Spineless evolutionists smoking stinkweed for the fair-minded skeptics of evolution

[Jerry Smith]

Here is something you can all click on to find out about ancient transitions in the invertebrates.

Are there pictures of fossils? Yes (not on the main page, but on several of the linked pages)...

Are there pictures of every fossil discussed? No. Only some of them. The other fossils discussed may have been imagined by the authors of this page or their sources. I, for one, have no reason to think they would go to so much trouble for so small a thing: nor do I doubt their honesty.

Can you just look at the fossils and see what they are talking about? I couldn't. On the other hand, I have no illusions about being competent to examine the fossils and extract useful information. I can see gross morphological differences, but I have no training in identifying the significant details. You do have to take someone's word for it. That's ok. Scientists do it. Paleobotanists take the word of paleozoologists for what those paleozoologists have discovered in their own field, and vice versa.

Are any of these fossils polyploid? Heck! I don't know, and for now, my curiosity about that matter is dimmed by my inability to find out and by other issues that seem much more important.


Are there any unresolved problems with the phylogeny of Cephalopods? Yes, some of them are discussed on the page.

Are all of the transitions between all of the groups of cephalopods chronicled in fossils? No, not even most are. Only a few.


With all these disclaimers, I hope those who are interested will click the link:

http://www.kheper.auz.com/gaia/biosphere/molluscs/Cephalopoda.htm

After reading the overview, I hope you will look at the Systematics section and check out as many of the numerous links from that page as you find an interest in.

 

 

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Another excellent page on transitional fossils.  No pictures, unfortunately, although there are references to the primary literature where I imagine one could find some.

http://www.nogs.org/cuffeyart.html

Quoting from the article:

Research has provided many examples of successive species and genera (and in some cases families) linking major higher taxa of order or class rank (Cuffey, 1984, p. 266). For example, within Phylum Mollusca, transitional fossils have been found between 1) Class Monoplacophora and Subclass Nautiloidea (Pojeta, 1980; Runnegar & Pojeta, 1974), 2) Class Monoplacophora and Class Rostroconchia (Pojeta, 1980; Runnegar & Pojeta, 1974; Pojeta & Runnegar, 1976; Runnegar, 1978), 3) Class Rostroconchia and Class Pelecypoda (Pojeta, 1980; Runnegar & Pojeta, 1974; Pojeta & Runnegar, 1976; Pojeta, 1978), 4) Class Rostroconchia and Class Scaphopoda (Pojeta, 1980; Runnegar & Pojeta, 1974; Pojeta & Runnegar, 1976, 1979), 5) Subclass Bactritoidea and Subclass Ammonoidea (Erben, 1966).

 

 

[Jerry Smith]

Research has provided many examples of successive species and genera

Note that the papers this research is to be found in are cited.

Please - if you are rejecting this science, please do it from an informed position: go to the local University library and read these papers! Find out how these successions of species and genera are documented!

I'm sorry that we can't give pictures of the fossils that are in the papers. Maybe between those with more time and energy, and those with more money, someday we will have all of this on the net in a form more accessible to the non-scientist.

Until then...

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Jerry Smith
Here is something you can all click on to find out about ancient transitions in the invertebrates.

Yes, I strongly recommend this page and all the links. This is a wonderful testimony to many assertions about evolution based on a total lack of hard evidence in the fossil record. I could hardly pick a better set of pages to illustrate this, except maybe all the pages after my challenge in this forum that totally lack any transitionals from 99.9% of the fossil record.

Thanks, Jerry.

 

[Jerry Smith]

Nick, I'm glad you like it... Reckon I'll bump it..

I'm suprised you read the thread & even more suprised you drivelled on it considering that it is intendend for the fair-minded, but if the hard-headed like it too, then I guess that's even better. By the way, what did you think of all those papers you read that were cited in LFOD's post?

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Another excellent resource regarding transitional fossils:

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Miller.html

This one seems to imply that it is very difficult in general to find a fine-grained transitional sequence.  Most of the ones we know of are from vertebrates because vertebrates are some of the best preserved of all life forms.

(This obviously calls into question Nick's "99.9%" claim.)

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

And just to be clear on what the fossil record of plants DOES show:

From http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/plants/plantaefr.html

The above chart shows the oldest undoubted fossil occurences of each of the major groups of plants. Note that a major radiation occurred in the Devonian, at which time the earliest vascular plants and seed plants appeared.

I realize for someone not familiar with the Latin names, this might not be quite clear.  The key concept is that the groups at the top of the chart are the most primitive and become successively more modern as you proceed down.

 

[Jerry Smith]

On the linked web-site you can click the taxonomic groups for more info.