Originally Posted by Tarquin

Of course, in Darwin's time the fossil strata hadn't been explored much, but it has now been explored with much greater thoroughness and the transitional are still lacking. There are a few candidates as possible transitional but of those we can't even be sure they are transitional without DNA evidence. On the whole, the fossil record refutes and does not confirm Darwin.


What a childish and loony comment.

There are THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of transitional fossils within the human lineage alone. Learn to read.

The reason you cannot compare DNA of Australopithecus amanensis with Homo sapiens is simply that DNA does not last long enough. However, we can compare our DNA with that of [bleep] and bonobos and guess what? Both their skeletal anatomy and DNA demonstrates they are our closest relatives.

I guess you don't understand the concept behind "punctuated equilibrium." It doesn't mean evolution doesn't happen. It means that changes in the environment of a species can lead to faster evolution of some traits than if environmental changes didn't happen.

Then there's this "well we believe in micro evolution but macro evolution is impossible." How dumb can you get? Micro evolution, over hundreds of years, is the same stuff as macro over thousands or millions. Why would there be some mythical limit as to where the "micro" must stop? The fossil record proves there isn't.

Don't blame me. I voted for Trump.

Democrats would burn this country to the ground, if they could rule over the ashes.