Does evidence of transitional forms exist ? (Hominid and other)

quote:

---

One, transitional means we can see a clear line of change from one SPECIES to another SPECIES.

---

reptiles to mammals; note how the repitilian jaw joint evolves into the mammalian inner ear, just like evolution predicted it would, even though creationists insisted this was impossible. apes to humans; look at the picture - can you tell which belong to ape-kind and which to human-kind? whales some good stuff on how whales evolved.

quote:

---

Another thing, if the so-called transition were to occure, it would have to occure in both a male and female member of the species for that new form to carry on.

---

Of course, any organism's genome will come from both mother and father. Except for sex-linked traits, no gene will remain confined to either male or female.

quote:

---

The Second law of thermodynamics states that ALL THINGS move toward entropy.

---

When you can pass gallo's thermodynamics test you can then lecture us about the second law.

quote:

---

"The leading mathematicians in the century met with some evolutionary biologists and confronted them with the fact that, according to mathematical statistics, the probabilities for a cell or a protein molecule coming into existence were nil. They even constructed a model on a large computer and tried to figure out the possibilities of such a cell ever happening. The result was zero possibility!"

---

I can demonstrate that the probability of all the cells in your body coming together to form you are essentially nil. So what?

quote:

---

The first point has been demonstrated in a labratory to be false: the decay rate does show variation.

---

Care to give details? What laboratory experiments demonstrated this?

quote:

---

Catastrophies like a flood would reset the clock because much of the material would have been washed away.

---

This is false. The flood does not explain why all radiometric methods give consistent dates. The flood does not explain why certain fossils are only found in strata of certain ages.

quote:

---

When you see how impossible the evolution model truely is,

---

An assertian you have failed to demonstrate.

quote:

---

Apes lokk like men men look like apes;

---

Why should this be true? Why would God create animals that look so much like humans? Why should a heirachical, branching classification of the species be possible?Look at the picture again. (link added in edit.) The first skull is a modern chimpanzee. The last one is a modern human. Look how different they are. Look at the second skull. It looks a lot like a chimp, but this is a fossil that lived several millions of years ago, and it is definitely not a chimp. Look at the next, and then the next. The point is that the form of the skulls fairly gradually change from very chimp-like to very human-like. These skulls are also placed in order of age.Now why did God create all of these different species, with just the right in-betweenness, to make it look like a gradual evolution of apes? Or if there are only a couple of species, why did the species vary so much so as to merge into one another? How did the flood put the skulls in strata with just the right radiometric ages so we can put them in the right order? That is the important question!Over a century and a half ago, evolution predicted that skulls exactly like these should be found. They have now been found. The creationists scoffed, saying no such thing existed - calling them "missing links".[This message has been edited by Chiroptera, 01-20-2004]