RAZD--
That text figure 10 is an excellent way to display and interpret the data. It is far superior to the standard charts we see.
And, for creationists, the thing to note is there is no "missing link" in that sequence, nor are there any gaps to be filled. There is a gradual transition, most likely made up of a series of micro-evolutionary events which over time added up to macro-evolution (speciation), just like we've been saying for years. And all members of the population can truly be said to be transitional between their ancestors and their descendants.
This also illustrates the fallacy that creationists often challenge us with--"If that chicken suddenly gives birth to a lizard what's that poor lone lizard going to mate with?"
While your figure shows evolution through time, the example of ring species gives the same example contemporaneously--with geography rather than time being the separating factor. The advantage of that form of speciation is that all transitional populations are still alive, from end to end, so that they can be studied while still living.
[quote]
Ring species provide unusual and valuable situations in which we can observe two species and the intermediate forms connecting them. In a ring species:
- A ring of populations encircles an area of unsuitable habitat.
- At one location in the ring of populations, two distinct forms coexist without interbreeding, and hence are different species.
- Around the rest of the ring, the traits of one of these species change gradually, through intermediate populations, into the traits of the second species.
A ring species, therefore, is a ring of populations in which there is only one place where two distinct species meet. Ernst Mayr called ring species "the perfect demonstration of speciation" because they show a range of intermediate forms between two species. They allow us to use variation in space to infer how changes occurred over time. This approach is especially powerful when we can reconstruct the biogeographical history of a ring species, as has been done in two cases. [b]
Source [/quote]
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.