Punctuated Equilibrium
Uploader Comments (reflect7)
All Comments (36)
-
@reflect7 on Dec. 21, 2012, we are scheduled for another Punctuated Equilibrium event..
-
Look at modern whales. It is partly "freaky" in a way. You will find a completely useless and non-functioning pelvis. These are called vestigial structures and show proof of an organism's ancestral past. This tiny pelvis shows the evolution of whales, how they transitioned from land-living hooved mesonychids, over time developed into living in water and on land, and finally not needing their legs for life fully underwater. So whatis the pelvis for? There's an example of a "freaky" whale for you.
-
This video is lies
-
@reflect7 you mean like it is the case in reality?
-
Please read peer reviewed scientific papers on the subject before making an argument on this point.
-
-
Human Civilization + Wolves = Dogs
Congratulations! You have just been introduced to a punctuated event.
Certain chemicals have multiple purposes, so it stands to reason that one direct change results in other indirect changes. See "Domesticated Silver Fox" for more about that.
-
Randy will undoubtedly be faulted for citing an example of a fish giving birth to a reptile, but in general terms he is correct. There are long periods of stasis in the record that show little to no change in form, with punctuated periods of 10 million years or so marked by radical change that cannot be accounted for by Darwin's gradualism. It is for this reason that many evolutionists are looking for another mechanism besides RM and NS. As Mindbites points out, transitional fossils are rare.
-
@flyingscience Half a wing is called a dinosaur arm with feathers.
-
This guy is a bit off and that is putting it nicely.
OK, I checked out many of these articles, especially on Talk Origins. I'm confused by the hide-the-ball logic in these articles.
reflect7 4 years ago
If evolution from one kind to another requires numerous, successive, slight variations, then I should see many more creatures in kind-to-kind transition in the fossil record than creatures in final form.
reflect7 4 years ago
The articles point to evidence of changes within kinds in the fossil record and says that's enough evidence to establish kind-to-kind evolution. Further, it says that I shouldn't expect to see "finely-detailed sequences of fossils" -- gaps are OK if we see a fossil with a "mosaic of features from an older and more recent organism."
reflect7 4 years ago
I'm not asking for "every direct ancestor tied to every direct descendant," but I need more than one specimen of ancient mollusk and another specimen of ancient clam, both of which are fully-formed, reproducing creatures, to establish evidence of a kind-to-kind progression to a more recent freshwater oyster.
reflect7 4 years ago
A fossil of a small horse with one kind of hoof and a fossil of a larger horse with another type of hoof does not establish proof for any notion of macro-evolution -- this is merely adaptation within the horse kind.
reflect7 4 years ago
Just because the hippo and the whale share some similar bone structures does not establish that an ancient hippo transitioned into an ancient whale. I only have ancient "hippo" fossils and ancient "whale" fossils. Where are the weird, half-nubbed, half-finned, freaky, half hippo, half whale creatures? There should be millions of years of those in the fossil record.
reflect7 4 years ago