And here is how neo-Marmarism is interpreted for aquatic inhabitants.

They explain that the fish that

remained stranded during periods of drought, due to the muscles of their fins, slowly crawled to other
bodies of water, that is, it turns out that the fish reached land before they had developed limbs. Well,
then - exercised, exercised their fins - and they turned into limbs ... But you can read another completely
in the book of Yu.V. Tchaikovsky's "Active Connected World", excerpts from which I have already
quoted. He refutes the foregoing in the spirit of Lamarck as follows.

Many new fossils were discovered that completely reversed previous ideas about the origin and
evolution of early tetrapods (quadrupeds). Acantostega had limbs ending in toes, but these legs were
not adapted for terrestrial existence. Akantostega was pro-amphibian, i.e. only the “rudiment” of a four-
legged animal fully adapted to life in water. There was less and less evidence to find the hypothesis,
according to which access to the land was accompanied by the formation of limbs with feet. On the
contrary, the limbs of the tetrapods formed when they dwelt in water.

Found transitional forms from fish to terrestrial quadrupeds (tetrapods):

Eusthenopteron , Panderichthys , Tiktaalik (presented in the figure below), Elginerpeton , Ventastega ,

Acanthostega , Ichthyostega , Tulerpeton . The first terrestrial tetrapods were not lizards, but organisms
similar to amphibians. For example, Tiktaalik had a mobile neck, lungs. The structure of the joints and
the ear of this organism is also similar to the four-legged joints, like many other details of the skeleton,
indicating that it is not just a fish, but a fish that has been adapted to spend time in very shallow bodies
of water and even occasionally go on land. Another example, the ichthyosteg still had a fish tail, small
fish scales, but already had paired five-fingered limbs of terrestrial vertebrates.

The second human chromosome resulted from the merger of two smaller ancestral chromosomes that
are found in chimpanzees . This, incidentally, is also one of the graphic evidence of evolution (discussed
in detail by Ken Miller, even cited in court). On the second human chromosome, traces of the second
centromere remained, as well as telomeres in the middle of the chromosome (where there was a fusion)
and genes arranged in the same order as on the two corresponding chromosomes. Therefore, we know
what place of this chromosome is homologous (similar) to which place on one of the two corresponding
chimpanzee chromosomes.

“A banana is like a human gene like 50%. It does not say anything. It only says that both man and
monkey are written in the same language. The creator of both animals and plants is the same”

A banana and a man also had a common ancestor, only he lived much earlier than the common ancestor
of a little man and a chimpanzee. But in general, the phrase "Banana on the human gene is similar to
50%" is illiterate. A banana is not like a human gene. But the banana has genes similar to the human
ones that we and the bananas inherited from a common ancestor. The similarity between humans and
chimpanzees is not only in the genes, but also in pseudogenes, in transposons, as well as in the
arrangement of genes. A good proof of evolution is the distribution of insertions of endogenous
retroviruses in humans and chimpanzees. Retroviruses (see schematic image below) are able to embed
their DNA into the host genome. Inserts of retroviruses are inherited if they enter the germ cell lines.
Consider two scenarios. The biblical scenario would say that viruses arose after the fall. Accordingly, in
humans and chimpanzees, all inserts occurred independently. The evolutionary position is that a
significant portion of the inserts is inherited from the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees. In
humans and chimpanzees, there are many overlapping insertions of endogenous retroviruses, much
more than one would expect by coincidence (with the hypothesis of independent insertion of inserts).