@ahmetsecer,
ahmetsecer;62287 wrote:
SOME DILEMMAS FACING THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION
Lets see what these supposed dilemmas are. I'm not saying that the current evolutionary theory is flawless by any means but usually the arguments creationists bring against evolution aren't dilemas at all.
Mutations are random, natural selection isn't. Natural and sexual selection for that matter are very deterministic. Nature chooses what genes get passed on at what genes don't, based on how the genes affect survivability of the host. Imagine this analogy:
"A child pulls Legos(tm) randomly from a bucket, and throws the pieces that he doesn't want back into the bucket and he uses the pieces that fit, and he repeats this process continually. So even while the pieces are selected randomly we know the product of the child's determinism is not random."
Evolution works in much the same way.
The problem is not that there isn't any intermediate fossils, it's that you are unaware of them. Why would you look for something that would dismantle your pre-conceived conclusion?
if you are truly interested in the sheer number of transitional fossils:
Transition from primitive jawless fish to sharks, skates, and rays:
o Cladoselachians (e.g., Cladoselache).
o Hybodonts (e.g. Hybodus)
o Heterodonts (e.g. Heterodontus)
o Hexanchids (e.g. Chlamydoselache)
Transition from primitive bony fish to holostean fish:
o Palaeoniscoids (e.g. Cheirolepis); living chondrosteans such as Polypterus and Calamoichthys, and also the living acipenseroid chondrosteans such as sturgeons and paddlefishes.
o Primitive holosteans such as Semionotus.
Transition from holostean fish to advanced teleost fish:
o Leptolepidomorphs, esp. Leptolepis, an excellent holostean-teleost intermediate
o Elopomorphs, both fossil and living (tarpons, eels)
o Clupeomorphs (e.g. Diplomystus)
o Osteoglossomorphs (e.g. Portheus)
o Protacanthopterygians
Transition from primitive bony fish to amphibians:
o Paleoniscoids again (e.g. Cheirolepis)
o Osteolepis -- one of the earliest crossopterygian lobe-finned fishes, still sharing some characters with the lungfish (the other group of lobe-finned fish). Had paired fins with a leg-like arrangement of bones, and had an early-amphibian-like skull and teeth.
o Eusthenopteron (and other rhipidistian crossopterygian fish) -- intermediate between early crossopterygian fish and the earliest amphibians. Skull very amphibian-like. Strong amphibian-like backbone. Fins very like early amphibian feet.
o Icthyostegids (such as Icthyostega and Icthyostegopsis) -- Terrestrial amphibians with many of Eusthenopteron's fish features (e.g., the fin rays of the tail were retained). Some debate about whether Icthyostega should be considered a fish or an amphibian; it is an excellent transitional fossil.
o Labyrinthodonts (e.g., Pholidogaster, Pteroplax) -- still have some icthyostegid features, but have lost many of the fish features (e.g., the fin rays are gone, vertebrae are stronger and interlocking, the nasal passage for air intake is well defined.)
Transition from amphibians to reptiles:
o Seymouriamorph labyrinthodonts (e.g. Seymouria) -- classic labyrinthodont skull and teeth, with reptilian vertebrae, pelvis, humerus, and digits; amphibian ankle.
o Cotylosaurs (e.g. Hylonomus, Limnoscelis) -- slightly amphibian skull (e.g. with amphibian-type pineal opening), with rest of skeleton classically reptilian.
o The cotylosaurs gave rise to many reptile groups of tremendous variety. I won't go into the transitions from cotylosaurs to the advanced anapsid reptiles (turtles and possibly mesosaurs), to the euryapsid reptiles (icthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, and others), or to the lepidosaurs (eosuchians, lizards, snakes, and the tuatara), or to most of the dinosaurs, since I don't have infinite time. Instead I'll concentrate on the synapsid reptiles (which gave rise to mammals) and the archosaur reptiles (which gave rise to birds).
