only development that happened here is humanity knowing about natural history than it did before. This is not a victory for ignorance, it’s a crushing defeat.