If evolution is "fact" then why can scientist not find any transitional fossils?

Question

I.E Half horse half reptile.

Windom - How can you explain the areas of this study that show major "gaps" in process.

Jett& Novangel - It says that "transitional fossils" is a misconception and that these show signifcant changes in the vertebras. Not completely new spieces. They are still vertebra.

Answer 1

You mean like these?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part2b.html#peri

Or were you talking about some other part-horse part-reptile fossils?

ADDENDUM:
There's not one explanation that can explain all of the gaps in the fossil record, so I'm not going to try.
I explain some of the gaps by saying we haven't found all of the transitional fossils, nor should we expect to. Fossilization is an extremely rare process, and we shouldn't expect that examples of every single transition between species would be fossilized.

I can't explain every gap in evolutionary biology, because I'm not a biologist. But Douglas J. Futuyma can help you with that. If you don't want to pay for his book go to a University Library. Almost all of them have it.

Answer 2

Try Googling horses and you will see your transitional fossils. They went from being very small up to the huge animals that they are today. Most of the dinosaurs were killed and that makes finding many transitional fossils hard.

Maybe rather than making a statement without thought you should hire a creationist to prove that evolution is false. If it is black and white and has the Creationist seal of approval you should be much happier!

Answer 3

Did you think before you asked the question? Evolution doesn't happen over night, like a fish giving birth to a fish with legs, and that fish gives birth to a dog.

Evolution is a HUGE branching tree of very minor generational mutations, most of which were failures and resulting death. Every once in a while there'd be a good mutation, but that mutation was very minor, on it's own it would have been insignificant. When you stack billions and billions of insignificant successful mutations, you get new species, new abilities, new branches... You get evolution.

By the time you get to the point where you're comparing horses and lizards you have to go back so far in the evolutionary tree that the creature they both came from have very little, if anything, in common with a horse or a lizard.

The Earth formed about 4.4 Billion years ago. Life started around around 2.8 billion years ago. We didn't even have any land animals until about 280 million years ago. The earliest "human" was about 5 million years ago.

So it took over 2.5 billion years to evolve from a single celled organsim into something with legs. Your question makes evolution look like magic. If you want magic, stick to creationism.

Edit: Oh yeah, and about your vertibate comment about not being new species because they're still vertibrates... Are you saying you're the same species as a horse? We're both vertibates. And a horse has every bone we have, their skeletons are nearly identical to ours. They're different lengths, but otherwise they're the same. The even have the same bones as our 5 fingers.

How about mammals... You have 7 bones in your neck. So does a whale. So does a giraffe. Every mammal does.

Answer 4

From your question , it's very obvious that you know nothing about the subject you're asking about . A little background work would help to keep from making you seem like a jackass .
Nothing in the study of evolution would even suggest half horse-half reptile animals . That's not what evolution is - - - except to lame-brains .

Answer 5

You are one of those fanatics that do not read about anything else for fear that it may contradict what you believe,
evolution is a fact!! and transitional fossils has been found that is why it is called a fact. because has been proved the evolution thing, and Darwin found while exploring those transitionals living things,
and you are aprove of that, you are a human with the brain of a jackass

Answer 6

But didn't you hear that scientists recently found a half human-half tickle me elmo fossil?

Answer 7

Hunh? They're ALL transitional fossils. Australopithocene afarensis is the transitional fossil between our common ancestor with chimpanzees and modern humans. Archaeopteryx ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx ) is a transitional fossil between reptiles and birds. Eohippus is the transitional fossil between early mammals and modern horses.

You're just demonstrating your abysmal ignorance of science, that's all...

Answer 8

half horse half reptile? do you not see the lunacy of your question. to pose that two evolved creatures would have been halved prior to their point now?
what is the relation between horse and reptile?
look at the fossil records of dolphins, the record of the blow hole moving farther back onto it's head, or the variant prehuman primates and the steady growth towards our "miraculous" form or the archaeopteryx (sp?)
you want half bird half monkey too?
points directly to the mythology that i assume you are comfortable believing.

btw down below me...the reason that not all monkeys evolved into men is that we did not come from monkeys. we came from earlier versions of ourselves that at one time appeared to be morphologically similar to some monkeys...not a monkey. monkeys are monkeys. we are not monkeys...breathe in.

Answer 9

http://www.talkorigins.org

If you bothered to read it, your question would not sound so naive. Ever heard of genetics? We're all linked by common descent.

If you think a god works in amazing, mysterious ways, why try to shove reality into a box that confirms the ego of a particular belief system or church? I'm not religious, but I can't fathom why it makes sense to believe in a small set of rules. Humans are only a tiny fragment of the universe. Here is a cosmological simulation of 20 million galaxies. It would take you more than one lifetime to count the number of stars in a single galaxy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W35SYkfdGtw&mode=related&search=

Answer 10

They will give you some links to sites that show these so called transitional fossils. Take the time to look at them. You will come out ever more convinced what a bunch of goofiness this stuff is. I studied them for a while and was amazed at what they consider transitional fossils....like this one animal...a four legged land animal that they said was an early ancestor of a whale because it had a similar ear structure. O.K. Then there was the one with the picture of a rabbit a frog and I believe the third animal was a bird (Can't remember exacly on that one) that demonstrated how they all came from a similar ancestor because their legs are similar. I mean, what a stretch. And we,re supposed to be ignorant imbeciles for not falling for this junk Science! Give me a break!