Andreas Falck wrote:
> Peter Mogensen skrev i news:45878d5e$0$3520$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk
>
>> Andreas Falck wrote:
>>> Martin Andersen skrev i news:45872b95$0$49196$14726298@news.sunsite.dk
>>>
>>> [ ... ]
>>>> Alle mellemformer mangler ikke.
>>>
>>> Hvilke mellemformer mener I dogmatiske darwinister da at fremlægge?
>>>
>>
>>
http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.html
>>
>> Jeg håber ikke at din holdning til om sitet er "tendensiøst" forhindrer
>> dig i at vurdere om argumenterne i sig selv er rigtige.
>
> Hvad med om du med dine egne ord ganske kort fortalte hvilke
> mellemformer, og mellem hvad, du mener der eksisterer. Derefter skal jeg
> nok se på den artikel du henviser til. Du har jo selv kritiseret mig for
> blot at give links, så hvad med om du selv gik foran med et godt
> eksempel, så du ikke selv skal udsættes for den kritik du udøver over
> for andre.
Det er ikke en "artikel" Andreas. Det er et kort og konsist svar på dit
spørgsmål.
Du har helt ret i at når jeg kritiserer dig for bare at linke til lange
artikler uden at forklare hvad dit argument helt konkret er, eller hvor
i artiklen man kan finde det, så skal jeg da BESTEMT ikke gøre det samme.
Men det var heller ikke det jeg gjorde. Du spurgte efter hvilke
"mellemformer" man kunne fremvise og jeg gad dig et link til hvor netop
det spørgsmål blev besvaret kort og konsist.
Det kan godt være at jeg ikke gider at læse de lange artikler du linker
til for at lede efter dine argumenter, men jeg klikker da i det mindste
på dine links for at konstatere om det er et konkret svar, eller blot
endnu engang en lang tekst man skal gætte sig til hvilken relevans har.
Gør du det samme?
Men anyway?.... jeg skal da gerne citere svaret konkret her. Det bliver
ikke med "mine egne ord", for jeg ser absolut ingen grund til at bruge
tid på at formulere noget andre har gjort så glimrende:
====================================================================
Claim CC200:
There are no transitional fossils. Evolution predicts a continuum
between each fossil organism and its ancestors. Instead, we see
systematic gaps in the fossil record.
Response:
1. There are many transitional fossils. The only way that the claim
of their absence may be remotely justified, aside from ignoring the
evidence completely, is to redefine "transitional" as referring to a
fossil that is a direct ancestor of one organism and a direct descendant
of another. However, direct lineages are not required; they could not be
verified even if found. What a transitional fossil is, in keeping with
what the theory of evolution predicts, is a fossil that shows a mosaic
of features from an older and more recent organism.
2. Transitional fossils may coexist with gaps. We do not expect to
find finely detailed sequences of fossils lasting for millions of years.
Nevertheless, we do find several fine gradations of fossils between
species and genera, and we find many other sequences between higher taxa
that are still very well filled out.
The following are fossil transitions between species and genera:
1. Human ancestry. There are many fossils of human ancestors,
and the differences between species are so gradual that it is not always
clear where to draw the lines between them.
2. The horns of titanotheres (extinct Cenozoic mammals) appear
in progressively larger sizes, from nothing to prominence. Other head
and neck features also evolved. These features are adaptations for
head-on ramming analogous to sheep behavior (Stanley 1974).
3. A gradual transitional fossil sequence connects the
foraminifera Globigerinoides trilobus and Orbulina universa (Pearson et
al. 1997). O. universa, the later fossil, features a spherical test
surrounding a "Globigerinoides-like" shell, showing that a feature was
added, not lost. The evidence is seen in all major tropical ocean
basins. Several intermediate morphospecies connect the two species, as
may be seen in the figure included in Lindsay (1997).
4. The fossil record shows transitions between species of
Phacops (a trilobite; Phacops rana is the Pennsylvania state fossil;
Eldredge 1972; 1974; Strapple 1978).
5. Planktonic forminifera (Malmgren et al. 1984). This is an
example of punctuated gradualism. A ten-million-year foraminifera fossil
record shows long periods of stasis and other periods of relatively
rapid but still gradual morphologic change.
6. Fossils of the diatom Rhizosolenia are very common (they are
mined as diatomaceous earth), and they show a continuous record of
almost two million years which includes a record of a speciation event
(Miller 1999, 44-45).
7. Lake Turkana mollusc species (Lewin 1981).
8. Cenozoic marine ostracodes (Cronin 1985).
9. The Eocene primate genus Cantius (Gingerich 1976, 1980, 1983).
10. Scallops of the genus Chesapecten show gradual change in one
"ear" of their hinge over about 13 million years. The ribs also change
(Pojeta and Springer 2001; Ward and Blackwelder 1975).
11. Gryphaea (coiled oysters) become larger and broader but
thinner and flatter during the Early Jurassic (Hallam 1968).
The following are fossil transitionals between families, orders,
and classes:
1. Human ancestry. Australopithecus, though its leg and pelvis
bones show it walked upright, had a bony ridge on the forearm, probably
vestigial, indicative of knuckle walking (Richmond and Strait 2000).
2. Dinosaur-bird transitions.
3. Haasiophis terrasanctus is a primitive marine snake with
well-developed hind limbs. Although other limbless snakes might be more
ancestral, this fossil shows a relationship of snakes with limbed
ancestors (Tchernov et al. 2000). Pachyrhachis is another snake with
legs that is related to Haasiophis (Caldwell and Lee 1997).
4. The jaws of mososaurs are also intermediate between snakes
and lizards. Like the snake's stretchable jaws, they have highly
flexible lower jaws, but unlike snakes, they do not have highly flexible
upper jaws. Some other skull features of mososaurs are intermediate
between snakes and primitive lizards (Caldwell and Lee 1997; Lee et al.
1999; Tchernov et al. 2000).
5. Transitions between mesonychids and whales.
6. Transitions between fish and tetrapods.
7. Transitions from condylarths (a kind of land mammal) to
fully aquatic modern manatees. In particular, Pezosiren portelli is
clearly a sirenian, but its hind limbs and pelvis are unreduced (Domning
2001a, 2001b).
8. Runcaria, a Middle Devonian plant, was a precursor to seed
plants. It had all the qualities of seeds except a solid seed coat and a
system to guide pollen to the seed (Gerrienne et al. 2004).
9. A bee, Melittosphex burmensis, from Early Cretaceous amber,
has primitive characteristics expected from a transition between
crabronid wasps and extant bees (Poinar and Danforth 2006).
The following are fossil transitionals between kingdoms and phyla:
1. The Cambrian fossils Halkiera and Wiwaxia have features that
connect them with each other and with the modern phyla of Mollusca,
Brachiopoda, and Annelida. In particular, one species of halkieriid has
brachiopod-like shells on the dorsal side at each end. This is seen also
in an immature stage of the living brachiopod species Neocrania. It has
setae identical in structure to polychaetes, a group of annelids.
Wiwaxia and Halkiera have the same basic arrangement of hollow
sclerites, an arrangement that is similar to the chaetae arrangement of
polychaetes. The undersurface of Wiwaxia has a soft sole like a
mollusk's foot, and its jaw looks like a mollusk's mouth. Aplacophorans,
which are a group of primitive mollusks, have a soft body covered with
spicules similar to the sclerites of Wiwaxia (Conway Morris 1998, 185-195).
2. Cambrian and Precambrain fossils Anomalocaris and Opabinia
are transitional between arthropods and lobopods.
3. An ancestral echinoderm has been found that is intermediate
between modern echinoderms and other deuterostomes (Shu et al. 2004).