Help defend free speech and free scientific inquiry in the U.S. Sign the Academic Freedom Petition.

From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

A transitional form is a living or fossilized organism that is believed to be an evolutionary link between two groups of organism. This is suggested when the organism possesses characteristics that uniquely belong to two distinct taxa, or when fossils exhibit traits that are considered primitive in comparison to living varieties. Such organisms would be said to clearly represent an evolutionary stage when a former taxon was evolving into the latter. Transitional forms are often referred to as intermediates or missing links. For example, the Tiktaalik is thought by evolutionists to be an intermediate between fish and reptiles because it has fleshy fins, and thus one believes that the fins enabled it to evolve from shallow waters to life on land.

When we examine living populations, there is a clear distinction between various plants and animals, which has allowed us to classify them into taxonomic groups. Since evolution via random mutations must occur at an extremely slow and gradual rate, we should find a continuous series of intermediate fossils that illustrate the transition from one type of organism to another if this theory is valid. The sheer absence of these transitional forms is the most reiterated empirical evidence against evolution. In this arena creationists have largely been helped by evolutionists decrying the state of the fossil record. For example, the evolutionist Michael Denton acknowledges this irrefutable problem.

“

The fact that so many of the founders of modern biology, those who discovered all the basic facts of comparative morphology upon which modern evolutionary biology is based, held nature to be fundamentally a discontinuum of isolated and unique types unbridged by transitional varieties, a position absolutely at odds with evolutionary ideas, is obviously very difficult to reconcile with the popular notion that all the facts of biology irrefutably support an evolutionary interpretation.[1]

”

To nearly all of the great biologists and naturalists of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, Darwin's theory failed to explain the discontinuity of species. Instead a typological model was adhered to, which recognized that organisms exist as distinct types.^[2] To explain the absence of transitional forms, an uncharacterized macroevolution process was proposed as being responsible for the rapid saltation (evolutionary jumps) responsible for the gaps between taxa, with the traditional micro process operating to produce the slow and gradual change responsible for groups of similar species.

Contents 1 Fossil forms 2 Evolutionists' Response 3 Examining Points of View 4 Conclusion 5 References 6 External links 7 See Also

Fossil forms

There are over one hundred million identified and catalogued fossils currently in the world's museums.^[3] If macroevolution happened, then there should be "transitional forms" in the fossil record that show the intermediate life forms. Another term for these "transitional forms" is "missing links". If young earth creationism is true then there should be a lack of transitional forms or at the very least there should be merely a handful of disputed transitional fossils.

Charles Darwin himself stated that the evolutionary theory required the existence of "transitional forms." Darwin wrote: "So that the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But assuredly, if this theory be true, such have lived upon the earth." ^[4] However, Darwin wrote: "Why then is not every geological formation and every strata full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against my theory." ^[5] Darwin thought the lack of transitional links in his time was because

“

only a small portion of the surface of the earth has been geologically explored and no part with sufficient care...".[6]

”

Darwin's theory of evolution required that transitional forms exist. As Charles Darwin became older, however, he became increasingly concerned about this lack of evidence in regards to the fossil record. Darwin wrote,

“

When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory.[7]

”

Evolutionist Michael Denton further stated:

“

It is still, as it was in Darwin's day, overwhelmingly true that the first representatives of all the major classes of organisms known to biology are already highly characteristic of their class when they make their initial appearance in the fossil record. This phenomenon is particularly obvious in the case of the invertebrate fossil record. At its first appearance in the ancient paleozoic seas, invertebrate life was already divided into practically all the major groups with which we are familiar today.[8]

”

Creation scientists state that evolutionists have had over 140 years to find a transitional fossil and nothing approaching a conclusive transitional form has ever been found and that only a handful of highly doubtful examples of transitional fossils exist.^[9][10]

Noted anthropologist Edmund Ronald Leach stated,

“

Missing links in the sequence of fossil evidence were a worry to Darwin. He felt sure they would eventually turn up, but they are still missing and seem likely to remain so.[11]

”

"Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them…" wrote David B. Kitts of the School of Geology and Geophysics at the University of Oklahoma.^[12]

David Raup, who was the curator of geology at the museum holding the world's largest fossil collection (the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago), observed: "[Darwin] was embarrassed by the fossil record because it didn't look the way he predicted it would.... Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin, and knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much.... [W]e have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time." (David M. Raup, "Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology," Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin 50 (January 1979): 22-23, 24-25)

One of the most famous proponents of evolution was the late Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. But Gould admitted, "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life’s history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection, we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.^[13] In a 1977 paper titled "The Return of Hopeful Monsters", Gould wrote: "All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt."^[14]

The senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, Dr. Colin Patterson, put it this way: "Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils."^[15]

One of the more famous alleged transitional fossils claimed by evolutionists is Archaeopteryx. Dr. Alan Feduccia, a world authority on birds and an evolutionist himself, has stated the following regarding Archaeopteryx:

“

Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur. But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of ‘paleobabble’ is going to change that. [16]

”

Creationist scientists have a number of arguments against Archaeopteryx being a transitional fossil find.^{[16][17][18][19]}

A second famous alleged transitional fossil claimed by evolutionists is Tiktaalik. Creationists have a number of arguments regarding the fossil find of Tiktaalik not being a transitional find.^[20][21]

Evolutionists' Response

Some evolutionists aver that transitional forms exist, but that is certainly not the consensus. The eminent Pierre Grasse, editor of the 28 volume Traite de Zoologie, one-time president of the Academie des Science attacked modern evolution theory on the grounds that it assumed to know much more than it did. Stephen Jay Gould in an often quoted statement calls the lack of transitional forms the "trade secret" in paleontology. It should be noted that this statement was made not in an effort to support creationism, but rather an explanation of why he felt the need to design a different theory to accommodate this absence.

