Transitional Fossils? Evolutionists Say No!

Forbidden information in the classroom.

Quotes by Evolutionary Scientists Against Evolution - http://www.warneveryone.com/evolution_scientists_quotes.htm

Live broadcasting with instant message - http://www.justin.tv/warneveryone

KJV1611 Bible - http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=authorizedversion&search=Search

Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin, and knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded...Ironically we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time......by this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information.David Raup, Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology, Chicago Field Museum Bulletin, January 1979

...I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustrations of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them...Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils...I will lay it on the line - there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.Personal letter from Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London, to L. Sunderland

...the gradual change of fossil species has never been part of the evidence for evolution...Darwin showed that the record was useless for testing between evolution and special creation because it has great gaps in it. The same argument still applies...In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuations, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation. Mark Ridley, New Scientist, 90:930, 1981

Established species are evolving so slowly that major transitions between genera and higher taxa must be occurring within small rapidly evolving populations that leave no legible fossil record. S. M Stanley, Macroevolution: Pattern and Process, p. 39

Scientists develop and adhere to theories for what are ultimately subjective and even irrational "reasons" and that modern scientists can be "...every bit the equal of ancient myth-tellers, troubadours and court jesters." Paul Feyerabend, in J. Horgan, "The Worst Enemy of Science," Scientific American, 268(5), p. 37

Darwinian evolution "impossible" to observe. T. Dobzhansky

No single "watertight" transitional fossil known. C. Patterson

Mutation/Selection mechanism "effectively dead." S. Gould

Evolutionist Colin Patterson, a former senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, perhaps summed it up the best when he admitted that Archaeopteryx "has simply become a patsy for wishful thinking." C. Patterson, in Darwin's Enigma by Luther D. Sunderland, p. 70, 1984

The origin of birds is largely a matter of deduction. There is no fossil evidence of the stages through which the remarkable change from reptile to bird was achieved. W.E. Swinton, Biology and Comparaitive Physiology, ed. A.J. Marshall, Academic Press, NY, Vol. 1, p.11

Unfortunately, the intermediate stages hardly ever seemed to exist in the fossil record (Huxley's later trumpeting about Archaeopteryx notwithstanding). M.Ridley, Nature, 286:444 (1980)

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• crxxxev
• Alfred
• S.
• Romer
• A.
• N.
• Strahle
• COSMOS
• NAUTILOID
• GENE
• creation
• evolution
• Dinosaur
• whales
• stars
• moon
• earth
• comets

[superwowie111]

evolutionists no, but scientists certainly know more than any creationist

[megamarsvin]

The reason there is no such thing as a transitional fossil is that EVERY fossil is transitional. In fact YOU are transitional. It would be like saying "breathable oxygen" or "wet water".

[gregrutz]

@BereanBeacon1 '''Neanderthals: Caveman or Human?''' LOL funny. They were Both.

1. They lived in caves many thousands of years ago, so they were 'cave men''

2. They were not hono sapians but were still a Kind of Human, their DNA shows that.

[TaslemGuy]

By the way: Archaeopteryx was fully avian. But it was still a transitional fossil. Anyone who uses the quote "Archaeopteryx was, in the modern sense a bird.." to mean the opposite is deliberately dishonest.

[TaslemGuy]

There are a multitude of transitional fossils. H neanderthalensis, H ergaster, H. habilis, H erectus are just a few human transitional forms. Archeopteryx is renowned for being the "first bird," but still closely related to theropod dinosaurs. Pre-cambrian life is abundant, but most of the fossils are so small they can barely be seen by the human eye.

[PatchesRips]

By the way, Piltdown Man did NOT "reign supreme". It was largely championed by British chauvinists who, not surprisingly, wanted to claim Britain as the homeland of the human species, but was immediately challenged by French and American scientists. It was withdrawn from public display; it was contraindicated by subsequent finds, and was revealed, by SCIENCE ITSELF, to have been a hoax once the techniques for doing so were established. It was the triumph of the scientific method, not a failure.

[BereanBeacon1]

@SuperJasontheman The Puzzle of Ancient Man

h t t p://w w wDOTyoutubeDOTcom/watch?v=2ON1­3a5OwD8

Neanderthals - Smarter Than We Thought

h t t p://w w w DOTyoutubeDOTcom/watch?v=xxL63­6n3w2o

Fossil Men

h t t p://w w w DOTyoutubeDOTcom/watch?v=NEw8f­k6NvbI

[BereanBeacon1]

@SuperJasontheman So Called "Neanderthals" Confuse Evolutionists

h t t p://w w wDOTyoutubeDOTcom/watch?v=LLhg­eNh9eRY

Evolving View of Neanderthal Doesn't Help Evolution

h t t p://wwwDOTyoutubeDOTcom/watch?­v=uBp1ExNc3X0

Neanderthals: Caveman or Human?

h t t p://w w wDOTyoutubeDOTcom/watch?v=dpIH­Olu9JGQ

[SuperJasontheman]

I'm 13, you should know this too.

[SuperJasontheman]

Homo erectus