to all who believed in Darwin's theory of Evolution...?

Question

i do, but i have this question which can be considered as the biggest pothole in the theory, the missing link??? how do we crawl out of this pothole??

forget the Creationists, i mean do we really have a definite answer to this question? i mean what really is the "missing link", i mean when somebody asks us in our face we can answer them eye to eye, i.e. hey its a CRAB!

Answer 1

This one keeps coming up by the creationists. Here's the answer.
All around the world are thousands of laboratory cases full of bones of primates. Many of the bones are of apes that have many human features. Many are human bones that have ape-like features. Many thousands of examples can't be catalogued as either human or non-human. There's not enough distinguishing features,
Take any one of them and label it the missing link. Scientists won't do that, because they don't recognize the term.

Answer 2

Realize that if science does not have absolutely every single last piece of the puzzle then it is definitely, absolutely WRONG (despite having a great deal of evidence that things do evolve). Follow up by placing "God" in said pothole, walk away victorious.

After Evolution, the religious fanatics will go on to defend the creation of the universe and how it is only "God" who could have done such a thing... Considering the period of time that has passed since the universe came into existence, it's not very probable that we will find any exact scientific explanation of to how it came to be - at least any time soon. Thus religion will claim victory - having actually never ever proved anything other then: "Well, you can't prove we're wrong! So we're right!".

Answer 3

I agree with you, this is one of the biggest problems to this theory. Scientists cannot explain it. One other of the many problems is the fossiles. If an insect or animal or plant die, we all know that they don't become fossiles. They moulder away, naturally enough. Why are there so many fossiles? Why didn't these animal and plants moulder away? For millions of years living things didn't moulder away but rather became fossiles, as it is believed. Why? If you look at the fossiles as they are embedded in the different layers, they must have got there by a catostroph. Nothing else can explain it. And such catastrophic situation is believed to have continued for millions and millions of year! I would say that life wouldn't have survived with such chaotic state of things for milliions of years. In the Bible you find a very good explanation, the Flood in the time of Noah. It was for about a year and explains it all.
So, yes, I'm a creationist. Laugh, spit or whatever you want, but it is the only thing that makes sence to me.

Answer 4

Evolution and Yahoo answers dont go well together.

But there are two theories on evolution. Punctuated equalibrium and gradualism.

With gradualism, you would expect there to be a more complete fossil record, because there are slow changes over time, which would allow a higher chance for fossilisation to occur between stages

With Punctuated equalibrium, there is supposedly periods of little change, and then a sudden change.

Some people say it happens in both ways.

Fossilisation is a rare event anywho. Not everything fossilises lol.

Answer 5

There are many missing links,problem being,when they are found,they are no longer missing,and then the creationists scream for the next "missing link" that's in between the one just discovered and the last one. Creationists will not be satisfied unless every single organism in history were all fossilized and found. For them,there will always be a "missing link"

Answer 6

Only very few animals (or those beings between animal and man) left fossils after they died. Usually the body totally decays and there are no bones left after thousands or even millions of years. Only under certain rare conditions bones were conserved until now. So the fossile record is always fragmentary. Of many extinct species we only have the fossils of one or a few individuals, and it is our big luck that we found at least them. So it is not surprising that there are species missing in the fossile record, it does not mean that they did not exist.

Answer 7

Darwin's theory is not a religion to believe in or not. It is a theory proposed by a scientist based on his observations of a limited area of the world and all good colleges teach the fallacies found in the theory, but it beats creationism all hollow.

Answer 8

The missing link theory is now debunked by evolutionists and frankly is a source of embarrassment these days, it is another example of how the goalposts have been moved time and time again to fit this theory in, because of the failure to find any transitional fossils the next step adopted was Neo-Darwinism and when that was seen as weak and unprovable they then moved onto `Punctuated Equilibrium` which has also proved useless because it suggests creation.
There is no missing link and no transitional fossils to date, so I am left wondering what the next theory will be.

Answer 9

"Missing link". Um, okay.

You need to read something about evolution that wasn't written by creationist propagandists. This whole "missing link" thing is just an advertising slogan used by creationists to convince people not to bother making the effort to learn about science.
------------------------
You can't "forget about creationism" and then talk about "the missing link". The "missing link" is a creationist propaganda tool - an advertising slogan, as it were.

That's the correct "definite" answer. You can pretend that it isn't, but this is Y!Answers, and I've just correctly answered your question.

Answer 10

The missing link is not a Darwinian concept.
Have you read any of Darwin's writings? Could you tell me the book, chapter and preferably page number?

What do you think scientists mean when they say "theory of evolution"?

(here's a hint, if man, human, mankind, etc, appears in your answer, you're wrong.)