CreateDebate


Debate Info

45
17
Yes No
Debate Score:62
Arguments:39
Total Votes:71
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (25)
 
 No (14)

Debate Creator

maccabaeus(231) pic



Does the Fossil Record Prove Evolution?

The Fossil Record

Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory.’

- Ronald R. West

Yet despite more than a century of digging, the fossil record remains maddeningly sparse. With so few clues, even a single bone that doesn't fit into the picture can upset everything. Virtually every major discovery has put deep cracks in the conventional wisdom and forced scientists to concoct new theories, amid furious debate.

Time Magazine, 1994

Since 1859 one of the most vexing properties of the fossil record has been its obvious imperfection. For the evolutionist this imperfection is most frustrating as it precludes any real possibility for mapping out the path of organic evolution owing to an infinity of "missing links".

- Arthur J. Boucot

Evidence for natural selection does not exist in the fossil record.

- Lipson, FRS

[F]or more than a century biologists have portrayed the evolution of life as a gradual unfolding ... Today the fossil record ... is forcing us to revise this conventional view.

- Stanley, S. M.

The known fossil record is not, and has never has been, in accord with gradualism. What is remarkable is that, through a variety of historical circumstances, even the history of opposition has been obscured. ... 'The majority of paleontologists felt their evidence simply contradicted Darwin's stress on minute, slow, and cumulative changes leading to species transformation.' ... their story has been suppressed.

-Stanley, S. M.

It remains true, as every paleontologist knows, that most new species, genera, and families, and that nearly all categories above the level of families, appear in the [fossil] record suddenly, and are not led up to by gradual, completely continuous transitional sequences.

- Simpson, George Gaylord

Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of "seeing" evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists the most notorious of which is the presence of "gaps" in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them. The gaps must therefore be a contingent feature of the record.

- David B. Kitts

Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory.

-Ronald R. West

Anything truly novel always seemed to appear quite abruptly in the fossil record.

- Ernst Mayr

Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn’t changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and , ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin’s time.

- Dr David M. Raup

Darwin's prediction of rampant, albeit gradual, change affecting all lineages through time is refuted. The record is there, and the record speaks for tremendous anatomical conservatism. Change in the manner Darwin expected is just not found in the fossil record. 

- Niles Eldredge

One might suppose that Darwin, like his modern intellectual descendants, saw in the fossil record a confirmation of his theory -- the literal documentation of life's evolution from the Cambrian to the present day. In fact, the two chapters devoted to geology in The Origin of Species are anything but celebratory. On the contrary, they constitute a carefully worded apology in which Darwin argues that evolution by natural selection is correct despite an evident lack of support from fossils. 

- Andrew Knoll

It is a feature of the known fossil record that most taxa appear abruptly. They are not, as a rule, led up by a sequence of almost imperceptibly changing forerunners such as Darwin believed should be usual in evolution. A great many sequences of two or a few temporally intergrading species are known, but even at this level most species appear without known immediate ancestors, and really long, perfectly complete sequences of numerous species are exceedingly rare.

- George Gaylord Simpson

Yes

Side Score: 45
VS.

No

Side Score: 17
5 points

Hehehe... Gaylord...

Side: Yes
1 point

Never thought evolution was true to begin with it was all based off of one guys theory which was never even close to being proven, many just agree with it because it sounds good which it is a good theory none the less. I doubt you will be getting anyone to justify belief in evolution with reasonable logical response without being able to call BS on what they claim because I know there are plenty on here that believe in evo. Better off in believing that Nintendo will rename the WiiU to Evolution than waiting for some ancient missing piece of miracle evidence to pop up out of the grave from Darwins tomb that will finally put an end to the doubt on his theory of evo.

Side: No
Cuaroc(8829) Disputed
3 points

Have you studied evolution at all? Anyone who is not blinded by religion finds it perfect sense.

Side: Yes
KingBlack(223) Disputed
2 points

Have you studied what I believe in or what logic I am using at all to make an assumption that I am even basing my debate off of religion. Anyone who is blinded by being too ignorant to even consider looking at other possible explanations for anything, can find it easy that the evolution process is the perfect gem in how we have gotten here today.