Transition from reptiles to mammals:
o Pelycosaur synapsids -- classic reptilian skeleton, intermediate between the cotylosaurs (the earliest reptiles) and the therapsids (see next)
o Therapsids (e.g. Dimetrodon) -- the numerous therapsid fossils show gradual transitions from reptilian features to mammalian features. For example: the hard palate forms, the teeth differentiate, the occipital condyle on the base of the skull doubles, the ribs become restricted to the chest instead of extending down the whole body, the legs become "pulled in" instead of sprawled out, the ilium (major bone of the hip) expands forward.
o Cynodont theriodonts (e.g. Cynognathus) -- very mammal-like reptiles. Or is that reptile-like mammals? Highly differentiated teeth (a classic mammalian feature), with accessory cusps on cheek teeth; strongly differentiated vertebral column (with distinct types of vertebrae for the neck, chest, abdomen, pelvis, and tail -- very mammalian), mammalian scapula, mammalian limbs, mammalian digits (e.g. reduction of number of bones in the first digit). But, still has unmistakably reptilian jaw joint.
o Tritilodont theriodonts (e.g. Tritylodon, Bienotherium) -- skull even more mammalian (e.g. advanced zygomatic arches). Still has reptilian jaw joint.
o Ictidosaur theriodonts (e.g. Diarthrognathus) -- has all the mammalian features of the tritilodonts, and has a double jaw joint; both the reptilian jaw joint and the mammalian jaw joint were present, side-by-side, in Diarthrognathus's skull. A really stunning transitional fossil.
o Morganucodonts (e.g. Morganucodon) -- early mammals. Double jaw joint, but now the mammalian joint is dominant (the reptilian joint bones are beginning to move inward; in modern mammals these are the bones of the middle ear).
o Eupantotheres (e.g. Amphitherium) -- these mammals begin to show the complex molar cusp patterns characteristic of modern marsupials and eutherians (placental mammals). Mammalian jaw joint.
o Proteutherians (e.g. Zalambdalestes) -- small, early insectivores with molars intermediate between eupantothere molars and modern eutherian molars.
o Those wondering how egg-laying reptiles could make the transition to placental mammals may wish to study the reproductive biology of the monotremes (egg-laying mammals) and the marsupials. The monotremes in particular could almost be considered "living transitional fossils". [see Peter Lamb's suggested marsupial references at end]
Transition from reptiles to birds:
o Lisboasaurus estesi and other "troodontid dinosaur-birds" -- a bird-like reptile with very bird-like teeth (that is, teeth very like those of early toothed birds [modern birds have no teeth]). May not have been a direct ancestor; may have been a "cousin" of the birds instead.
o Protoavis -- this is a highly controversial fossil that may or may not be an extremely early bird. Not enough of the fossil was recovered to determine if it is definitely related to the birds, or not. I mention it in case people have heard about it recently.
o Archeopteryx -- reptilian vertebrae, pelvis, tail, skull, teeth, digits, claws, sternum. Avian furcula (wishbone, for attachment of flight muscles), forelimbs, and lift-producing flight feathers. Archeopteryx could probably fly from tree to tree, but couldn't take off from the ground, since it lacked a keeled breastbone (for attachment of large flight muscles) and had a weak shoulder (relative to modern birds).
o "Chinese bird" [I don't know what name was given to this fossil] -- A fossil dating from 10-15 million years after Archeopteryx. Bird-like claws on the toes, flight-specialized shoulders, fair-sized sternal keel (modern birds usually have large sternal keel); also has reptilian stomach ribs, reptilian unfused hand bones, & reptilian pelvis. This bird has a fused tail ("pygostyle"), but I don't know how long it was, or if it was all fused or just part of it was fused.
o "Las Hoyas bird" [I don't know what name was given to this fossil] -- This fossil dates from 20-30 m.y. after Archeopteryx. It still has reptilian pelvis & legs, with bird-like shoulder. Tail is medium-length with a fused tip (Archeopteryx had long, unfused tail; modern birds have short, fused tail). Fossil down feather was found with the Las Hoyas bird.
o Toothed Cretaceous birds, e.g. Hesperornis and Ichthyornis. Skeleton further modified for flight (fusion of pelvis bones, fusion of hand bones, short & fused tail). Still had true socketed teeth, which are missing in modern birds.
o [note: a classic study of chicken embryos showed that chicken bills can be induced to develop teeth, indicating that chickens (and perhaps other modern birds) still retain the genes for making teeth.]
