well it is relevent inthat it shows that the ‘evidence’ is based on sketchy circumstances. There was no evidence shown by those hypothesising that the fossils (which could very plausibly have been deformed through the fossilization process) evolved an ear structure. While it is possible for MICRO evolution to move a certain feature, to suggest that it did happen in such a way as to construct and assemble the complex hearing systems we now enjoy is a far leap of conjecture and does nothign to show a transitional experience through genetic favouring of certain traits. As well, you speak of ‘quibbling’ yet, to ignore the biological impossibilities of even the ‘beginnings of life’ and then to set two fossils next to one another and suggest evolution is being witnessed, (while ignoring the more abundant differences) is as well nothing but quibbling about speculatives that ignore the problems and impossibilities of the biology included in abiogensis. It’s like saying I have gold that I beleive came from lead, and showing some similarities between the two by pointing out the wieghts are ‘close’ or the solidness of the two metals are similiar, or pointing out that both can be easily scratched etc. The ‘evidence’ for the ‘evolution of the ear’ is suspect at best, and there are no real ‘transitional stages’ that show the complete progression of the structures to the middle ear. Showing a jaw bone with a low structure, then one with a bit higher and another with a bit higher one yet shows nothign but variation within kinds and not a progressive ‘transition’ as has been purported by those who wish to beleive the process did happen.
I will cede that the fella should not have said ‘major structural changes’ can’t happen because even a loss of limbs can be major structural changes, and we know for fact that microevolution can produce this effect- however, the proper wording should have been now NEW information has been observed in nature showing the macroevolution of one species to another KIND. NEW information is needed for NEW organs to appear where no information for such organs exist-
No, it isn't actually. The fossil evidence is good, and even if we didn't have that you can actually SEE the relevant bones moving from the jaw into the ear during the embryological development of some mammals. This has been observed specifically in kangaroos.
There's no question of the homologies involved.