The Definition and Description of a "Transitional"

DSo you have any pictures of the original fossils so that I could check them out. Let me see if I got this. You're saying then that the transitional species has more information than the present one because it went from being able to live in both enviroments (land - water) to living in only one. Hmmm wasn't information supposed to increase. A cat can walk, jump, swim and climb just like the mudskipper. So i guess a cat is also in a transitional state. Yes but in order to believe you I need to see the original fossil and not a drawing. I can draw a picture of God from what I read in the bible but will it be enough to convince you of his existence.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

I've seen plenty of them and I'm not interested in pictures but the original fossils.From the Dinosaur to bird link. [quote]Part reptile, part dinosaur, part bird the creature still fascinates us. If Archaeopteryx is not an evolutionary link, how do creationists explain such a unique organism?[/qs]It's already explained - its an unique organism.Archaeopteryx is a fossil creature with some reptilian and some bird features. Most leading evolutionary paleontologists today would not regard it as a transitional form because it has no transitional structures, and because fossils of true birds have been found in a supposedly earlier geological layer. If you do some more reearch youll find that many evo Paleontologists now believe that this creature was complete bird and not a transitional form. The author of the link says it himself - "Despite all the conflicting data with respect to the linkage between dinosaurs/reptiles and birds, it seems clear that although Archaeopteryx is the best candidate, it is not the link."From the reptile to mammal link I only have one question. How did you get such a god idea that it looked the way that it is in the picture when you only have the skull.I'm getting more of the same in the third link. Exactly. I dont only think theyre making it up know I apparently know from the links you posted. One thing is to do a reconsruction of the head with the fossil of the head available and it is another thing to reconsruct the whole creature from just the head. We finally agree. I wouldn't say difficult, impossible is more like it.This message has been edited by jazzlover_PR, 11-30-2004 10:46 PM

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

the ability to draw better than me or the ability of me playing a musical instrument better than you (just an example. i do not know if youre a musician)is developed by practice and not by code in our dna. Anyone of us (assuming no one is disabled) can play an instrument,draw or become an athlete with a little dedication and practice.This message has been edited by jazzlover_PR, 11-30-2004 10:53 PMThis message has been edited by jazzlover_PR, 11-30-2004 10:54 PM

---

Yo soy BoriCua Pa Que tu lo Sepas

Transition between what?Cite a reference that convinces me it is a transition.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

What I said in that reply was not influenced by anything that ive read or else I would of have cited it. Reread it and youll find that my response was based on the logic the author was using. I am not responsible of him contradicting himself.Ok i Apologize. Information s not part of this thread so lets forget about it here.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

do you have any material I can read that deals with this. I would like to learn more on this. Sure. If the evidence points that way I guess there would be nothing to argue about.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

take a look at the picture in your profile and compare it with a picture of yourself. Then answer the question. The picture is not a chimp but its a member of the family.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

I haven't heard a chimp at the local zoo talk in english or spanish to me and I see no fur on my body. Oh wait! I found a similarity. We both like bananas

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

I know I know i was just being sarcastic. The truth is that we are similar to the chimps and other animals for the simple reason that we live in the same planet. We drink the same water, breathe the same oxygen and eat the same bananas. I believe that for this to be possible you need to have a similar DNA but this doesnt mean that we are a transicion from the apes. If we were transicion from the apes then I would be able to do what apes do and do what humans do because im an updated version of the chimp. I mean we can't climb trees the way a chimp does.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

The truth is that we adapt to our surroundings. If you get used to the cold you will not like the weather in my country the same way i dont like the cold. This has nothing to do with information. A lion that lives in a zoo cannot live in the wild. it will most likely die befores it adapts or gets used to it.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

It is obvious that new version does things the older version could not do. If that werent the case there would be no point in updating.
The new version does the new updated things plus the old things. My point is that if we are and updated version of the common ancestor (in this case the ape)why then we cant do what the ape easily does plus what we humans can do. What is disadvantageous about climbing trees the way apes do. Wouldnt that help us harvesting crops that grow in tall trees? From this example you give me the idea that you believe that humans and fish have the common ancestor. If this is true, give some evidence or a link.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

I thought you were talking about similarities and not differences. Inteligence, habitat, size, way of communicating, etc

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

Let me see. Well we can start with size which is in the list and we can also go with skeleton structure.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

Apparently there are as many definitions for evolution as there are minds. For some people evolution is getting better and better for others its just survival of the fittest. For some everything started with the big bang and for others the big bang has nothing to do with evolution. Who am I gonna believe? Heres a quote from David Menton PhD. He is a researcher for AiG."They are quite certain, for example, that the similarities between apes and humans prove they evolved from a common ape-like ancestor "only" 2 or 3 million years ago. By comparison, evolutionists say we are far more distantly "related" to our insect "relatives." The Living World exhibit at the St. Louis Zoo at one time had a sign by a dish of fruit flies that confidently declared: "humans and flies had a common ancestor 630 million years ago." This hypothetical "common ancestor" is not identified because no one has the slightest evidence of what it looked like, or even if it existed at all!This belief, that similarities between animals can only be understood in terms of an evolutionary relationship, is the most fundamental axiom of evolution -- almost all arguments for evolution depend upon it. Evolutionists do not feel compelled to prove their claim that similarity necessarily means common evolutionary ancestry -- they assume it. Indeed, evolutionists never question or investigate whether evolution is true or not, rather they ask which animal evolved into which, and their answer is generally based on similarity!Most evolutionists are dead certain that this very ape-like ape evolved into man because of certain arguable similarities to man in its teeth and pelvic bones. Perhaps you heard the story of the evolutionist who dug up a fossilized fragment of an ape's jaw and promptly declared it to be an ancestor of man -- he was so excited about the find he said, "I wouldn't have seen it if I hadn't believed it."One of the problems with the similarity = evolutionary ancestry axiom is that evolutionists ignore it whenever it doesn't fit their evolutionary scenarios. There are many instances of remarkable similarities between animals that evolutionists consider to be only distantly related. The eye of the squid, for example, is strikingly similar to the human eye. Sometimes almost the whole body and even the behavior of animals are obviously similar and still evolutionists argue they are not closely related!For example, many of the Australian marsupials have strikingly similar counterparts to certain North American placental mammals. There are both marsupial and placental mammal versions of mice, moles, rabbits, wolves, and badgers. There is even evidence that there once were both marsupial and placental saber-toothed tigers! Yet evolutionists consider marsupials and placental mammals to be only distantly related because their mechanism of reproduction is so different. Evolutionists believe that the primitive ancestors of marsupial and placental mammals split off from a hypothetical common ancestor about 120 million years ago, long before there were mice, moles, rabbits, wolves, and badgers, and have been evolving separately ever since. How then did both these separate lines manage to come up with such similar animals?Incredibly, evolutionists explain away amazing similarities between animals they consider to be only distantly related by simply invoking "convergent evolution." Convergent evolution is the unobserved and unexplained process whereby two very different animals independently evolve into two very similar animals by an incredible run of countless lucky mutational coincidences extending over tens of millions of years! It seems that some folks will believe almost anything, as long as it doesn't appear in the Bible."Are you seeing the flaws in logic of your theory. Are talking about complete skeletons or a part of a skeleton. if it is a part mention which part.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova