The evidence is that they have a mixture of features from two divergent taxa which is exactly what we should see if evolution is true. The fossils also fall into the same nested hierarchy that living species fall into. For example, you don't see any fossils with a mixture of bird and mammal features, but you do see fossils with a mixture of reptile and mammal features, just as you should if evolution is true. That is the evidence.
We know what mixture of features past life should have had and should not have had if evolution is true. When the fossil record matches the predictions made by the theory, the theory is confirmed.
We conclude that evolution occurred because all of the fossils match the predictions made by the theory. It is a conclusion, not an assumption.
Nature already did the experiments for us, and we can observe the results in the genomes of living species. Those genomes are a direct record of a species ancestry, and we use that direct record to test the theory.
I see a lot of claims, but zero evidence.
That is a flat out lie. That is not what biologists say.
What biologists say is that shared and derived features fall into a nested hierarchy, and it is this nested hierarchy that evidences common ancestry and evolution. It was one of the very first pieces of evidence that I gave you:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#nested_hierarchy
Are you telling me that you didn't even read it?
Added in edit:
Since creationists refuse to actually look at the evidence, perhaps posting the evidence in the threads will cause them to at least acknowledge it.
"As seen from the phylogeny in Figure 1, the predicted pattern of organisms at any given point in time can be described as "groups within groups", otherwise known as a nested hierarchy. The only known processes that specifically generate unique, nested, hierarchical patterns are branching evolutionary processes. Common descent is a genetic process in which the state of the present generation/individual is dependent only upon genetic changes that have occurred since the most recent ancestral population/individual. Therefore, gradual evolution from common ancestors must conform to the mathematics of Markov processes and Markov chains. Using Markovian mathematics, it can be rigorously proven that branching Markovian replicating systems produce nested hierarchies (Givnish and Sytsma 1997; Harris 1989; Norris 1997). For these reasons, biologists routinely use branching Markov chains to effectively model evolutionary processes, including complex genetic processes, the temporal distributions of surnames in populations (Galton and Watson 1874), and the behavior of pathogens in epidemics.
The nested hierarchical organization of species contrasts sharply with other possible biological patterns, such as the continuum of "the great chain of being" and the continuums predicted by Lamarck's theory of organic progression (Darwin 1872, pp. 552-553; Futuyma 1998, pp. 88-92). Mere similarity between organisms is not enough to support macroevolution; the nested classification pattern produced by a branching evolutionary process, such as common descent, is much more specific than simple similarity. Real world examples that cannot be objectively classified in nested hierarchies are the elementary particles (which are described by quantum chromodynamics), the elements (whose organization is described by quantum mechanics and illustrated by the periodic table), the planets in our Solar System, books in a library, or specially designed objects like buildings, furniture, cars, etc."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#nested_hierarchy
Last edited:
Upvote
0
