I'm so confused. Which ones are missing?
Figure 1.4.4. Fossil hominid skulls. Some of the figures have been modified for ease of comparison (only left-right mirroring or removal of a jawbone). (Images © 2000 Smithsonian Institution.)
Most have been blown away in Non-evolutionist circles as grasping or gasping...your choice...to support what they could not find.
According to Darwin's theory of descent through gradual modification (by way of random mutation and natural selection), the fossil record should contain near-infinite numbers of ever-so-slightly-different "transitional" forms, and even greater numbers of evolutionary dead ends.OK, I have a request for all you creationists here who insist that there aren't any "missing links" or transitional fossils between ancient apes & modern man: Go back up to post 84. Look at fossils A and N. These are modern chimpanzee and modern human, respectively.[GLDNGUN] That, my friends, is the fart in the Darwinian-Evolution Religion. It stinks and it's ruining the whole charade, but all of the blindly faithful try their best to pretend it's not there.
[Scourge of God] Dont see anyone disputing those missing fossil records.
[firebrand] For anyone to assume the so-called fossil record can tell us anything on this issue is the ultimate in hubris.
[GLDNGUN] Thanks. I'll have to use that next time a Darweiner tries to use a fossil as evidence. :-)
[JCEccles] ...and the fossil record lacks evidence of even the tiniest complement of transitory life forms that Darwin himself said his theory required.
Now, I want you to tell me precisely which of the other fossils: B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M are. Since you deny that there are any transitional fossils, please check one of these boxes:
1. [_] Just an old chimpanzee or other ape, or
2. [_] Just an old human
Can you do it?
Hey, if we arrange cars that way can we tell which cars copulated with which to give birth to the edsel? Nice picture. Would be nice for you if it meant anything, it doesn't.