So what you are saying is that a predictive analysis of what the record should state is not necessary to state the fossil evidence is supportive of ToE.
Boy talk about a strawman. That is not what I said at all. I said it was not necessary to predict the number of transitionals. The prediction is that there will be transitionals and there will be homology among ancestors, transitionals, and modern forms. Those predictions are fulfilled in the fossil and extant form evidence.
I disagree, but here's the kicker. If you feel that way, why are you on this thread at all?
This thread, to my knowledge, is about that fossil evidence, of which you discount as unnecessary and perhaps even impossible to assess in terms of the record overall in this transition.
Yes, the thread is about fossil evidence - which I did not discount as unnecessary. I simply disagree with you as to what KIND OF ancestral and transitional fossil evidence is necessary. Big difference. When you misrepresent what people say it is quite easy to refute their arguments. That is why it is called a strawman argument - easy to knock it down.
edited misspelling and to add missing word for clarity
This message has been edited by deerbreh, 08-15-2005 04:20 PM
This message has been edited by deerbreh, 08-15-2005 04:51 PM