A few points

[wordy80]

A few things regarding evolution.

As far as I can see there's still a lot of dispute as to whether any of these missing links contain any human bones but the fossils are owned privately making it impossible to analyze the originals. I wonder if they had the originals a different conclusion might be told there is even talk that some of these missing links contain a mismatch of bones from different species. Lucy the missing link is no longer regarded as having any human?

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

 

[ChristineM]

A few things regarding evolution.

As far as I can see there's still a lot of dispute as to whether any of these missing links contain any human bones but the fossils are owned privately making it impossible to analyze the originals. I wonder if they had the originals a different conclusion might be told there is even talk that some of these missing links contain a mismatch of bones from different species. Lucy the missing link is no longer regarded as having any human?

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

You obviously have a gap in your knowledge. What is a missing link? An idea spread by those who do not understand evolution.

Evolution is occurring all the time, every animal born is genetically different from their parents. Only slightly but over 1000s of years these differences become noticeable.

See my avatar, its a human skull, 22000 years old (approximately) it is considerably different from todays human skull. It is slightly larger, early modern humans had a roughly 13% larger brain than we do. So the brain case is larger. The bone itself is thicker, and rhere are slight but measurable brow ridges.

Looking at my avatar, little difference is seen but close examination shoes the differences.

And.. could you please provide some of these holes?. As far as i am aware, evolution is one of the most researched sciences

 

[Twilight Hue]

A few things regarding evolution.

As far as I can see there's still a lot of dispute as to whether any of these missing links contain any human bones but the fossils are owned privately making it impossible to analyze the originals. I wonder if they had the originals a different conclusion might be told there is even talk that some of these missing links contain a mismatch of bones from different species. Lucy the missing link is no longer regarded as having any human?

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

I don't get the fixation and obsession with fossils anymore, especially in light that the genome is the real medium where you can determine one's ancestry just by noticing there are dormant genes and by reverse engineering , it will bring out the traits of your evolutionary branch that can be traced throughout history.

Everyone carries their evolutionary lineage with them right within their genome.

 

[wordy80]

You obviously have a gap in your knowledge. What is a missing link? An idea spread by those who do not understand evolution.

Evolution is occurring all the time, every animal born is genetically different from their parents. Only slightly but over 1000s of years these differences become noticeable.

See my avatar, its a human skull, 22000 years old (approximately) it is considerably different from todays human skull. It is slightly larger, early modern humans had a roughly 13% larger brain than we do. So the brain case is larger. The bone itself is thicker, and rhere are slight but measurable brow ridges.

Looking at my avatar, little difference is seen but close examination shoes the differences.

And.. could you please provide some of these holes?. As far as i am aware, evolution is one of the most researched sciences

Well it depends on how you define evolution. I am taking about transitioning from one class to another, like reptiles to mammals or insects to reptiles.

This is where the real dispute is. If you want to say each animal / human has it's own genetic footprint and that's evolution then ok but the idea that a fish transitions into a reptile there is still no evidence apart from sketchy comparison between fossils. These fossils are the only apparent evidence of this yet many scientists dispute that these intermediate fossils show any evidence of containing more than one class of animal

 

[ImmortalFlame]

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

That's not really how evolution works. There is no such thing as a "finished" species, and the designation "intermediate" doesn't mean it is an "un-finished" species, it just means that it is one of the forms between two states.

It helps if you think of it in terms of you, your parents, your grandparents and your children. Your parents are "finished" people, but they represent an "intermediate" between you and your grandparents. You are a "finished" person, but you represent an "intermediate" between your parents and your children. And so on.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

This is not how evolution works. Neanderthals had 100% neanderthal hearts and homo sapiens have 100% homo sapien hearts.

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

What are the holes?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You obviously have a gap in your knowledge. What is a missing link?

I found the juxtaposition of those two sentences more than a little humorous.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

---> ignore-list

 

[exchemist]

A few things regarding evolution.