Valentine, in What Darwin Began writes:

“

The fossil record is of little use in providing direct evidence of the pathways of descent of the phyla or of invertebrate classes. Each phylum with a fossil record had already evolved its characteristic body plan when it first appeared, so far as we can tell from the fossil remains, and no phylum is connected to any other via intermediate fossil types. Indeed, none of the invertebrate classes can be connected with another class by series of intermediates.

”

Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, wrote to a reader in 1979 the following passage:

“

I fully agree with your commentary on the lack of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would have certainly included them. I will lay it on the line, there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.

”

It is claimed that Patterson asked the assemblage of paleontologists at a 1998 conference whether anyone knew of a genuine transitional form, receiving no answer but silence. This report is only partially substantiated.

Evolutionists have dealt with this concern in two divergent ways. Some have decided that evolution is simply a postulate which must be believed due to lack of reasonable alternatives. Others, such as Gould, have claimed that evolution does not take place in small gradual steps. Rather, he and others believe that evolution may take place in small populations for short bursts of time before a plateau is reached. This means that transitional forms would be few in number because they only exists in small populations for small lengths of time.

This latter viewpoint is known as punctuated equilibrium, and is discussed in great detail at Talk.Origins.org;^[22]; it became a major rival to Neo-Darwinism in the latter part of the 20th century.

Examining Points of View

The topic of transitional forms is central to the Creation/Evolution debate. Creationists have argued for decades that the transitional forms do not exist which are required to prove the common descent of all life on earth. Evolutionists, on the other hand, will claim there are many examples of transitionals, such as the Archaeopteryx and Tiktaalik. The reason for these diametrically opposite positions is in part due to the way each side views the concept of transitional forms.

• Creationists - think of transitional forms in terms of intermediates between the created kinds of animals. This includes partially formed parts.
• Evolutionists - see every animal and person as a transitional form, and tend to interpret the fossil evidence from this standpoint.

Created kind: A group of organisms descended from interbreedable ancestors. Note that only the ancestors have to be interbreedable.

It is not possible to completely reconcile the created kind with the current taxonomic classification system. This is because the taxonomic hierarchy is no longer based exclusively on physical distinctions, but evolutionary perspectives regarding ancestry now affect the classification of organisms.

Creationists of the past have also been guilty of defining the created kind as equivalent to Species or Genus. However, captive breeding history has indicated that the kind is more frequently equivalent to the Family level, but can also sometimes be as narrow as Species or as broad as the Order.

Another point is what is meant by a gap.

• Evolutionists: A gap is a period of time (evolutionary time scale) during which no fossils in a particular line have been found.
• Creationists: A gap is a physical distinction between types of animals with no objective evidence of a transition between them.

The question is, what does the fossil record show, distinct kinds or transitions with no distinct kinds?

Conclusion

Evolutionists present several transition series, which can be found below. They are based on a comparison of selected parts, while often ignoring bigger differences. Sometimes the various types are represented only by fragmented fossil evidence. Often they will use what are called cousins when they can not find a fossil in the right place to be able to call it an ancestor. The gaps recognized by evolutionists are often at critical parts in the fossil record.

Often the designation of a new genus or species is based on only one individual or at most only a few individuals. In such cases they may represent a small number of degenerative mutants, rather than an entire genus or species. This would greatly reduce the number of individuals implied by the fossil record.

The simple fact is that these transition series are pure fantasies. They are based on a presupposition of evolution and a comparison of specific body parts while ignoring others.

The lack of support in the fossil record and the dearth of transitional forms composing a reasonably minimum continuum is something recognized by some evolutionists themselves, among them Stephen Jay Gould, in support of his own evolutionary theory of "punctuated equilibrium", and as evidence against the "gradualism" that Charles Darwin expected. Not surprisingly, many critics of evolution view "punctuated equilibrium" as simply an excuse for the absence of fossil evidence.

Browse

References

External links

• Fossil Fools The Darwin Papers
• Evolution: The Changing Scene by Duane Gish ICR Impact #136
• The links are missing from the book Refuting Evolution by Jonathan Sarfati. Chapter 3

See Also

• Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
• Evolution: A Theory in Crisis
• Refuting Evolution
• Answers in Genesis
• Creation Ministries International
• Institute for Creation Research

v • d • e Paleontology Feature articles Dinosaurs · Dragon · Dinosaur extinction · Fossil · Fossil record · Fossil record quotes · Fossil sorting · Geochronology · Geologic ages · Geological column · Living fossil · Paleoanthropology · Quotes · Paleobotany · Paleozoology · Paleontology news · Recent dinosaur · Transitional form Categories · Portal

v • d • e Evolutionism Feature articles Abiogenesis · Biological evolution · Common descent · Creation vs. evolution · Darwinism · Evolution · Myths · Evolutionists · Genetic variability · Gradualism · Haldane's Dilemma · History · Homology · Microevolution · Macroevolution · Natural selection · Naturalism · Neodarwinism · Punctuated equilibrium · Speciation · Theory of evolution · Transitional form Categories · Portal