I know, there are hundreds of threads on evolution. And if someone can point me to one of them with an answer to my specific question, please let this thread die, but I’ve searched through a few and haven’t seen much more than bickering on this subject. So, unless I’m referred elsewhere, please give a charitable answer here as I’m asking for clarification, but do not want to start another fight between the two sides on this debate.
As I look through sites from critics of evolution, I keep seeing the claim that there is not one single example of a transitional fossil between species. Advocates of evolution claim there are plenty of examples. Take this post from the thread “Is Evolution a fact?” where someone made the claim of no transitional fossils:
Would you like to explain Acanthostega, Icthyostega, Pederpes finneyae, Tiktaalik, Tulerpeton, Greererpeton, Pandericthys, Gogonasus?
How about Caudipteryx, Byronosaurus, Microraptor gui, Sinornithosaurus, Protarchaeopteryx, ConfuciusornisWhat about Eomaia scansoria? Carsonella rudii? Ambolecetus? Durodon?
Castorocauda lutrasimilis? Cynognathus crateronotus?, Traversodontidae?
Australopithecus anamensis? Homo habilis? Homo erectus?
No transitionals? You are joking, aren’t you?
So, in layman’s terms, can someone explain how each side feels it is credibly making its claim, which completely contradicts the other? Please no answers such as “by ignoring science” or “acting on presumptions”. How is the same evidence interpreted in two different ways?
On a similar note, the same debate comes up over the claim that there are no observed examples of evolution. I get the idea that the distinction comes between micro and macro evolution and the evolutionists’ claim that there is no distinction between the two - that micro is just building up to macro by the teaspoon. So, in refutation of the claim that there is no observed evolution, groups such as “Talk Origin” provide proofs such as this, which by the way, claims to show speciation, not just variation within a species. Groups such as “Answers in Genesis” refute with articles such as this.
One answer or the other won’t affect my faith. I believe that God created everything, even if he used the mechanism of evolution to do so. And I’m not interested in that debate (there are plenty of threads for that), but just an analysis of the two claims on each of these issues from a fair and “nice” point of view.