Transitional fossils from early eutherian mammals to primates:
o Early primates -- paromomyids, carpolestids, plesiadapids. Lemur-like clawed primates with generalized nails.
o Notharctus, an early Eocene lemur
o Parapithecus, a small Old World monkey (Oligocene)
o Propliopithecus, a small primate intermediate between Parapithecus and the more recent O.W. monkeys. Has several ape-like characters.
o Aegyptopithecus, an early ape.
o Limnopithecus, a later ape showing similarities to the modern gibbons.
o Dryopithecus, a later ape showing similarities to the non-gibbon apes.
o Ramapithecus, a dryopithecine-like ape showing similarities to the hominids but now thought to be an orang ancestor.
o Australopithecus spp., early hominids. Bipedal.
o Homo habilis.
o Homo erectus. Numerous fossils across the Old World.
o Homo sapiens sapiens. This is us. (NB: "Cro-magnon man" belongs here too. Cro-magnons were a specific population of modern humans.)
o Homo sapiens neanderthalensis (not on the direct line to H. sapiens sapiens, but worth mentioning).
o [I haven't described these fossils in detail because they're fairly well covered in any intro biology text, or in any of several good general- interest books on human evolution.]
Transitional fossils from early eutherian mammals to rodents:
o Paramyids, e.g. Paramys -- early "primitive" rodent
o Paleocastor -- transitional from paramyids to beavers
o [yick. I was going to summarize rodent fossils but Paramys and its friends gave rise to 5 enormous and very diverse groups of rodents, with about ten zillion fossils. Never mind.]
Transitional fossils among the cetaceans (whales & dolphins):
o Pakicetus -- the oldest fossil whale known. Only the skull was found. It is a distinct whale skull, but with nostrils in the position of a land animal (tip of snout). The ears were partially modified for hearing under water. This fossil was found in association with fossils of land mammals, suggesting this early whale maybe could walk on land.
o Basilosaurus isis -- a recently discovered "legged" whale from the Eocene (after Pakicetus). Had hind feet with 3 toes and a tiny remnant of the 2nd toe (the big toe is totally missing). The legs were small and must have been useless for locomotion, but were specialized for swinging forward into a locked straddle position -- probably an aid to copulation for this long-bodied, serpentine whale.
o Archaeocetes (e.g. Protocetus, Eocetus) -- have lost hind legs entirely, but retain "primitive whale" skull and teeth, with forward nostrils.
o Squalodonts (e.g. Prosqualodon) -- whale-like skull with dorsal nostrils (blowhole), still with un-whale-like teeth.
o Kentriodon, an early toothed whale with whale-like teeth.
o Mesocetus, an early whalebone whale
o [note: very rarely a modern whale is found with tiny hind legs, showing that some whales still retain the genes for making hind legs.]
Transitional fossils from early eutherian mammals to the carnivores:
o Miacids (e.g. Viverravus and Miacis) -- small weasel-like animals with very carnivore-like teeth, esp. the carnassial teeth.
o Arctoids (e.g. Cynodictis, Hesperocyon) -- intermediate between miacids and dogs. Limbs have elongated, carnassials are more specialized, braincase is larger.
o Cynodesmus, Tomarctus -- transitional fossils between arctoids and the modern dog genus Canis.
o Hemicyon, Ursavus -- heavy doglike fossils between the arctoids and the bears.
o Indarctos -- early bear. Carnassial teeth have no shearing action, molars are square, short tail, heavy limbs. Transitional to the modern genus Ursus.
o Phlaocyon -- a climbing carnivore with non-shearing carnassials,
transitional from the arctoids to the procyonids (raccoons et al.):
o Plesictis, transitional between miacids (see above) and mustelids (weasels et al.)
