Evolution has a major problem . .. see if you can solve this mystery for me

According to evolution there should be billions of subtle transitional forms . . . . . yet these forms appear to be rather scarce. But there is an even more obvious problem and when you look at it you should go “why didn’t I see this?”.  Even those some transitional fossils may have been found . . . even if there are many of them (I promised this was a journey and told you to hang on to your seat belt)  why are almost all of these forms DEAD????   !!!!     . . . . . June 9 2011 . . . .  several life forms of intermediate form would have been able to survive . . . . but we find contrary to this common sense that they are extremely few . . . and they are all dead and fossilized. What the  . .. .

Advertisements

Tags: , , , ,

2 Responses to “Evolution has a major problem . .. see if you can solve this mystery for me”

  1. Oscar Rivera Says:

    I didn’t read the comments that have already been made, so forgive me if I seem redundant.

    Before I answer your questions, however, I am curious as what material you are reading to further your knowledge on the subject. Could you list just a couple?

    Now, for your questions:

    “According to evolution there should be billions of subtle transitional forms . . . . . yet these forms appear to be rather scarce.”

    I’m not sure if you are aware of precisely how difficult it is for a fossil to form. It really says a lot about the difficulties of fossilization when freezing is the best way to fossilize something. Anyway, even though it is an extremely difficult process, we still have millions of fossils. I wouldn’t really call it scarce. Maybe with respect to how many species have lived on the earth, but to expect a fossil of all of these species is not being reasonable.

    “Even those some transitional fossils may have been found . . . even if there are many of them (I promised this was a journey and told you to hang on to your seat belt) why are almost all of these forms DEAD???? !!!!

    I’m not sure if you actually thought through your question. There a couple responses that need to be said:

    1. First, I need to correct your use of “transitional fossils”. You do realize that, if they are transitional, that means there would not be any reason for there to be any left, right? As an example, in evolutionary theory, natural selection dictates that species most adequately suited to survive will indeed survive. Now, in this hypothetical scenario, let us suppose that there are two competing species. On the one hand we have a transitional species and we have the more evolved species. Being the more evolved species, and thereby being more adequately suited to survive, one would expect that the more evolved species to naturally last and for the transitional species to, eventually, die out.

    2. Now, having said that, you do also realize that there are species that have survived millions of years, right? I encourage you just to just google the term “living fossils”.

    P.S. I know I grossly over-simplified evolution, but I’m not sure how well-versed you are in it, so I tried to keep it as simple as possible.

  2. limey Says:

    Hi,

    I think the issue you have is that what you are expecting is not what actually happens

    To pick your point on majority of life forms being dead. This is what you would expect from evolution. With the exception of the time when the earliest forms of life were emerging; whatever time of life you are looking at, those life forms that are alive will be outnumbered by those that have lived before.

    This is simply because to get to us, many life forms have been and gone. They started at one form and have evolved through many to get to where we are now. If you were to rewind one million years and look at life then, they would still be outnumbered by the variety that was about then.

    Rather than seeing it as a problem, think of it as a demonstration of the dynamics of life. Many of those past creatures are the forerunners of todays still alive creatures.

    You also make a point about intermediate life forms that should have been alive today. Good point. However, how would you tell the difference between a life form that’s alive today that should be an intermediate and one that shouldn’t?

    Life has a habit of adapting to its environment, so a life form that fits well in its environment is not automatically evidence of special creation, it could just be something that adapted.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: