|
|
#21
08-28-2007, 05:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Evolution: Transitional forms
[ QUOTE ]
I like this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx [/ QUOTE ] I have a feeling that Wikipedia will end up being written off as a "tool for the spread of atheism" or what have you, but I spent all afternoon reading since I admittedly don't know very much about transitional forms. Some really great articles with a ton of information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objections_to_evolution 
|
|
#22
08-31-2007, 12:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Evolution: Transitional forms
[ QUOTE ]
And the creationist complaint against the evolutionist is they will label anything in the fossil record between 2 fossils as a transitional form. [/ QUOTE ] Only if they are message board posters donking around with ideas and not scientists who are busy doing science and have never seen a message board. No such thing as a "transitional form." Take it to the bank.
|
|
#23
08-31-2007, 12:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Evolution: Transitional forms
[ QUOTE ]
No such thing as a "transitional form." Take it to the bank. [/ QUOTE ] Darwin was wrong? Wiki is wrong? Talkorigin is wrong? Oh my.
|
|
#24
08-31-2007, 04:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Evolution: Transitional forms
ok ive been thinking and reading more, and ive decided that my OP was flawed. what im trying to say is not that transitional forms don't exist, but that their existence is merely definitional.
When these creatures were alive, they couldn't be considered transitional in any way. Only in hindsight, after their descendents have changed, can they be considered transitional. The relevance of this point to the validity of natural selection is this: Creationist thinkers require lots of fossils of transitional forms to prove that, say a primate is an ancestor of a human. If they dont see these fossils, they dismiss the theory. This is rather like seeing a mountain peak and asking: "what proof do you have of the rest of the mountain?" as if the peak could just be floating in space over the earth. If you saw the leaf of a maple tree, and your saw the trunk of the tree and its roots, would you have any doubt that the leaf was connected to the trunk and roots by way of branches?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