o Stenoplesictis and Palaeoprionodon, early civets related to the miacids (see above)
o Tunguricits, transitional between early civets and modern civets
o Ictitherium, transitional between early civets to hyenas
o Proailurus, transitional from early civets to early cats
o Dinictis, transitional from early cats to modern "feline" cats
o Hoplophoneus, transitional from early cats to "saber-tooth" cats
Transitional fossils from early eutherians to hoofed animals:
o Arctocyonid condylarths -- insectivore-like small mammals with classic mammalian teeth and clawed feet.
o Mesonychid condylarths -- similar to the arctocyonids, but with blunt crushing-type cheek teeth, and flattened nails instead of claws.
o Late condylarths, e.g. Phenocodus -- a fair-sized animal with hoofs on each toe (all toes were present), a continuous series of crushing-type cheek teeth with herbivore-type cusps, and no collarbone (like modern hoofed animals).
o Transitional fossils from early hoofed animals to perissodactyls:
o [Perissodactyls are animals with an odd number of toes; most of the weight is borne by the central 3rd toe. Horses, rhinos, tapirs.]
o Tetraclaeonodon -- a Paleocene condylarth showing perissodactyl-like teeth
o Hyracotherium -- the famous "dawn horse", an early perissodactyl, with more elongated digits and interlocking ankle bones, and slightly different tooth cusps, compared to to Tetraclaeonodon. A small, doggish animal with an arched back, short neck, and short snout; had 4 toes in front and 3 behind. Omnivore teeth.
o [The rest of horse evolution will be covered in an upcoming "horse fossils" post in a few weeks. To whet your appetite:]
o Orohippus -- small, 4/3 toed, developing browser tooth crests
o Epihippus -- small, 4/3 toed, good tooth crests, browser
o Epihippus (Duchesnehippus) -- a subgenus with Mesohippus-like teeth
o Mesohippus -- 3 toed on all feet, browser, slightly larger
o Miohippus -- 3 toed browser, slightly larger [gave rise to lots of successful three-toed browsers]
o Parahippus -- 3 toed browser/grazer, developing "spring foot"
o 'Parahippus' leonensis -- a Merychippus-like species of Parahippus
o 'Merychippus' gunteri -- a Parahippus-like species of Merychippus
o 'Merychippus' primus -- a more typical Merychippus, but still very like Parahippus.
o Merychippus -- 3 toed grazer, spring-footed, size of small pony (gave rise to tons of successful three-toed grazers)
o Merychippus (Protohippus) -- a subgenus of Merychippus developing Pliohippus-like teeth.
o Pliohippus & Dinohippus -- one-toed grazers, spring-footed
o Equus (Plesippus) -- like modern equines but teeth slightly simpler.
o Equus (Hippotigris), the modern 1-toed spring-footed grazing zebras.
o Equus (Equus), the modern 1-toed spring-footed grazing horses & donkeys. [note: very rarely a horse is born with small visible side toes, indicating that some horses retain the genes for side toes.]
o Hyrachyids -- transitional from perissodactyl-like condylarths to tapirs
o Heptodonts, e.g. Lophiodont -- a small horse-like tapir, transitional to modern tapirs
o Protapirus -- a probable descendent of Lophiodont, much like modern tapirs but without the flexible snout.
o Miotapirus -- an almost-modern tapir with a flexible snout, transitional between Protapirus and the modern Tapirus.
o Hyracodonts -- early "running rhinoceroses", transitional to modern rhinos
o Caenopus, a large, hornless, generalized rhino transitional between the hyracodonts and the various later groups of modern & extinct rhinos.
o Transitional fossils from early hoofed animals to some of the artiodactyls (cloven-hoofed animals):
o Dichobunoids, e.g. Diacodexis, transitional between condylarths and all the artiodactyls (cloven-hoofed animals). Very condylarth-like but with a notably artiodactyl-like ankle.
o Propalaeochoerus, an early pig, transitional between Diacodexis and modern pigs.
o Protylopus, a small, short-necked, four-toed animal, transitional between dichobunoids and early camels. From here the camel lineage goes through Protomeryx, Procamelus, Pleauchenia, Lama (which are still alive; these are the llamas) and finally Camelus, the modern camels.
