Concerning Punctuated Equilibrium, your view on this question?

Question

Do you think the offspring or descendants of Michael Phelps will grow fins or any of the following: scales, webbed hands and feet, gills, etc... just because he spends a lot of time in the water? Please be consistent with your beliefs.

Answer 1

That has nothing to do with punctuated equilibrium.  That is Lamarckian evolution and it has been disproven.

Answer 2

horses are still horses

dogs are still dogs

pigs are still pigs

sheep are still sheep

lions are still lions

michael phelps will have children not some kind of fish.

Answer 3

Only if it helps them survive long enough to reproduce, and if helps each subsequent generations.

Answer 4

In all seriousness, punctuated equilibrium has more feasibility than the current model.  I can see the possibility of single, catastrophic events causing enough changes/mutations that, when the dust settles, new species will have emerged.  That would explain why we don't see the gradual changes that the present theory would predict.

Now, this in no way goes against my belief in God.  No matter what science finds, that only explains how God did it.  Science cannot ever disprove the existence of God, because God created it.

Answer 5

Learned behaviors are not passed genetically.

They could well be born with bodies naturally inclined to swim well.

Answer 6

When you demand the same standards of proof for your superstition that you demand of evolution then we'll talk. OK?