What missing link?

Question

There is no missing link. To think of Evolution as a chain is a fallacy in and of itself. I found this article that may help explain a little. Its from a source that I have found time and time again to be unbiased.

http://atheism.about.com/b/2006/11/01/evolution-and-the-missing-link-why-is-it-missing.htm

Wes- does it make you feel good to attack someone? its all good I can tell just from your answer that you have TDS (tiny dick syndrome) LOL

Paul222- Im sorry I didnt understand your answer too well. If your trying to say that the "missing link" that is constantly talked about is still around, fairly well educated, and open-minded to almost any idea. Then yes I would probably fit the discription of said missing link. Though I fear your brain capacity may be too tiny for you to really be saying that so I'm assuming your answer was just an asinine attempt at trying to be funny. It is quite sad that you come from a place where to be funny and "show superiority" you feel the need to belittle and insult others. Hopefully at some point you will grow up and become a real man. Until then keep looking in the mirror and hoping to see hair on your balls. Some day that will have kid, some day.

Wes my friend I am not attacking anyone here. If you felt like I was attacking you then perhaps it was simply due to a lack of a real argument. I have read as much as I could find and had the time to read on evolution. If you think that this article is the ONLY one I have read or the only source I have tapped for my own understanding you are mistaken. I have seen and read arguments from both sides of the case. And personally feel that arguments from the Anti-evolutionists just really dont hold up. They are either poorly constructed or consist of "God made everything, anything else is a lie". And personally I want hard proof. I am far from uneducated my friend. Actually it sounds more and more like you would be the uneducated one here. Y/A is for getting answers to questions. I posted this in an attempt to take in others answers to it and evaluate whether what my own knowledge gave me was folly or not. Your the one who attacked. not I.

And wes my friend I wanted to add. Even though it is none of your business. I do agree with you that sources on the net cannot be considered absolute truth or unbiased. But when multiple sites say about the same thing (some of which being SCIENTIFIC sites) I will tend to believe it. And I didnt mean this site was a completely unbiased site, I meant that it has been one of the least biased I have found. One where they argue for both sides. Just because it does not agree with YOUR BIASED opinion does not mean that is is biased. Also I am currently in College. Graduated high school with decent grades. Doing well in college grade wise. And though I am not going to school for science (I am actually a business major) I am quite fascinated with it therefore do my best to learn what I can. Are you currently in school?

Ah sir but I believe science over God as well. lol. big argument over miscommunication lol. Actually I was arguing FOR science because I am of the belief that there is no missing link and Evolution is more solid than religious freaks would like us to believe. =) Congrats on West Point.

Answer 1

There is no missing link because evolution produces a continuum of subtly-changing variety which only we as humans choose to pidgeon-hole into separate species.

In effect every generation is a link to the previous one.

The issue of missing links arises because fossilisation is such a rare ocurrence - it has been estimated that many, if not the majority of species, have never been preserved as fossils. This makes the ever-changing spectrum of life appear to "lurch" or "jump" from one distinct form or species to another.

It has been calculated that if an animal the size of a mouse grew a tiny amount in each generation at such a slow rate that no humna would notice any change over his entire lifetime, then that creature would still reach the size of an elephant in just 60,000 years. 60,000 years is the merest blink of an eye in evolutionary terms and the fossil records would be unlikely to show an intermediate sizes - the "mouse" would just appear to go extinct and the "elephant" would just suddenly appear... leaving unthinking creationists to cut-and-paste their mantra about "where is the missing link"

Answer 2

Abandoned again.
Direct descent. Missing link. Transitional form. Grade of change. There must be some way to word it. When will those conniving creationists stop introducing definitions in an attempt to confuse?
So, now to the question of gradual change and the apparent lack of need for anything to be labeled as a specy. Isn't that where it is all going?
It is a relief to be rid of bad definitions. Now we can be about the proper task of producing empirical evidence of how man gradually evolved. That evidence is everywhere, right?

Answer 3

No, you're incorrect. A scientific theory must be testable and disprovable. Creationism is neither, so it's not a theory. Evolution is based on proven facts, although if new facts came to light conflicting with it, then Evolution would no longer be useful. Since Darwin proposed his theory in 1859, advances in genetics, zoology and paleantology have strengthened evolutionary theory. Over the last 148 years, millions of fossils have been discovered, including 1000s of fossils of hominids and early humans. Genetic discoveries have confirmed that humans share nearly 99% of their genes with other primate species, building the case for our origins. .

Answer 4

Evolution is not going to make one set of animals and then "poof" suddenly a new set is created. The change is very slow and from one generation to the next, you would probably not notice any change. However, over many different generations you would notice the change happen. Over thousands of years there would be some difference. Tens of thousands of years to hundreds of thousands of years the change would be very significant.

Harping about the lack of a missing link is not a good argument against evolution. All of the other evidence in the fossil record show that evolution has been happening on this planet for a very long time.

Answer 5

Wes, that is such an idiotic excuse. You can say the same thing about books, newspapers and magazine articles. Grow up.

As to answer the question... yes, I know there isn't a missing link. The people that think there is one are those that know nothing about evolution and aren't willing to become educated.

In ancient times, people this weak willing would have died out. Unfortunately, nowadays, even the morons are given license to procreate simply by virtue of society.

Its rather frightening.

Answer 6

I find many articles to be biased to some degree; however, that doesn't prevent me from reading them and gathering information and enlightenment. Whether evolution or God is the answer is left to the believer. It doesn't necessarily follow though that if you believe in one that the other is negated.

Answer 7

The term "missing link" came about from the Great Chain of Being, which is pretty ridiculous. There isn't a missing link between any species because they all diverge from a common ancestor, not a presently living one.

Answer 8

any source on the net can not be trusted, let alone unbiased, go back to school and get some real education

its called having real facts, people like you dont take the time to actually go out and learn anything or read up on the material, instead you look for quick answers in attacking others with false propaganda that only retarded politicians and religious freaks would believe

edit2:
i am not a science freak but i believe it more then god and religion. sorry that i attacked, i just get tired of seeing the same old crap being used time and time again when it holds no ground. as for my schooling, im getting into to west point

Answer 9

I'd still rather believe than have no room for imagination. I want a world with bigfoot in it and just because theres no proof he exists, I can still have faith.

I'm sure you can relate to that.

Answer 10

'What missing link?'

YOU!!!



NOTE:
I apologise for upsetting you!
(We do 'seem' to be on the same side!)

Although, your reaction... Well it does show 'your' mentality, doesn't it!!!
Amazing how one small word: 'you' ...
Has driven you into a frenzy of 'very' personal abuse back!!

Ps... Also, before you insult my country, regarding your question, try to remember where Darwin actually came from!!


Back to your question:
So, if there is 'no' missing link/s?

Do you suppose a chimp gave birth to a human??

There 'has' to be a chain of gradual change, that 'is' what Evolution is all about!!!!

Fossil evidence shows quite clearly that we evolved from apes, although that evidence is widely believed to 'not' show a 'complete' chain.
There is/are one or more 'missing link/s' in that chain!!