o Archeomeryx, a rabbit-sized, four-toed animal, transitional between the dichobunoids and the early deer. From here the deer lineage goes through Eumeryx, Paleomeryx and Blastomeryx, Dicrocerus (with antlers) and then a shmoo of successful groups that survive today as modern deer -- muntjacs, cervines, white-tail relatives, moose, reindeer, etc., etc.
o Palaeotragus, transitional between early artiodactyls and the okapi & giraffe. Actually the okapi hasn't changed much since Palaeotragus and is essentially a living Miocene giraffe. After Palaeotragus came Giraffa, with elongated legs & neck, and Sivatherium, large ox-like giraffes that almost survived to the present.
So, there's a partial list of transitional fossils.
Living fossils are both explain and predicted by evolutionary theory, so i don't see how this is a dilemma.
90% of DNA is "Junk DNA" which is completely unexplainable without evolution.
Quote:(5) Organs with irreducible complexity...
Irreducible complexity is a feature that invalidates the claim of gradual development lying at the heart of the theory of evolution. For example, eyes and wings possess irreducible complexity. It is impossible for the structures such as the tear gland, retina and iris, that together comprise the eye, to come into being individually in stages. That is because sight will only take place when all the components making up the eye are present and fully formed. The same thing applies to the wing.
None of the above listed are examples of irreducibly complex syetems. Each has been explained by Ken Miller at the Dover trial.
Quote:(6) All the variety of life on Earth appeared suddenly 530 million years ago...
Nearly all the phyla (Mollusca, Chordata and similar categories) emerged in the Cambrian Period, 530 million years ago. Only one or two phyla existed in the Pre-Cambrian, whereas more than 50 emerged suddenly in the Cambrian in various regions of the world. Pre-Cambrian life forms had only very simple bodily forms, while those from the Cambrian were incomparably complex. For example, there is no difference between the eye of the trilobite, a life form that emerged in the Cambrian, and the eyes of present-day life forms.
Most life in the pre-Cambrian period would have been microscopic, thus it wouldn't have fossilized very well. To further expand on this, yes Cambrian lifeforms were much more complex than pre-Cambrian lifeforms (as predicted by evolution) but even Cambrian lifeforms were/are very simplistic when compared to modern animals, which again is also predicted by evolutionary theory. So i don't see how this is a problem for evolution, on the contrary it supports the theory.
Quote:(7) Reptiles are not the ancestors of birds...
Evolutionists are no longer able to point to Archaeopteryx as an intermediate form between reptiles and birds. Investigations of fossils have shown that the creature is not a transitional form, but rather an extinct species of bird with slightly different characteristics to those of present-day birds. The presence of a breastbone (sternum) proving it had powerful flight muscles and an asymmetrical feather structure identical to that in present-day birds show that this animal was able to fly perfectly well.
:rollinglaugh: "No birds are related to reptiles because one species, is not a perfect 50-50 transition" :rollinglaugh:
This is laughable, i shouldn't even have to explain why this argument is fallacious......so i won't!
This also follows the same flawed reasoning as the last one. Furthermore coelacanth has never been said to be a fish to amphibian transition anyway, so i'm not sure why you are using it as an example of such. Either you are ignorant of this or intentionally dishonest.
also:
Quote:(9) Mutations cannot form new species...
Mutations are breakages and dislocations, caused by radiation or chemical effects, in the DNA molecule located in the nucleus of the living cell and that carries genetic information. DNA has a highly complex structure. For that reason, any random change arising in this molecule can only damage it. Mutations usually lead to irreparable damage, deformity and even death. People subjected to the tragedies of Hiroshima, Nagasaki or Chernobyl are living indications of this. The claim that mutations are an evolutionary mechanism is proof of the dilemma facing the theory of evolution.
