Why does a discussion about evolution always also include a discussion about abiogenesis and cosmology? This is supposed to be discussion about
evolution (hence the title). Abiogenesis, how life started, has nothing to do with the validity of evolution. Abiogenesis described how the lifeform
got there and evolution says what happened from there. If abiogenesis is false, evolution doesn't have to be false.
No transistory fossils? The transition from reptiles to birds is described by a list of 23 species: Eoraptor, Herrerasaurus, Ceratosaurus, Allosaurus,
Compsognathus, Sinosauropteryx, Protarchaeopteryx, Caudipteryx, Velociraptor, Sinovenator, Beipiaosaurus, Sinornithosaurus, Microraptor,
Archaeopteryx, Rahonavis, Confuciusornis, Sinornis, Patagopteryx, Hesperornis, Apsaravis, Ichthyornis, and Columba
). That link also contains the examples from
reptiles to mammals, from apes and humans and land-mammals to marine mammals, with references and examples.
Human evolution? Hominid species evolution with fossil examples
How do creationists explain that species which evolution says have evolved from the same ancestor have the same retrovirus-DNA still in their DNA? The
trees made with retrovirus DNA are the same as the trees made from morphological and DNA comparisons. Differences in cytochrome-DNA also show the same
trees. Did God make all those things exactly so it would seem like evolution was true?
Symbiotic organisms were not symbiotic before they were together. When they started living together, they evolved to be symbiotic.
[Edited on 4-5-2004 by amantine]