Wumpini writes:
I still do not understand how the changes can cross the lines of species.
There is no such thing as "lines of species". In the same way, there is no such thing as a line that seperates New York from LA.
You're still thinking like a typical creationist where you think in order for speciation to happen a creature has to morph into another.
Just think back to the walking analogy for a few minutes. Where exactly do you stop being in New York AND start being in LA? If you haven't noticed, this is a nonsensical question. This question assumes that NY and LA are right next to each other. But instead, the two places are seperated by a large distance that CAN be crossed by accumulating lots and lots of tiny steps.
In the same way, your comment about the supposed "lines of species" makes no sense. There are no such things as lines of species just like there are no such things as lines of colors in the light spectrum.
I will have to study more on the subject to see the line of descent that is being proposed.
If you are going to seriously study the subject, you must first clear your head of creationist propaganda. There is no distinction between macro and micro evolution except for the time that's involved just like there is no distinction between walking to a few paces away and walking all the way from NY to LA. One requires a lot more time than the other. However, they both use the same mechanics.
Why are there not abundant transitional forms in the fossil record?
When I referred to creationist propaganda, this is one of those propaganda.
Every fossil that has ever been found IS a transitional fossil. Try not to think of evolution having a goal of morphing one creature to the next. Rather, each tiny mutation coupled with natural selection gives changes to the allele frequency of the population. Over a large amount of time, the change in allele frequency could amount to something that would be unrecognizable if we compare the allele frequency to the one we started out with.
In other words, you will never find a fossil of a creature between a duck and a croc. This is the most common creationist strawman.
Going back to our walking analogy. If you are to walk from NY to LA and you decide to take a picture of yourself at random times. Each snapshot represents where you are from NY to LA, but by just looking at these snapshots it is next to impossible to say for certain which route you took to get from one place to the next.
Each fossil is a snapshot in time, nothing more. Each one represents the creature of the particular population when the allele frequency is exactly where it was.
The other thing is you have to understand that fossilization is a rare event. What is even rarer is them surviving millions of battering by natural causes. And what is even rare than that is us finding them.
Take the do-do for example. We haven't a single fossil of the creature and we know for sure they once existed in great numbers. The passenger pigeon once dominated our skies. They numbered in the hundreds of millions. They're extinct now. No fossil at all. I can point to a dozen other examples off the top of my head of creatures we knew to have once existed in great numbers but are now extinct without a single fossil.
How did the reproductive system evolve?
In tiny changes through mutation and natural selection that took place over a billion years.
However, these small changes cannot account for the creation of systems that are extremely complex and have interrelated parts.
Can you name a mechanism that would prevent large changes by accumulation of lots and lots of tiny little changes?
I know that evolution does not take into account the origin of life, but that needs to be considered also.
This is another common creationist tactic. Look, even if tomorrow the Almighty comes down from heaven and told us he poofed everything into existence 4 and a half billion years ago, this still doesn't disprove evolution.
By the way, "goddunit" is an intellectual dead-end. How do we account for the motion of the planets? Goddunit! How do we account for lightning? Goddunit. How do we account for fire? Goddunit. How do we account for lunar and solar eclipses? Goddunit. I can go on and on until I turn blue. Do you not see the obvious intellectual dead-end?
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
™ Version 4.2