As far as I can see there's still a lot of dispute as to whether any of these missing links contain any human bones but the fossils are owned privately making it impossible to analyze the originals. I wonder if they had the originals a different conclusion might be told there is even talk that some of these missing links contain a mismatch of bones from different species. Lucy the missing link is no longer regarded as having any human?

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

This post betrays a lack of knowledge of both evolution and palaeontology.

But the suggestion of "cover ups" is particularly absurd. Do you really suppose all the worlds biologists and palaeontologists are engaged in some sort of conspiracy to defraud the public? Is this serious?

 

[ChristineM]

Well it depends on how you define evolution. I am taking about transitioning from one class to another, like reptiles to mammals or insects to reptiles.

This is where the real dispute is. If you want to say each animal / human has it's own genetic footprint and that's evolution then ok but the idea that a fish transitions into a reptile there is still no evidence apart from sketchy comparison between fossils. These fossils are the only apparent evidence of this yet many scientists dispute that these intermediate fossils show any evidence of containing more than one class of animal

No dispute, fossil and genetic evidence os abundant

Please provide the names of a few of these many scientists you say dispute the evidence. I would like to research their credentials

 

[ratiocinator]

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

There is no distinction. Every single organism is (potentially, at least) part of a transition. You really do not know anything about the subject if you think there are some special 'intermediate' forms.

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

Humans are primates. You definitely know nothing about the subject.

This is where the real dispute is. If you want to say each animal / human has it's own genetic footprint and that's evolution then ok but the idea that a fish transitions into a reptile there is still no evidence apart from sketchy comparison between fossils.

Simply untrue. You could 'prove' evolution beyond reasonable doubt from genetics alone, even if there were no fossils at all....

 

[MikeF]

A few things regarding evolution.

As far as I can see there's still a lot of dispute as to whether any of these missing links contain any human bones but the fossils are owned privately making it impossible to analyze the originals. I wonder if they had the originals a different conclusion might be told there is even talk that some of these missing links contain a mismatch of bones from different species. Lucy the missing link is no longer regarded as having any human?

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

It is literally impossible to instill a graduate level understanding of evolution in a forum post. If you have doubts, start checking out some books from reputable experts on the subject. Follow their arguments and see the evidence that they provide. If you have already done so and this is your takeaway from that research, then so be it. You are not convinced.

 

[wordy80]

There is no distinction. Every single organism is (potentially, at least) part of a transition. You really do not know anything about the subject if you think there are some special 'intermediate' forms.


Humans are primates. You definitely know nothing about the subject.


Simply untrue. You could 'prove' evolution beyond reasonable doubt from genetics alone, even if there were no fossils at all....

Link?

 

[Left Coast]

Link?

Start here:

https://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-True-Jerry-Coyne/dp/0143116649

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent

This article directly addresses the scientific evidences in favor of macroevolutionary theory and common descent. It is specifically intended for those who are scientifically minded but, for one reason or another, have come to believe that macroevolutionary theory explains little, makes few or...

www.talkorigins.org

 

[The Hammer]

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

Hominid dental morphology evolution - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

This is how our teeth changed over the last couple hundred thousand years, using "intermediary" fossils. This shows the shift in diet, going from raw plants and meat, to cooked predigested foods.

 

[Valjean]

A few things regarding evolution.

As far as I can see there's still a lot of dispute as to whether any of these missing links contain any human bones but the fossils are owned privately making it impossible to analyze the originals. I wonder if they had the originals a different conclusion might be told there is even talk that some of these missing links contain a mismatch of bones from different species. Lucy the missing link is no longer regarded as having any human?

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

First, we need to define "human." Were australopiths, like Lucy, human? We have lots of australopith fossils, but we're stuck with mainly morphological comparisons, since we lack intact DNA or cultural artifacts.
More recent hominid and hominin fossils have more diverse and abundant accompanying evidence.

So what features constitute "human?"

 

[Valjean]

Well it depends on how you define evolution. I am taking about transitioning from one class to another, like reptiles to mammals or insects to reptiles.

This is where the real dispute is. If you want to say each animal / human has it's own genetic footprint and that's evolution then ok but the idea that a fish transitions into a reptile there is still no evidence apart from sketchy comparison between fossils. These fossils are the only apparent evidence of this yet many scientists dispute that these intermediate fossils show any evidence of containing more than one class of animal

No, most of the same genes have carried over to mammals like us, though they've usually been slightly repurposed or inactivated. The lizard is still in us.
Keep in mind that there is change with every generation, and small changes accumulate. First, only small changes would be noticeable, but, as the process continues, for millions of generations, adapting to new or changing niches, generating endless small changes, novel species, genera, families, &c are created.

 

[Dao Hao Now]

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete. That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

At what point does this image stop being yellow and become blue?
Half way between the bottom right corner and the top left corner, would you say it’s half yellow and half blue?
Or would you say it’s something else?

 

[Valjean]

A few things regarding evolution.

As far as I can see there's still a lot of dispute as to whether any of these missing links contain any human bones but the fossils are owned privately making it impossible to analyze the originals. I wonder if they had the originals a different conclusion might be told there is even talk that some of these missing links contain a mismatch of bones from different species. Lucy the missing link is no longer regarded as having any human?

What do you mean when you say "missing link?" It's not a technical, biological term. Every organism is a link between its parent and offspring.
There are hundreds of thousands of non-private fossils in museums, universities, anthro. labs, &al, available for research. More are found every day.

"The originals?" What are the originals? I don't follow.
Lucy exists. It's not a "missing link." She's in the Paleoanthropology Laboratory of the National Museum of Ethiopia. She's been extensively studied, and if an anthropologist today wants to examine her, she need only go to Addis-Ababa and apply at the museum.
There are many other fossils of her species, as well. She's hardly unique.

One thing I was thinking about is, when does an intermediate stage begin after the full new species is finished, is it right away or some time in the future?

Every stage could be called intermediate. A "species" isn't a completed design, just a form, picked from a long series of gradually changing forms+, that biologists have arbitrarily chosen to name.

Lets say a new species like primate to human is in an intermediate stage, say it's 50% complete.

Humans are primates. We conform to the biological definition of primate. More specifically, we're great apes, conforming to that definition, as well. The genetic, anatomical, and fossil history is clear.

There are no "stages," as you're using the term. Evolution has no goal, or completed designs. Every individual in the sequence is a fully developed, functioning organism; a completed design, if you will. Every individual is a 'stage' in a continuing sequence of evolutionary changes.

That means it could have half a human heart and half primate heart or half a human digestive system and half primate. I cant see how this species would survive as it would be too unbalanced to process food and all the other internal processes it would need to complete to survive.

LOL! -- I've heard this objection from hundreds of different creationist sources. It's ridiculous, and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how evolution works, and what it is.
Every stage in the adaptive sequence is fully functional. Every individual is complete, fully functional organism. There are no partially completed organisms.

Analogy: Latin "evolved" into French; different, mutually incomprehensible languages, yet no parent ever gave birth to a child who spoke a different language, nor was there ever a "partial language." There was just a long sequence of tiny changes, and a complete, functioning language at every point in the sequence.

And again, human vs primate makes no sense. It's like dog vs canine.

There are so many holes and what appear cover ups in evolution that I really can't take it seriously.

You don't understand the first thing about it! How are you seeing holes?
Where are you seeing cover-ups? Who would cover anything up; who would a cover-up benefit?

Argument from incredulity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Valjean]

Link?

Primate cladogram

This diagram shows the evolutionary relationships between members of the primate family.

www.sciencelearn.org.nz

We are Great Apes.
If not in the Order primates ['Prim-uh-teez], what order are we in?

Human taxonomy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org