Originally Posted by DURANG0 In the past I have challenged the readers of various forums to show me a smooth transition of one species evolving into another species INWHICH it is now a representative of a different taxonomic rank of Family.
Kingdom --> phylum --> class --> order --> family --> genus --> species.
So... are you asking for one
species changing to another, or one
family changing to another?
To date I have seen NO hard core evidence. It has become apparent that mutations do not collect over time and create morphological changes.
And you came to this conclusion how...?
I here-by now challenge the Christian Forum evos to present the evidence.
Which, like every scrap of evidence presented to you in the past, will be summarily ignored.
Remember, it must show a smooth fossilized transition of one species evolving into another species INWHICH it is now a representative of a different taxonomic rank of Family...or the develepment of a new body part or appendage from scratch or an existing body part or appendage.
How smooth do you want it? If I showed you a series of photographs of a snowball rolling down a 20-foot hill, how many photos would you want?
Durango: "AHA! There's a gap! There's NO photo of the snowball when it was 4 feet and 6 3/4 inches down the hill, so it never happend!"
It seems to me and other creationist, if evolution happened in the fashion as taught through gradual changes the fossil record should support the theory with NO gaps.
It seems to me that you know precious little about the fossil record, and you have some sort of bizarre notion that what we know of the fossil record is
all we'll ever know.
Poor Durango -- still looking for a gap to shoehorn his God into...
WHY do I say that?
Currently there are millions of fossils in our museums that have been collected since the days of Darwin more than a century ago. Certainly there must be one completed smooth series of transitional species in which the evolutionist can present as evidence for MACRO-evolution above the speciation level.
One more think, spam links to certain sites such as Talk.Origins will not be considered as proof. One of the reasons being is that I have no clue as to just what portion of that site you want me to visit, nor do I have any desire to refute every statement presented on that page as I don't have enough time to address all the spam.
Will you be doing
any of the work yourself, or shall we chew your food for you as well, while we're at it?
Present the info here in your own words if you desire a reply from me.
Fine. Here are my own words:
Your "challenge" is an absurdly rigged scenario, with a...rbitrary rules, and yourself as the final authority, which you have no obvious intention of taking seriously.
Self-respecting educated minds are going to steer clear of this trap, which was flawed from your first sentence, and ignore you.
You will then claim some hollow victory over us evolutionists, and continue on spewing tripe.
Kent Hovind would be proud.
Linear Mode
