Don't you know that evolution has big gaps?

Question

We have not found ALL the links. There are many gaps. So why do you continue to base your beliefs on evolution?

Answer 1

Even with the gaps, there is far more evidence for evolution than there ever will be that there is some god somewhere. There is no magic. To base a belief in god because you cannot explain how things evolved means that your belief in god is based on ignorance and fantasy. We can explain it, so that mean there is a god....that is not religion, that is mental illness.

Answer 2

Well, I live in a world where nothing is finally, really, and for all time settled. Take the Kennedy assasination. There is footage of that one, from more than one camera. But still all our questions about it aren't answered. History is like this. You never get every last item of information you want. You just have to take what you can get and draw the best conclusion you can from that.

So too with evolution. You look at what you can find and do the best you can with that. Sure, you wish you could find every smoking gun. You wish you could find Noah's ark or Atlantis. But we know that some things are just lost to history. It's the things you can find that you have to go on.

Answer 3

Yes there are "gaps" ... but they are NOT "long" gaps like this:

A (long gap) G (long gap) M (long gap) Z.

When scientists admit quite openly that there are "gaps" they're talking like this:

A B C D (gap) F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U (gap) X Y Z.

That's all. Why do you believe that all of evolution is "disproved" if we have not found ALL the links?

In other words, scientists are very very honest about what fossils they have not yet discovered, where the "gaps" are. But that honesty is precisely *why* they have more credibility with the things they *do* know.

For example, here is the sequence for the horse ("Ma" means "million years ago" ... see source for a description of all these fossils):

* Loxolophus (early Paleocene)
* Tetraclaenodon (mid-Paleocene)
(GAP)
* Radinskya yupingae (late Paleocene, China)
* Hyracotherium (early Eocene, about 55 Ma; previously "Eohippus")
* Hyracotherium vassacciense (early Eocene)
* Orohippus (mid-Eocene, ~50 Ma)
* Epihippus (late Eocene, ~45 Ma)
* Epihippus (Duchesnehippus)
* Mesohippus celer (latest Eocene, 40 Ma)
* Mesohippus westoni (early Oligocene)
* Miohippus assiniboiensis (mid-Oligocene)
* Kalobatippus (late Oligocene)
* Parahippus (early Miocene, 23 Ma)
* 'Parahippus' leonensis (mid-Miocene, ~20 Ma)
* 'Merychippus' gunteri (mid-Miocene, ~18 Ma)
* Merychippus primus (mid-Miocene, ~17 Ma)
* Merychippus spp. of mid-late Miocene (16-15 Ma)
(GAP): It's not known which Merychippus species (stylodontus? carrizoensis?) gave rise to the first Dinohippus species
* Dinohippus (late Miocene, 12 Ma)
* Equus (Plesippus), also called the "E. simplicidens" group (Pliocene, ~4 My)
* Equus (Hippotigris) (Pleistocene)
* Equus (Equus) (Pleistocene)

That's it. Two small gaps in an other wise unbroken sequence of fossils.

The source has the same sequence (including any known "gaps") for primates, bats, rodents, rabbits & hares, earlier hoofed animals, cetaceans (whales & dolphins), elephants, pigs, hippos, deer, giraffes, etc. etc. All have very good fossil records, with known, but small, gaps.

Answer 4

We don't need to find all of the links (fossil links between species, I'm assuming) to establish that the theory is sound. In any analogous situation, we wouldn't demand such a high (indeed, impossible) standard of proof. E.g., when I meet you, I don't need a complete history of your life and samples of every meal you've ever eaten from to know that you have, in fact, eaten - I can deduce it from the fact that you're alive and that all other humans need to eat to live. Similarly, one doesn't need to find a chain of fossils connecting every living creature. In fact, this is unlikely to occur, simply because fossilization is a rare event, and the fossils simply might not have formed for us to find them. But we can tell from other indications, and from the fossil evidence that IS available, that DOES corroborate our theories, that common descent is true. The gaps are unimportant.

Answer 5

Oh, HUUUUUUUUGGGGEEEE gaps, more than i'm sure you know. But, here's the great thing about science, you don't have to know all the answers to be right. You see, unlike religion wich most be complete in and of itself, science is a process of refinement. You form a theory, test the theory, and refine the theory based on your results. In fact, I would be much more wary of the theory of evolution if it did -not- have gaps, given the hit or miss nature of the fossilization process.

Answer 6

All that indicates is that we ourselves are not Gods. We just plain don't know everything. There's not a single legitimate scientist alive that thinks he does know everything.

By the way, the God of the Gaps argument is widely regarded as one the most pathetically flawed philosophical arguments for God's existence.

Answer 7

Do you know that you have big gaps in your understanding of biology and natural sciences?
There is no evidence for you anyway, you are just a couple of words on my computer screen. So I don't believe you exist...

Answer 8

The gaps are not large, and the evidence is extensive. There is little faith involved in understanding evolution.

Answer 9

People can say all they want that evolution exists simply because there is more proof for it than for God, but they are still forgetting that God if he/she/whatever exists is a spiritual being and therefor there WOULDN'T be any physical evidence for it now would there?

Answer 10

Guys, there is no use in even attempting to educate someone like this. He asks the question but does not read the answers because he doesn't care. We give him education, knowledge and facts; he simply gives us the finger.