Do evolution trees still have too many dots?
Opinion
Evolution trees
Why haven't all the dots been replaced by animal names?
By Brad Marshall : August 20, 2009
When I was at school I remember being fascinated by some evolutionary trees in one of my textbooks.
These charts showed the paths along which different types of animals had evolved. Along the top were various categories of animals, and leading down from each category were “leaves” labelling the types of animals in that category. At the bottom of each leaf was a thin line, or dotted lines, that showed how the whole lot were connected through evolution.
The animal drawings were crude, but my fascination centered not on the drawings, but on those many thin and dotted lines.
Our class was told that the connecting “stalk-lines” and dotted lines were either uncertain connections or connections for which fossils had not yet been found. The dots and thin lines represented the intermediate fossils as one type of animal evolved into another.
Scientists believed that those thin and dotted lines showed the true evolutionary path, but most of the evidence was flimsy or missing.
In fact, if you removed the thin and dotted lines — the imaginary parts — you would have a collection of the animals that have actually existed with no evidence of their evolution, just their existence.
I would have thought that if evolution were true, as we are constantly told by Richard Dawkins and other evolutionists, that all those dots and thin lines for which evidence was missing years ago would now have been replaced by the actual animal names.
Surely with all the fossils that have been found in the 150 years since Charles Darwin published his monumental book Origin of Species, we should now be able to confidently show an evolution chart with no dotted lines and no thin line connections that represent imagined evolution rather than evidential evolution.
I found the following clip of Richard Dawkins on YouTube yesterday explaining how whales evolved from a cloven-hoofed land ancestor. Notice how clear the evolution trees are these days, and the absence of dots, and especially how definite is that link between whales and hippopotamuses!
Photo of dinosaur evolution chart is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 License. In short: you are free to share and make derivative works of the file under the conditions that you appropriately attribute it, and that you distribute it only under a license identical to this one. Official license.
See also
- Why there is no common ancestor for humans and apes
- (Video) Dr. David Berlinski: What does it take for change?
- Dr. Jonathan Sarfati: Refuting whale evolution
- (Video) Dr. Marc Surtees: Whales — Designed or evolved?
- Science against evolution: In a whale of trouble
- Science against evolution: Whale tale 2
- Ashby L. Camp: The overselling of whale evolution
- John Woodmorappe: Walking whales …
Other opinion pieces:
- Birds didn't evolve from dinosaurs
- Latest “missing link” turns out to be not missing and not a link
- Evolution of laughter? Ha ha ha
- Earliest human fossil in Asia turns out to be an ape
- Ban the burqa? (And cut down on stonings and amputations while you're at it)
- Sexting kills
- Cyber-bullying: What teens should know but don't
- Teen heroes: Bullets, blazing houses, and speeding trains don't stop them.
- Why have people stopped being polite?
- Abortionist shot dead in church
- Miss California vs. The Beast Perez Hilton
- 3 easiest ways to lose weight?
- Train surfing: See the world while you lose your limbs
- Why criticizing others is risky
- Did John Lennon sell his soul to the Devil?
- Michael Jackson: He almost had it all
List of opinion articles.
| Main page || Creation Tips || Teen Topics || Crystal Clear Creation || DinosaurCam || Games || News archives || News |
Contact us.
Website: www.creationtips.com
Copyright © Creation Tips and its licensors.