Op zondag 1 oktober 2017 04:15:02 UTC+2 schreef
r3p...@gmail.com:
> I'm actually quite tired of waiting for Peter to defend evolutionary claims that I have challenged in various threads. Invariably, for whatever reason, Peter fails to address in a timely fashion.
>
> Concerning the famous equine sequence: Assuming the same equates to a prime example of faunal succession, I have a question for the Evolutionists. In your minds, how much does succession or the sequence contribute to the so called fact of evolution?
>
> Ray
The evolution of the horse is based on multiple lines of evidence from multiple fields of study, where some evidence is indirect and some direct. While indirect evidence seems to creationists has mere guess work, it is in fact far more reliable than we presume. Many crimes are solved not based on direct observation either but on the preponderance of evidence leaning towards a certain conclusion.
Yes, we might assume that God created all of these creatures in a nested hierarchy at the same time, while they were buried in sequence, in for example, a single ctastrophic event (as young earthers tend to believe).
Or, we can invoke what the sciences say about the strata, the anatomy and the genetics of the horse compared to other extant animals.
When a 'sequence' of fossils are found that seem related it indeed does not mean they are related in a linear fashion. As you mentioned later on, 4 species of birds may look awfully similar, even though they are different species. But just because 4 types of birds across 4 species look similar, does not mean they're not related. This is a case of nested hierarchies where species share common ancestry. The existence of similar looking animals across species is more about rapid proliferation within a genus, rather than God creating 4 highly similar species.
Even within a similar species do we find plenty of variation to go around, such as Canis Lupus (Gray Wolf) and subsequent domesticated dogs; from great danes to chiauaua.
In the same vein as the birds, the equine fossils may not directly fall into the same lineage as the modern horse, as those fossils belong to populations acquiring their own mutations over time, but would represent anatomically various stages in horse evolution. To dismiss this is to dismiss the existence of a meter, but not the centimeters themselves, or to dismiss a color spectrum, but not the individual colors.
With one line of evidence, we cannot yet draw conclusions. Paleontology and geology however, give far more insight into the equine fossils found. Stratigraphy provides incredible insights into geologic deep time, which in turn is confirmed by multiple lines of evidence itself:
- multiple consistent radiometric dating methods of various points of the geologic column around the world,
-erosional unconformities,
-no particular order of sedimentary layers, the required environmental conditions to deposit many types of sediment,
-and the chemical limits in forming limestone and chalk.
It's in these strata where we find our equine fossils. Modern horse fossils are not found in strata where we find the extinct mesohippus. While specimens lower in the fossil record may appear higher, the reverse simply isn't seen unless the entire geologic column has slowly folded, which is also noticable because:
- the fossils appear upside down
- are next to geologic column in the correct order
- can still be radiometrically dated which confirm they're upside down
These fossil bearing strata not only show progression of populations over time, but also how they change. The deeper in the fossil record we go, the more and more modern animals dissapear, and the more they are replaced by extinct lineages, as well as fossils belonging to organisms which evolutionary theory predicted would occur if evolution were true.
__
Creationists love to bring up soft tissue for dinosaur fossils, but often ignore the important part:
- the dino collagen is nearly identical to modern bird collagen, as predicted by evolutionary theory.
- Many dinosaur species have evidence for feathers.
- Archeopteryx has older therapod features as well as modern bird features while finding itself in the late jurassic strata, whereas therapods first occur in the late triassic strata, which is again evidence for succession and evolution.