posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 11:24 PM
Originally posted by jiggerj
I don't remember the exact wording, but wasn't this Darwin's fear? That if enough remains couldn't be found then his theory shouldn't be taken
seriously? I don't remember. What WAS Darwin's fear?
That's an old creationist quote mine. Evolution originally predicted that species would be found to link modern man to ancient ape, as well as fill
other gaps in the fossil record. Obviously, fossilization is very rare, so we haven't found them all, but we have found well over a dozen species of
hominids, each that shows slow gradual change over time over the past 7 million years. Evolution has evolved majorly since Darwin first founded it,
but new species are constantly being discovered, so Darwin was definitely accurate in his prediction.
Hmmm, you're the second I know of to miss what I wrote in the OP. I wrote: In the image below, there are three skulls of Australopithecus
afarensis ***(that I manipulated)***.
I did this to explain what I would have expected to see from evolution.
Okay, i guess it was just a little confusing, didn't realize it was hypothetical. So you are saying you expect small changes like you showed in the
picture. The only thing is that's exactly what we do see in the various fossils of hominid skulls that were posted here. You see a small change in
each one from early to late. The only thing is these fossils are hard to find because the conditions aren't so great for fossilization in the area
they lived, so there is quite often a large gap in time and small sample size. We have found a bunch, however, and if you compare a human skull from
150,000 years ago from one today, you will indeed see small change, even though they are still categorized as the same species.
edit on 3-9-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)