First of all you definition of mutation is incorrect. Mutations are simply errors in DNA replication. Every person on the planet has mutations, the average person has about 100 to 200 mutations. This is the reason children don't look like exact clones of their parents.The vast majority of mutations are neutral about 70%, they cause neither harm nor benefit. Then the second most common are harmful mutations and the least common are beneficial mutations. But we must keep in mind that what constitutes a harmful mutation or a helpful mutation may vary depending on environment. very rarely is a beneficial mutation beneficial in all circumstances.
How is it limited? You have stated this but have not explained why? What mechanism or process in biology would prevent gradual change over time from result in significant change.
secondly your argument about skeletal and muscular structure is non-sequitar. These things would not prevent evolution from happening because these are the things that evolution changes!
Show me this find! It has never happened! No modern human fossil has been found in the same geologic layer as Homo habilis or homo erectus. It simply hasn't happened.
Quote:(12) All the fossil skulls proposed for the supposed evolution of man are false...
All of the fossils proposed for the myth of evolution belong either to apes or to human beings. None of them have any intermediate form characteristics. Darwinist categorization of fossils is based on their speculation on either extinct ape or human fossils. In fact, all the living things classified as Australopithecus and Homo habilis are actually extinct apes, and those classified as Homo erectus and Homo neandertalensis are extinct forms of human being.
There are two problems with this.
Number one: Neanderthals are definitely not us, chimpanzees have more genetic similarity to modern humans than neanderthals do.
Number two: Humans and chimps share too many ERVs in common for this to be merely a coincidence, the chance of this coincidence is:
1 in a 1x10^9 chance.
Guess who debunked all of these? Go on guess! I'll give you a hint, it wasn't creationists.
The hoaxes were committed by individuals seeking fame, and each has been debunked by the scientific community.
Quote:(14) Darwinists have sought a solution in hiding the fossil record, which did not reveal a single intermediate fossil...
Darwinists conceal fossils. The reason for this is that among all the millions of fossils, NOT A SINGLE ONE supports evolution. Cambrian fossils that declare that the whole variety of life emerged suddenly some 530 million years ago with no evolutionary ancestors behind it, were concealed by an evolutionist scientist for 70 years. The oldest known fossil parrot, dating back 65 million years, which is identical to present-day parrots and thus refutes evolution, was hidden away for 40 years. There are still 100 million fossils unearthed from below the ground and that show that living things were created with all their perfect, complex appearances and have never changed since, that are being concealed by Darwinists.
Go back I have given you a partial list of transitional fossils earlier in this post.
I have already responded to this.
It is not a prerequisite for a vestigial structure to be functionless, simply that it's function is different than it's initial function in previous species. like The hip bone of many modern whales does have a function but is different from it's initial function (to support hips).
"Many cave dwelling animals, such as the fish Astyanax mexicanus (the Mexican tetra) and the salamander species Typhlotriton spelaeus and Proteus anguinus, are blind yet have rudimentary, vestigial eyes (Besharse and Brandon 1976; Durand et al. 1993; Jeffery 2001; Kos et al. 2001). The eyes of the Mexican tetra have a lens, a degenerate retina, a degenerate optic nerve, and a sclera, even though the tetra cannot see (Jeffery 2001). The blind salamanders have eyes with retinas and lenses, yet the eyelids grow over the eye, sealing them from outside light (Durand et al. 1993; Kos et al. 2001)."
Quote:(17) The fact that we only have experience of an image of matter totally demolishes Darwinist philosophy...
One reality scientifically proven in our century is that we never have direct experience of the external original of matter. Electric signals reach us by way of our senses, and the image that forms for us in our brains consists solely of these signals. But we see highly colored, vivid, active, three-dimensional and perfectly sharp images, hear perfectly clear sounds and perceive a flawless outside world. But all these are merely perceptions. It is the soul bestowed on human beings by Allah (God) that perceives, sees and hears them, that understands, thinks, rejoices and yearns. This great reality has totally discredited the materialist and Darwinist mindset, which claims that everything consists of matter.
The soul doesn't exist, therefore it can't be evidence against evolution.
Once again these supposed Dilemmas are nothing more than empty rhetoric, based on the perpetuation of intentional misinformation.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace