Changes

Evolutionists have criticised creationists for claiming that if an intermediate form is discovered, it merely creates two gaps where there was previously one.

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>

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.

However, if the gap is still large, this does not validate the claim of the creationist, as fossilization is a rare process and sometimes evolution occurs rapidly, as in the case of humans, who evolved into their modern form in only a few million years.

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" />