Weak Speculations of Early Land Plant Evolution

Once again, my prospector friend Stormie Waters had ventured past Creek Road and was in sight of the Winkie Guards at the Darwin Ranch (not the one in the Bridger-Teton National Forest). At that moment, foreman Rusty Swingset was heading out, so Stormie hid behind some greasewood.

Rusty passed close to her, but he was busy talking with some ranch hands about land plant evolution from stonewort and didn't notice her. (She gets shy when trespassing.) Some evolutionists are writing checks on the bank of science that cannot be cashed.

Stonewort image by Jeremy Halls at Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0)

If you study on it, evolution is taken by faith, not by sight. People have believed it by relying on science of the gaps: eventually, evidence would be found. Materialists presuppose evolution, and when it comes to land plants, believe they have found a way to fill in the evolutionary gaps appealing to genetics. However, they have no actual evidence, and many questions are left unanswered. They will remain unanswered if naturalists continue to deny the evidence for the Creator that is right in front of them.

In a recent Science article, two evolutionists consider land plants (embryophytes) to have evolved from stoneworts (charophyte algae).

A spore is a haploid (single, unpaired chromosome), which is a single or multicellular reproductive structure produced by certain species (e.g., fungi) that detaches from the parent and gives rise to a new individual. Spores were recently extracted from Australian deposits dated by secular scientists to be 480 million years old. They maintain “these spores are of intermediate morphology [form or appearance] between confirmed land plant spores and earlier forms of uncertain relationship. This finding may help to resolve discrepancies between molecular and fossil data for the timing of land plant origins.” Creation scientists predict the discrepancies will not be resolved.

To get to the root of the article, see "Early Land Plant Evolution?"