"Fossil gap", is it evidence of lack of "true" transitional fossils?

Answer 1

not at all... though there are many fossils to be found, fossilization is a difficult thing to acheive. the conditions must be right. think for a moment of all the creatures that have lived and died in the course of life here on earth... if every one one of them had left a fossilized imprint, we would be finding fossils every day, everywhere. i'm not going to make any specific statements about how many fossils there may be (found and yet to be found) but one must imagine that represents a very small percentage of all life on earth over hundreds of millions of years

Answer 2

There are evidences in palaentology where some fossil remains were found in one part e.g. Asia and some in Africa.Imagine the whole earth as one common mass that got separated into continents due to continental drift that eventually resulted in the fossil gap which is evidence of lack of true transitional fossils.

Answer 3

Not only is there the fossil 'gap' but there is also lacking any ongoing or historical evidence that there are any ' transitions'. Humans, apes, and all other animals are just the same as they have been for eons allowing for minor genetic differences such as hair & skin color, slight variations in size and body shape within species etc. I think that it is reasonable to conclude that there is a true 'lack' of the transitional fossils that the theory of evolution is based on..

There is also the DNA evidence that Neanderthal and previous primates are not actually related to modern man, commonly called Cro-Magnon, who appeared rather suddenly on the scene and who was in the berginning a better physical speciman with a slightly larger (on the average) brain capacity then modern man. If anything, we have a case for devolution in humans.

Answer 4

No. Creationists claim that there are no transitional creatures by a variety of means. If you show them a transitional creature that 51% fish 49% amphibian, they'll say it's just a fish (plus the "now there are two gaps"). There are too many transitional fossils to ignore.

Answer 5

no. the fossil record is about as good as we might expect, as fossilisation is rare anyway, and expected to be more so for transitional populations. without the fossil record, evolution would still be a well-supported theory due to evidence from the genetics and morphology of organisms that are currently alive. but the fossil record is useful for working out more precisely the patterns of how the tree of life branched. for instance, one may be able to say that birds and reptiles are quite closely related, but fossil evidence suggests that birds evolved from dinosaurs rather than directly from the ancestors of modern reptiles.

Answer 6

All fossils are transitional, because evolution is an ongoing process.

But for your "classical" transitional fossil, look at the archaeopteryx. It's a reptile with feathers.

Answer 7

No its NOT!

Read Mark Isaak's Counter Creationism Handbook!

We do however have a more complete variety of fossils that provide evidence for evolutionary change from some species than others.

Answer 8

say you have two fossils. you have one gap.
if you find a transitional fossil between them. now you have 2 gaps.
when it comes to the fossil record of humans, we have thousands of gaps.

it means we have a very detailed record.

Answer 9

of course it is, lack of fossils, famous scientists being caught creating their own transitional fossils to promote their false agenda, using animal parts and calling it human parts, perhaps finding skeletal fragments smaller than normal from people with handicaps or midgets to suggest the we came from apes.

Answer 10

By that do you mean that Harvard educated Paleontologists are dupes of the Devil?