Transitional fossils

lucaspa · #1 24th June 2003, 11:22 AM

Since we are going to have to go over everything over the last 3 months (not your fault, webmaster, these things happen), we might as well start with that old claim "There are no transitional fossils". Here is a list of sources of transitionals I have compiled. It is not complete. It is restricted to series of transitional [b]individuals[b] that link one species to another or, a series of individuals that go from species to species linking genera, families, orders, and even class in the taxonominc ranking. Examples of classes are mammals and birds. Each is a class.

Transitional individuals from one class to another
1. Principles of Paleontology by DM Raup and SM Stanley, 1971, there are transitional series between classes. (mammals and reptiles are examples of a class)
2. HK Erben, Uber den Ursprung der Ammonoidea. Biol. Rev. 41: 641-658, 1966.

Transitional individuals from one order to another
1. C Teichert "Nautiloidea-Discorsorida" and "Actinoceratoidea" in Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology ed RC Moore, 1964
2. PR Sheldon, Parallel gradualistic evolution of Ordovician trilobites. Nature 330: 561-563, 1987. Rigourous biometric study of the pygidial ribs of 3458 specimens of 8 generic lineages in 7 stratgraphic layers covering about 3 million years. Gradual evolution where at any given time the population was intermediate between the samples before it and after it.

Transitionals across genera:
1. Williamson, PG, Paleontological documentation of speciation in cenozoic molluscs from Turkana basin. Nature 293:437-443, 1981. Excellent study of "gradual" evolution is an extremely fine fossil record.

Transitional individuals in hominid lineage
1. CS Coon, The Origin of Races, 1962.
2. Wolpoff, 1984, Paleobiol., 10: 389-406
3. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/11/sc...html?tntemail1

Transitional series from one family to another in foraminerfera
1. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/foram/foramintro.html
2. http://cushforams.niu.edu/Forams.htm

Reptiles to mammals
1. http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_05.htm

Speciation in the fossil record
1. McNamara KJ, Heterochrony and the evolution of echinoids. In CRC Paul and AB Smith (eds) Echinoderm Phylogeny and Evolutionary Biology, pp149-163, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1988 pg 140 of Futuyma.
2. Kellogg DE and Hays JD Microevolutionary patterns in Late Cenozoic Radiolara. Paleobiology 1: 150-160, 1975.

There are also transitional species. This is where you have species linking higher taxa. Often there are transitional individuals involved, although these may not be specifically described. An example of this is in the evolution of whales from land mammals.

Whale transition:
1. http://www.neoucom.edu/Depts/ANAT/whaleorigins.htm
2. http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPa...3277a0_fs.html
3. http://darla.neoucom.edu/DEPTS/ANAT/whaleorigins.htm

PhantomLlama · #2 24th June 2003, 11:32 AM

It's going to be a pain looking over it all again, although this systematic approach should work well. Perhaps we should also point out that all fossils are transitional, but some are just in clearer series.

lucaspa · #3 24th June 2003, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomLlama

It's going to be a pain looking over it all again, although this systematic approach should work well. Perhaps we should also point out that all fossils are transitional, but some are just in clearer series.

When stabilizing selection is working, then the fossils aren't transitional, because the population is stable and not changing. Also, many lineages die out without leaving descendents. Thus, the fossils of H. erectus in China are not transitionals. They are on a dead end. The same applies to the later neandertal fossils.

Now, there are transitional H. erectus in Africa where the population was transforming to H. sapiens. And in the 300,000 year ago range, there are transitional fossils of H. erectus to H. neandertal.

But to say that "all fossils" are transitional is going a bit far.

JohnR7 · #4 24th June 2003, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by lucaspa

Since we are going to have to go over everything over the last 3 months (not your fault, webmaster, these things happen),

I do not mind losing the posts, but it's difficult to adjust to the different look. It is sort of like driving a different car than what your use to.

PhantomLlama · #5 25th June 2003, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by lucaspa

When stabilizing selection is working, then the fossils aren't transitional, because the population is stable and not changing. Also, many lineages die out without leaving descendents. Thus, the fossils of H. erectus in China are not transitionals. They are on a dead end. The same applies to the later neandertal fossils.

Now, there are transitional H. erectus in Africa where the population was transforming to H. sapiens. And in the 300,000 year ago range, there are transitional fossils of H. erectus to H. neandertal.

But to say that "all fossils" are transitional is going a bit far.

Sorry, I forgot about extinction and stable populations.

But some transitional forms is still much more impressive than no transitional forms as creationists claim. This thread should be kept near the top for easy reference.

lucaspa · #6 25th June 2003, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomLlama

Sorry, I forgot about extinction and stable populations.

But some transitional forms is still much more impressive than no transitional forms as creationists claim. This thread should be kept near the top for easy reference.

It's OK. That particular argument -- all fossils are transitional -- has been repeated many places by evolutionists on the web. However, statements by evolutionists have to be tested just like statements by creationists.

The fact that there are ANY transitional series falsifies all forms of creationism, from YEC to ID. ALL of them forbid transformation of populations across taxonomic boundaries. The furthest I've seen "kind" stretched is "family", and we have several transitional series that go way beyond that.

I'll try to keep bumping the thread up. Will you help, too, please?

Cantuar · #7 25th June 2003, 09:37 PM

Sorry, I forgot about extinction and stable populations.

Do they count as transitional when they're transitional between their ancestors and oblivion? I mean, they still had to get to the point when they went extinct.

lucaspa · #8 26th June 2003, 12:00 AM

Originally Posted by Cantuar

Do they count as transitional when they're transitional between their ancestors and oblivion? I mean, they still had to get to the point when they went extinct.

Remember the claim: ALL fossils are transitional.

Let's take the sequence of neandertals. At 300,000 years ago we have fossils that are intermediate between H. erectus and later neandertals. Then there are fossils up to about 40,000 years ago where the neandertal features become more derived. Then the later fossils are the most derived but, since the neandertals went extinct, how can you call them "transitional"? Transitional to what?

Also remember stasis. That part of Punctuated Equilibria where most species are in stasis up until their extinction. Yes, we can occasionally find the isolated geographical area where the splinter population transforms to the new species, but the vast number of the original population remains unchanged up until the point of extinction.

I'm sorry, but the view of evolution where entire populations transform to new species -- phyletic gradualism -- simply isn't supported by the fossil record. Altho it happens, by far the vast majority of speciation occurred allopatrically or sympatrically. And it is phyletic gradualism you need for the statement "all fossils are transitional".

lucaspa · #9 16th July 2003, 09:50 AM

Bump. Because JohnR7 has claimed there are no transitional fossils. Again.

lucaspa · #10 19th October 2003, 06:06 PM

bump, because we got another post claiming no transitional fossils.