So you think in the real world that an environment could exist unchanged over millions of years? Note i said in the real world.
As for why stasis is damaging to evolution. This comes from a creationist response to "Structure of Evolutionary Theory by Steven J. Gould Harvard University Press, 2002".
Have a read:
Chapter nine, ‘Punctuated Equilibrium and the Validation of Macroevolutionary Theory’ is a Trojan horse for creationists. Although unintended, in this chapter Gould provides a completely updated and superbly annotated treasure trove (almost three hundred pages) for creationists to foil arguments from any scientist who claims that there is ample evidence for gradualism in the fossil record. On the lack of change in the fossil record Gould states:
‘ the tale itself illustrates the central fact of the fossil record so well[the] geologically abrupt origin and subsequent extended stasis of most species Anatomy may fluctuate through time, but the last remnants of a species look pretty much like the first representatives’ (p. 749).
Quoting none other than George Gaylord Simpson (p. 755):
‘ the greatest and most biologically astute paleontologist of the 20th century acknowledged the literal appearance of stasis and geologically abrupt origin as the outstanding general fact of the fossil record and as a pattern which would pose one of the most important theoretical problems in the whole history of life’ (p. 755) [emphasis added].
Gould provides additional creationist evidence stating:
‘The long term stasis following a geologically abrupt origin of most fossil morphospecies, has always been recognized by professional paleontologists’ (p. 752).
‘The great majority of species do not show any appreciable evolutionary change at all. These species appear in the section (first occurrence) without obvious ancestors in underlying beds, are stable once established and disappear higher up without leaving any descendants’ (p. 753).
Gould provides additional testimony for predominant stasis in numerous species, and to eliminate any possibility of confusion he hammers on with ‘but stasis is data’, and ‘Say it ten times before breakfast every day for a week, and the argument will surely seep in by osmosis: stasis is data; stasis is data ’ (p. 759).
Gould then debunks the ‘ exceedingly few cases that became textbook "classics of the coiling of Gryphaea and the increasing body size of horses etc. (p. 760). (Interestingly, nearly all these ‘classics’ have since been disproved, thus providing another testimony for the temporary triumph of hope and expectation over evidence).’
He continues:
‘Indeed proclamations for the supposed truth of gradualismasserted against every working paleontologist’s knowledge of its rarityemerged largely from such a restriction of attention to exceedingly rare cases under the false belief that they alone provided a record of evolution at all! The falsification of most textbook classics upon restudy only accentuates the fallacy of the case study method and its root in prior expectation rather than objective
reading of the fossil record’ (p. 773).
From where do you go with this. Many evos on here don't agree with puncuated equalibrium and see it as a minority view. Again the old, if something is a minority view this = wrong. OK so there is no evidence for puncuated equalibrium other than gaps (which means what?), so now you really do have a dilemma.
You guys seem to want to have it both ways. Evolution is change over time. So when presented with evidence that things don't change over time, you say that this is evidence for evolution. WHAT THE...????
A theory that supposedly explains even contradictory observationsin this case change and no change in fossilsin reality, explains nothing at all. This type of loose thinking has become commonplace among people who speculate about evolutionary origins.
Evolutionary Stasis - creation.com
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Took out the extra lines feeds and added blank lines in the first quote box.