Question:
Are fossils really support evolution?
Marlou G
2008-07-17 19:14:42 UTC
From a small mammal to human(homo sapiens),there is a line of connection.Like a number from 1 to 700.if this small mammal is the number 1 the origin(origin not limited to this small mammal) and the 700 is the human. If species 1 had a population of more than a billion,we could see that fossils.If number 300 is the cousin of apes and have a population of more than a billion ,we must found that fossils.

Few fossils only found.Some are contoversial.
Where is the other hundreds of billions of fossils?
We will not just only limit fossils in the line of human.
Are there really plenty of fossils to support evolution?
Seventeen answers:
8theist
2008-07-18 22:07:07 UTC
Fist of all, the reason why we don't have 1 billion fossils is mostly because formerly-living things tend to decompose relatively quickly following death. In order for an organism to be fossilized, the remains normally need to be covered by sediment as soon as possible. Not all animals(or their body parts) can be fossilize.



Secondly, we do have millions of fossils, enough to support evolution.
Charlie
2008-07-18 02:37:10 UTC
Try expanding your reading beyond creationist drivel.



"The limitations of the vertebrate fossil record can be easily illustrated. The famous fossil Archaeopteryx, occurring in a rock unit renowned for its fossil preservation, is represented by only seven known specimens, of which only two are essentially complete. Considering how many individuals of this genus probably lived and died over the thousands or millions of years of its existence, these few known specimens give some feeling for how few individuals are actually preserved as fossils and subsequently discovered. Yet this example actually represents an unusual wealth of material. The great majority of fossil vertebrate species are represented by only very fragmentary remains, and many are described on the basis of single specimens or from single localities. Complete skeletons are exceptionally rare. For many fossil taxa, particularly small mammals, the only fossils are teeth and jaw fragments. If so many fossil vertebrate species are represented by single specimens, the number of completely unknown species must be enormous!"
battleship potemkin AM
2008-07-18 02:40:57 UTC
You greatly exaggerate the chances of dead tissue becoming fossilized. The chances of a dead animal winding up a fossil is phenomenally small at best. We're lucky to find the ones we do.



Having said that, all fossils found so far support the currently accepted theory of evolution. If they find a rabbit fossil in pre-Cambrian rock, that would be evidence AGAINST current evolutionary theory. Right now, everything we've found has been what you would expect to find were the evolutionary theory correct.
anonymous
2008-07-18 02:21:37 UTC
There are more than 250 million species identified and cataloged and probably five times that many found.



But more importantly than the numbers is the Law of Fossil Succession, which says they appear SORTED in the geology in the precise order that evolution predicted: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/fossils/succession.html



Fossil Succession alone makes it a slam dunk case. It certainly doesn't agree with Creationism in any way at all.
vorenhutz
2008-07-18 02:31:01 UTC
the only species of primates that has populations _anywhere near_ as large as a billion is humans. humans are not your typical primate, we have agriculture! consider the chimpanzee. until the early 20th century they were relatively unaffected by human expansion into their habitat, but still there were only a few million of them (not billions as you assume). fossil representatives of chimpanzees were not known until just three years ago. forest dwelling species don't fossilise well. your assumption (and that is all it is) that there should be fossil representatives of each and every intermediate species is simply not justified, considering what is known about the process of fossilisation.



but enough of your whining about the evidence we don't have... the evidence that we DO have (fossils, and also genetics, anatomy, behaviour and biogeography of modern species) all fully supports evolution.
the_way_of_the_turtle
2008-07-18 02:29:34 UTC
Even though thousands upon thousands of fossils exist, and there are hundreds of transitional fossils identified (which makes your assumptions wrong and questions fallacious), the fossil record pales in comparison to the genetic and ecological evidence for the theory and fact of evolution.
anonymous
2008-07-18 02:17:08 UTC
I find it very entertaining that so many True Believers™ like you claim they have so much faith, then spend so much time and energy trying to rationalize what they believe in.



But to address your question, there are a lot more than 700 intermediates. Between me and my great great grandfather born just 145 years ago there are 3 intermediates. Imagine how many there are in millions of years.
No Gods, No Masters
2008-07-18 02:19:25 UTC
Many animals don't fossilize, which explains why we have yet to find some fossiles
Andy
2008-07-18 02:20:10 UTC
when you say few you mean the tens of hundreds of thousands of fossils and not all are preserved perfectly for many of reasons. please attempt to research something before posting idiotic questions like this.



Disagree with anything i say? Come to http://www.stickam.com sign up and join the most popular Debate faith room and tell me why I'm wrong.



Current active room: http://www.stickam.com/member/loadChatRoom.do?roomId=688277
anonymous
2008-07-18 02:18:44 UTC
Nope you are completely wrong

There are tons and tons and tons of fossils



You dont know more about evolution than biologists who study it for a living.

So its prolly best if you stop acting like you have found holes in the theory of evolution

Because you havent
anonymous
2008-07-18 02:19:51 UTC
Most animals' bones decomposed (duh!) Only some that happened to be in mud, or somewhere else that can preserve bones, can fossils occur. Then, to find certain ones, are very hard. Yes fossils are proof of evolution!
ʌ_ʍ ʍr.smile
2008-07-18 02:31:23 UTC
if only ALL dead animals fossilize.
anonymous
2008-07-18 02:19:14 UTC
Watch this Video



Evolution: Challenge of the Fossil Record - Part 1 of 6

http://www.youtube .com/watch?v=9NkO6fQvydM
anonymous
2008-07-18 02:18:04 UTC
1.) Is there a single intermediate form fossil among all the 100 million or so that have been unearthed to date?





- No, there is not. Nobody can say there is, because every fossil evolutionists have to date proposed as a "missing link" either turned out to be a hoax or else was removed from the literature because it had been distortedly interpreted.



2.) Can a single protein molecule emerge by chance?



- No, it cannot. The chances of a protein molecule forming by chance are 1 in 10950. In practical terms that figure means "zero probability."



3.) Is it true that there have been shown to be millions of living fossils?



- Yes. Specimens of living fossils are displayed all over the world. Thousands of fossils have been on show in hundreds of exhibitions in Turkey alone



4.) Is it true that Piltdown Man, exhibited for 40 years, was a hoax?



- Yes. A 500-year-old human cranium was joined onto an orangutan jaw and then stained with potassium dichromate to give it an aged appearance



5.) Is it true that Nebraska Man was a fraud based on a single peccary tooth?



- Yes. The reconstructions based on a single molar tooth took their place among evolutionist frauds when it was realized the tooth actually belonged to a peccary.



6.) Is it true that Archæoraptor liaoningensis, proposed as a "dino-bird," was a fraud?



- Yes. The fossil, consisting of bone and stone held together using glue and plaster, was made by adding a dinosaur tail to a bird body. The fossil, described in the press as evidence for so-called evolution, was declared to be "dino-bird waffle" two years later.



7.) Is it true that the Coelacanth, for years depicted as an intermediate form fossil, is a species of fish still living today?



- Yes. Because of the bones in its fins the Coelacanth was depicted as a fish about to progress to the walking stage. However, the capture of many living specimens consigned all fictitious evolutionist scenarios to the waste bin.



8.)Is it true that Archaeopteryx, also put forward as a missing link, was actually a fully flying bird?



- Yes. It has been realized that this extinct bird, a tool for evolutionist claims because of the teeth in its jaws, the claw-like nails on its wings and long tail, actually flew in just the same way as present-day flying birds.



9.)Is it true that the fossil known as Lucy belonged to an extinct type of ape and has been removed from the fictitious tree of human evolution?



- Yes. Lucy, portrayed to the public as a missing link, is today agreed to have been an ape with no place in the human family tree. The magazine Science et Vie announced this in its cover story titled "Adieu Lucy" (Farewell, Lucy) in May 1999.
Gregory
2008-07-18 02:19:59 UTC
no



all they have are bits and pieces very small and they use these to make whole beings with just these few bones
anonymous
2008-07-18 02:21:56 UTC
There should be an abundance , it is sadly lacking indeed
Dreamstuff Entity
2008-07-18 02:18:02 UTC
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 ( http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC050.html ). 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 ( http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC214.html ).



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 ( http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC216_1.html ).



6. Transitions between fish and tetrapods 9 http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC212.html ).



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 ( http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC220.html ).

















Claim CC200.1:

Given all the species that exist and have existed, there should be billions of transitional fossils in the fossil record; we should have found tens of thousands at least.



Response:



1. Some important factors prevent the formation of fossils from being common:



* Fossilization itself is not a particularly common event. It requires conditions that preserve the fossil before it becomes scavenged or decayed. Such conditions are common only in a very few habitats, such as river deltas, peat bogs, and tar pits. Organisms that do not live in or near these habitats will be preserved only rarely.



* Many types of animals are fragile and do not preserve well.



* Many species have small ranges. Their chance of fossilization will be proportionally small.



* The evolution of new species probably is fairly rapid in geological terms, so the transitions between species will be uncommon.



Passenger pigeons, once numbered in the billions, went extinct less than 200 years ago. How many passenger pigeon fossils can you find? If they are hard to find, why should we expect to find fossils that are likely from smaller populations and have been subject to millions of years of potential erosion?



2. Other processes destroy fossils. Erosion (and/or lack of deposition in the first place) often destroys hundreds of millions of years or more of the geological record, so the geological record at any place usually has long gaps. Fossils can also be destroyed by heat or pressure when buried deep underground.



3. As rare as fossils are, fossil discovery is still rarer. For the most part, we find only fossils that have been exposed by erosion, and only if the exposure is recent enough that the fossils themselves do not erode.



As climates change, species will move, so we cannot expect a transition to occur all at one spot. Fossils often must be collected from all over a continent to find the transitions.



Only Europe and North America have been well explored for fossils because that is where most of the paleontologists lived. Furthermore, regional politics interfere with collecting fossils. Some fabulous fossils have been found in China only recently because before then the politics prevented most paleontology there.



4. The shortage is not just in fossils but in paleontologists and taxonomists. Preparing and analyzing the material for just one lineage can take a decade of work. There are likely hundreds of transitional fossils sitting in museum drawers, unknown because nobody knowledgeable has examined them.



5. Description of fossils is often limited to professional literature and does not get popularized. This is especially true of marine microfossils, which have the best record.



6. If fossilization were so prevalent and young-earth creationism were true, we should find indications in the fossil record of animals migrating from the Ark to other continents.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...