English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

links fossils? Shouldn't there be like millions of different types of transitional links? Where are the fossils? What if there are just thousands of transitional links? Where are the fossils? Ok I will narrow it down to 100, 10, 2-3 transitional links? Where are the fossils? Anybody give me something better than the chimpanze Lucy. She has been proven to indeed be a chimpanze you know that right? If you could show me some fossils that really matter MAYBE I could be swayed to consider believing in evolution...OK where are the fossils?

2007-08-22 16:35:44 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

one guy's answer said....."Actually there are quiet a few".....OK....prove it!!!

2007-08-22 16:39:04 · update #1

31 answers

I don't know, but I am wondering if modern man has been around for 130,000 years, why is the oldest writing ever found only 5,500 years old?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/334517.stm

If we have millions and millions of examples over the last 5,500 years, you would think something would have survived out of the billions and billions that would have been created during the other 125,000 years.
(No I don't think the earth is young either, it is billions of years, just wondering where all the writing is from modern humans)

2007-08-22 17:51:21 · answer #1 · answered by Someone who cares 7 · 0 1

Lucy wasn't a chimpanzee. She was an early species of homonid called Australopithicus afarensis. She was about 25 years old if memory serves. I'm no expert but I have read a lot of books on the subject of evolution. I've done papers on the subject and even portrayed Henry Drummond in a play called Inherit the Wind, based on a true story of a teacher who was jailed for teaching evolution. It's an interesting subject and it would take way too much time to explain about the fossils, where they are....and, again, I'm not an expert, so I don't qualify. I suggest you read up on the subject and then you can decide what to believe. Learn it for yourself and refrain from letting others try to convince you with their hand picked facts to support their theories. In fact, a good way to become interested is to read some fictional novels that are based on science. I would recommend a book called "Almost Adam" by Petru Popescu, a Romanian author. It's a very good book. Also there is a book called "Neanderthal". I can't remember the author. I loaned my copy to someone who moved away and I never got it back. Good luck and enjoy the journey.

2007-08-22 16:47:41 · answer #2 · answered by ndn_ronhoward 5 · 0 0

Lucy has not been proven to be a chimpanzee. This is only asserted by a small minority of paleoanthropologists, mostly those with an interest in 'proving' creationism.

Further, there are transitional fossils and transitional living beings all over the place. Everything that was or is alive now is a transitional form.

So in one question you manage to prove that you don't even know what evolution genuinely is, and prove that even presented the evidence, you'd lie about it and refuse to accept it.

So ... besides me getting two points, what's the point of bothering?

2007-08-22 16:41:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

The question shows a fundamental misunderstanding of genetics. Genetic information is stored in digital, not analog, form, and there is thus a minimum amount of change that can take place with a one-bit change in the DNA code. But there is NO maximum: a one-bit change can activate all or part of an intron, or de-activate all or part of an exon, causing a change that is arbitrarily large. Hence, a supposed transitional form may never have existed. Of course, there are other mutation mechanisms than a single bit error; see, for example:

2007-08-22 16:49:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

There are thousands of clearly transitional fossil forms known, some between major classes of animals and many more between families and genera. When are fundies going to stop asking this inane question and just do a little basic reading? It's all there for anyone who really wants to know. But they don't want to know. That's the problem.

2007-08-22 16:47:50 · answer #5 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 0 0

The problem you have arises out of the fact that you imagine that there are permanent species, and transitional ones. That is not how it is. In fact, all species are transitional, since evolution is a continuous process. A woolly mammoth is a transitional species. They have disappeared and we now have modern elephants. But elephants will inevitably eventually evolve into something else. The point is there is no such thing as a permanent species. (except maybe some microbes that have remained intact in special niches, but that would take us a bit far from our point.)

2007-08-22 16:41:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

you easily are starting to be some exceedingly sturdy solutions, including references to molecular to boot as complete-physique fossil information for evolution. the factor is that transitional types do no longer constantly exist, some stay on the comparable time as species that formed from the transitional ones (via fact they at the instant are in diverse environments...it extremely is what allowed the speciation to proceed interior the 1st place), yet maximum could die out and not making use of a sturdy fossil checklist. bear in mind, it incredibly is amazingly complicated to get sturdy fossils in a planet like ours with an eroding and reforming crust...it incredibly is properly exceedingly incredible we've discovered the sparkling lineages we've. The presence or absence of sparkling transitional types interior the fossil checklist is under no circumstances required to tutor relatedness between communities and evolutionary pathways...they help...yet no longer required.

2016-11-13 05:27:25 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Prove what I believe? Are you insane, if I could prove what I believed then it would what thought. As for transitional fossils look at dinosaur fossils and then at bird bones. Maybe something will click.

2007-08-22 19:37:04 · answer #8 · answered by jetthrustpy 4 · 0 0

I've already asked this question... all I got as a response is *high-pitched annoying voice* "well you're just too narrow minded to accept these things anyway." You won't get an answer to where these are... because they are no where. There should be just a few, there should be millions. There's plenty of human skeletons we could dig up and that's just from a few thousand years, so there should be TONS of half apes lying around from millions of years.... You can't find them, because they don't exist, and the ones that do are actually ones desperate scientists forced together so they could say O I discovered something that doesn't exist!

2007-08-22 16:42:43 · answer #9 · answered by spinelli 4 · 1 2

Some people, I've recently learned, think that aliens came down and transfused early beings, I think Homo Erectus or something like that, with their DNA and overnight, out came humans. Also, some say that there are some fossils, not knowing that most were constructed from only a very little of the original skeleton. I know of one "missing link" that was constructed from one tooth that they later found out was from a pig.

2007-08-22 16:40:47 · answer #10 · answered by Shy Farm Girl 3 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers