:::::: "''what significance is the absence of fossils of kangaroos from the fossil record for a few thousand years?''" I think the significance for me is that there aren't as many ''recent'' gaps in fossil evidence. If a creature was supposed to have migrated from somewhere within a few thousand years of today, then it is highly probable that there would be fossil evidence to support this. I can understand the point you make again, and I have to agree to some degree that fossil evidence can in some cases be incomplete, inadequate and somewhat [http://www.trilobites.info/anohome.html misleading, as shown by the Anomalocas], although this is usually with ''older'' fossil records. | :::::: "''what significance is the absence of fossils of kangaroos from the fossil record for a few thousand years?''" I think the significance for me is that there aren't as many ''recent'' gaps in fossil evidence. If a creature was supposed to have migrated from somewhere within a few thousand years of today, then it is highly probable that there would be fossil evidence to support this. I can understand the point you make again, and I have to agree to some degree that fossil evidence can in some cases be incomplete, inadequate and somewhat [http://www.trilobites.info/anohome.html misleading, as shown by the Anomalocas], although this is usually with ''older'' fossil records. |