Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Origin and Extinction of Species
The American Chronicle ^ | July 25, 2008 | Darrell Williams

Posted on 07/25/2008 2:26:42 PM PDT by Soliton

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 last
To: count-your-change
A transition? If so then with all these transitions extinct they must have been unsuitable for life whereas what they were transitioning from was more suitable and with us today.

In short these supposed transitions would be a dead end with all those human characteristics not an improvement but a disadvantage to survival. Jungles, trees and savannas, chimps, o’rangs, apes, humans, etc. all here today but not one “transition”.

I see your problem!

You have an incorrect view of "transitional." As an analogy, you can look at your great, great grandparents as transitionals. They were not dead ends, nor failures, just farther back in the line leading to you.

Same with Lucy and the other transitionals in our hominid ancestry. Those species were well adapted to their conditions, but as conditions changed so did they. The new species were also well adapted to their new conditions. Neither was a dead end nor a failure; each was well adapted to the conditions in which they lived.

Hope this helps.

61 posted on 07/28/2008 12:48:53 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
To use your example my grandparents had parents and children so, yes, they could be called “transitional” to me.
But my cousin is not transitional to me and “Lucy”, whose parents and children we know nothing of, cannot even be demonstrated to be a relative let alone a cousin. It's all fine and well to draw lines of descent and connection between apes, transitions, and humans and it looks good on paper but that's all it is.
62 posted on 07/28/2008 2:12:49 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
It's all fine and well to draw lines of descent and connection between apes, transitions, and humans and it looks good on paper but that's all it is.

Correct; its a theory. And it looks good on paper only in relation to the evidence supporting it.

But hominid evolution is well supported by the evidence.

63 posted on 07/28/2008 2:18:57 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

Well, you are free to assert what you wish and I’ll not endlessly go back and forth with you. I don’t see the point in that unless one is trying to “win” somehow and I don’t think either of us is interested in such silliness.
But I’ll be back when I think it warranted. And I did enjoy our discussion.


64 posted on 07/28/2008 2:35:59 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson