Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
Judging from the pictures, I think to claim that lungfish are “more closely related to the tetrapods than… to tuna” is an extraordinary claim.
2. According to some this would imply it needs extraordinary evidence.
3. Evidence based on a particular assumption only shifts the focus of the argument to the justifiability of the assumption.
4. If you insist that the world had no designer and OOL happened by chance ( a very shaky assumption that no one has shown to be in line with any reasonable calculation of the probabilities involved ) then there exists extraordinary evidence that the lungfish is closer because of the function of lungs. However, this is only sufficient evidence, it is not necessarily evidenced. the same situation is likely to have occurred given the assumption of design
5. So we are back to all evidence being subject to a basic assumption that do you (by faith ) believe that creation happened without an intelligent designer… and I do not.
6. Your basis for believing that lungfish are closer related to humans than tuna ( even in a narrow technical sense ) is a statement of faith.
7. I don’t have enough faith to believe the notions that you believe.