Transitional form - Revision history

DavidB4-bot: /* top */clean up & uniformity

2016-07-13T20:45:10Z

top: clean up & uniformity

Conservative: Reverted edits by JRMG (talk) to last revision by TK

2014-11-06T16:33:32Z

Reverted edits by JRMG (talk) to last revision by TK

TK at 00:33, April 30, 2009

2009-04-30T00:33:40Z

Jinxmchue: Undo revision 652713 by SamNoble (Talk)

2009-04-14T01:43:34Z

Undo revision 652713 by SamNoble (Talk)

SamNoble: /* Identification problem */

2009-04-14T00:29:19Z

Identification problem

Conservative: Reverted edits by Alphador (Talk) to last version by Philip J. Rayment

2009-03-08T03:04:53Z

Reverted edits by Alphador (Talk) to last version by Philip J. Rayment

Alphador at 02:59, March 8, 2009

2009-03-08T02:59:14Z

Philip J. Rayment: /* References */ Added cat.

2008-09-29T10:20:49Z

References: Added cat.

Karajou: Reverted edits by Truth9355 (Talk); changed back to last version by Karajou

2008-09-04T04:36:52Z

Reverted edits by Truth9355 (Talk); changed back to last version by Karajou

Show changes

Truth9355 at 03:00, September 4, 2008

2008-09-04T03:00:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:45, July 13, 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
−
	A '''transitional form''' is a [[fossil]] or living [[organism]] that is intermediate between two other organism in an evolutionary sequence.		A '''transitional form''' is a [[fossil]] or living [[organism]] that is intermediate between two other organism in an evolutionary sequence.
	A transitional form that has not yet been found is colloquially called a '[[missing link]]'.		A transitional form that has not yet been found is colloquially called a '[[missing link]]'.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{merge from|transitional fossil}}
 A '''transitional form''' is a [[fossil]] or living [[organism]] that is intermediate between two other organism in an evolutionary sequence.
 A transitional form that has not yet been found is colloquially called a '[[missing link]]'.

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 == Identification problem ==
-A major problem with identifying transitional forms is in determining whether a particular fossil or living thing is truly intermediate between two others, or is merely an unrelated form which has characteristics common to both other forms. What you have described here is a transistional form. Its relation is impossible to prove but a transitional form is an animal that has properties from two groups of animals e.g. birds and dinosaurs. therefore if a fossil has features of birds and dinosaurs it is a transitional form between birds and dinosaurs.
+A major problem with identifying transitional forms is in determining whether a particular fossil or living thing is truly intermediate between two others, or is merely an unrelated form which has characteristics common to both other forms.
 [[Archaeopteryx]], for example, has some features in common with both living [[bird]]s and [[reptile]]s, and is often quoted as an intermediate form.
-It was not covered with part-[[scale]]s/part-[[feather]]s, but had fully-functioning feathers and [[wing]]s, and was capable of [[flight]]. It also had teeth. A feature not found in modern birds.
+It was not covered with part-[[scale]]s/part-[[feather]]s, but had fully-functioning feathers and [[wing]]s, and was capable of [[flight]].
-There is therefore no reason to think that it is not simply a bird with some features in common with reptiles but since this is what a transitional form is its not a problem for evolution. If Archaeopteryx could fly it was more bird then dinosaur, but it was still a transition between the two. The fact that it isn't slap bang in the middle is irrelevant because it is still a transitional form!
+There is therefore no reason to think that it is not simply a bird with some features in common with reptiles.
 Evolutionists have criticised creationists for claiming that if an intermediate form is discovered, it merely creates two gaps where there was previously one.
 This criticism ignores the size of the gaps.<ref>Woodmorappe, John, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/4248 Does a ‘transitional form’ replace one gap with two gaps?], ''Journal of Creation'' 14(3):5–6, August 2000.</ref>
 If the remaining two gaps are large, then the creationist claim is justified.
-Rather than simply producing the occasional form which appears to be intermediate between two different forms, evolutionists need to demonstrate what [[Charles Darwin]] called a "finely-graduated organic chain".<ref name="chain" /> The problem here is that most animals are not preserved in the fossil record. Besides we have more then enough to show a smooth transition between the main groups e.g. reptiles-mammels
+Rather than simply producing the occasional form which appears to be intermediate between two different forms, evolutionists need to demonstrate what [[Charles Darwin]] called a "finely-graduated organic chain".<ref name="chain" />
 Despite many more fossils being discovered since Darwin's time, the continued lack of a series of fossils showing a smooth transition led [[Stephen Jay Gould]] and [[Niles Eldredge]] to propose [[Punctuated Equilibrium]], which says that the change from one form to another took place is short bursts which generally would not leave a fossil trace.