Side: No
maccabaeus(231) Disputed
1 point

My observation of the natural world has led me to believe that Intelligent Design makes 'perfect sense'. The Zebra, Parrot, Kangaroo, Killer Whale, Peacock, Camel, and Elephant all appear to the results of a creative mind. Many plants and seem appear to be designed, by a creator with a sense of humor, the woodpecker and venus flytrap come to mind.

Side: No
mrsci999(41) Disputed
1 point

How do you know what your calling evolution is really just succession stages in creation. Think about succesion still occurs naturally throughout many environments how do its just a part of the creation process. According to geological records the carbon levels of the earth has been going down and every time that happen geologist found evidence of newer more adapted forms of life. Maybe evolution isn't really wrong maybe its just misinterperted. I don't belong to any religious organization(mostly because there all full of SH*&) but i still in god because evolution is just a theory. Be honest have you ever found any actual evidence of evolution recently.

Side: No
1 point

The fossil record is often shown in textbooks as a tree trunk with branches growing out of it. While the fossil tree shows horizontal branches which demonstrate the supposed mutation of species into other species, there is is absolutely no empirical evidence to support the existence of horizontal branches. In other words there is no evidence in the fossil record to support the existence of any intermediary species. Theses are know as the missing link, and yet even thought they are missing, they are the cornerstone of the entire theory of evolution.

The missing links in the fossil record were clearly a big problem for Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. But the only explanation he could come up wit was that we have "extreme imperfection" in the fossil record. In Darwin's day only a small portion of the fossil-bearing strata had been investigated and so he lived in the hope of digging would undoubtedly unearth theses missing links. Since 1860 however, virtually every fossil species that have been unearthed has shown that only near-relatives of existing species ever lived. In other cases, unique species were found, unlike any we have existing today. But never have any fossils have been found that can be classified as ancestors or descendents of other species. Never have any missing links, pertinent to the theory of evolution, been discovered

Side: No
Cuaroc(8829) Disputed
2 points

Fossils are quite hard to create so if a species only lived on the planet for a short time (by short time i mean a few thousand years) very few of that species would end up as fossils. Also finding fossils of a certain species is extremely difficult. So either the missing links never died in the right conditions for a fossil to form or we have not found them yet.

Side: Yes
Emperor(1348) Disputed
3 points

No, there are actually a lot of fossils.

I'm talking about a lot of transition fossils. There are certainly more than in Darwin's time, and if they thought the evolution hypothesis was correct then, the theory of evolution is certainly proven beyond a doubt now.

I've done a lot of research lately. I've looked at the transition fossils and it's fascinating.

It's beautiful, really...

Side: Yes
ricedaragh(2494) Disputed
2 points
Side: Yes
Srom(12206) Disputed
1 point

That wasn't plagiarsm. I got it off of a book not the internet.

Side: No
ricedaragh(2494) Disputed
0 points

In other words there is no evidence in the fossil record to support the existence of any intermediary species

All species are in some respects intermediary, this is what evolution teaches.

Theses are know as the MISSING LINK,

Invented term, has no basis in scientific reasoning.

they are the cornerstone of the entire theory of evolution.

How so?

The missing links in the fossil record were clearly a big problem for Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution.

No it wasn't, it was barely mentioned in "On the Origin" and was only seized upon by his detractors, not to any avail.

But the only explanation he could come up wit was that we have "extreme imperfection" in the fossil record.

Why would you expect a perfect fossil record? Nature does not work for the convenience of it's explanations. Fossilization is extremely rare, it is a wonder and a testament that we have so many that clearly show a gradual change.

In Darwin's day only a small portion of the fossil-bearing strata had been investigated and so he lived in the hope of digging would undoubtedly unearth theses missing links.

He most certainly did not, and this is also not true about the small number of fossil bearing strata, Darwin himself wrote about the Cambrian.

Since 1860 however, virtually every fossil species that have been unearthed has shown that only near-relatives of existing species ever lived.

I suppose those dinosaurs are near relatives of existing reptiles right?

Or could you explain what animal this is a relative of.

But your author does have one thing right, and that is that there is a close cousin ship with all existing species and those that are extinct, if not there would be no basis for evolution.

But never have any fossils have been found that can be classified as ancestors or descendents of other species.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiktaalik

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus_afarensis

Side: Yes