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 == Identification problem ==
-A major problem with identifying transitional forms is in determining whether a particular fossil or living thing is truly intermediate between two others, or is merely an unrelated form which has characteristics common to both other forms.
+A major problem with identifying transitional forms is in determining whether a particular fossil or living thing is truly intermediate between two others, or is merely an unrelated form which has characteristics common to both other forms. What you have described here is a transistional form. Its relation is impossible to prove but a transitional form is an animal that has properties from two groups of animals e.g. birds and dinosaurs. therefore if a fossil has features of birds and dinosaurs it is a transitional form between birds and dinosaurs.
 [[Archaeopteryx]], for example, has some features in common with both living [[bird]]s and [[reptile]]s, and is often quoted as an intermediate form.
-It was not covered with part-[[scale]]s/part-[[feather]]s, but had fully-functioning feathers and [[wing]]s, and was capable of [[flight]].
+It was not covered with part-[[scale]]s/part-[[feather]]s, but had fully-functioning feathers and [[wing]]s, and was capable of [[flight]]. It also had teeth. A feature not found in modern birds.
-There is therefore no reason to think that it is not simply a bird with some features in common with reptiles.
+There is therefore no reason to think that it is not simply a bird with some features in common with reptiles but since this is what a transitional form is its not a problem for evolution. If Archaeopteryx could fly it was more bird then dinosaur, but it was still a transition between the two. The fact that it isn't slap bang in the middle is irrelevant because it is still a transitional form!
 Evolutionists have criticised creationists for claiming that if an intermediate form is discovered, it merely creates two gaps where there was previously one.
 This criticism ignores the size of the gaps.<ref>Woodmorappe, John, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/4248 Does a ‘transitional form’ replace one gap with two gaps?], ''Journal of Creation'' 14(3):5–6, August 2000.</ref>
 If the remaining two gaps are large, then the creationist claim is justified.
-Rather than simply producing the occasional form which appears to be intermediate between two different forms, evolutionists need to demonstrate what [[Charles Darwin]] called a "finely-graduated organic chain".<ref name="chain" />
+Rather than simply producing the occasional form which appears to be intermediate between two different forms, evolutionists need to demonstrate what [[Charles Darwin]] called a "finely-graduated organic chain".<ref name="chain" /> The problem here is that most animals are not preserved in the fossil record. Besides we have more then enough to show a smooth transition between the main groups e.g. reptiles-mammels
 Despite many more fossils being discovered since Darwin's time, the continued lack of a series of fossils showing a smooth transition led [[Stephen Jay Gould]] and [[Niles Eldredge]] to propose [[Punctuated Equilibrium]], which says that the change from one form to another took place is short bursts which generally would not leave a fossil trace.

@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 == Claims of a lack of transitional forms ==
-It is a commonly claimed misconception by critics of evolution that there are no transitional fossils.<ref name="CC200">{{Cite web | url = http://www.toarchive.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.html | title = Claim CC200 at www.talkorigins.org | accessdate = 2007-06-19}}</ref><ref name="NS2645" /><ref>[The Scientific Case for Creation http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences27.html], Life Sciences, 23. Fossil Gaps</ref>  Such claims may be based on a misunderstanding of the nature of what represents a transitional feature,<ref name="CC200" /> or according to Donald Prothero, may be a tactic actively employed by [[creationist]]s seeking to distort or discredit evolutionary theory.<ref name="NS2645" /> Prothero has called that claim the "favourite lie" of creationists and further said that it was "manifestly untrue".<ref name="NS2645" />
+Creationists claim that there there are no transitional forms between the various [[baraminology|created kinds]].
-A common, though fallacious, [[creationist]] argument is that no fossils are found with partially functional features. Vestigial organs are common in whales for example.<ref name="whalelegs">{{Cite web | url = http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/data/2001/11/01/html/ft_20011101.4.html | title = Evolution of Whales @ nationalgeographic.com | accessdate = 2008-11-07}}</ref>. Also, there is evidence that a complex feature with one function can adapt to a wholly different function through evolution in a process known as [[exaptation]]. The precursor to, for example, a wing, might originally have only been used for gliding, trapping flying prey, and/or mating display. Nowadays, wings may still have all of these functions, while also being used for active flight.
+The late paleontologist [[Stephen Jay Gould]] said in 1977:
-Although transitional fossils elucidate the evolutionary transition of one life-form to another, they only exemplify snapshots of this process. Due to the special circumstances required for preservation of remains, only a very small percentage of all life-forms that ever have existed can be expected to be represented in discoveries. Thus, the transition itself can only be illustrated and corroborated by transitional fossils, but it will never be "caught in the act" as it were. Creationists often argue against this, claiming it is merely a convenient way to explain the lack of 'snapshot' fossils that show crucial steps between species. However,  progress in research and new discoveries continue to fill in such gaps, and in modern thinking evolution is pictured as a bush of lines of development, not the simplistic ladder of progress that was common before Darwin published his theory and still influences popular opinion.
+In 1979, the senior palaeontologist at the [[British Museum of Natural History]], [[Colin Patterson]], agreed with Gould, when asked why he didn't have any illustrations of transitional forms in his book:
-The theory of [[punctuated equilibrium]] developed by [[Stephen Jay Gould]] and [[Niles Eldredge]] and first presented in 1972<ref>Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould, 1972. "Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism" In T.J.M. Schopf, ed., ''Models in Paleobiology.'' San Francisco: Freeman Cooper. pp. 82-115. Reprinted in N. Eldredge ''Time Frames.'' Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press. 1985.</ref> is often mistakenly drawn into the discussion of transitional fossils. This theory, however, pertains only to well-documented transitions within taxa or between closely related taxa over a geologically short period of time. These transitions, usually traceable in the same geological outcrop, often show small jumps in morphology between extended periods of morphological stability. To explain these jumps, Gould and Eldredge envisaged comparatively long periods of genetic stability separated by periods of rapid evolution.
+In 1984 Gould wrote the following:
 ==See also==

← Older revision	Revision as of 16:33, November 6, 2014
(No difference)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:20, September 29, 2008
Line 64:		Line 64:

	[[Category:Origins Debate]]		[[Category:Origins Debate]]
		+	[[Category:Fossils]]