1. Comment #98367 by rnewson on December 13, 2007 at 2:23 pm

Aren't *all* fossils transitional?

Other Comments by rnewson

2. Comment #98373 by latsot on December 13, 2007 at 2:30 pm

Why on Earth would anyone need to explain it? Doesn't that just pander to the erroneous idea that lack of fossils somehow constitutes evidence that evolution is false? The question seems at best a distraction and at worst a spurious validation of tired creationist arguments.

Other Comments by latsot

3. Comment #98377 by benjamintm on December 13, 2007 at 2:33 pm

I've found transitional forms to be best explained by showing a picture of my father, my son, and me standing together. I then point out that I'm the transitional form between my dad and my son.

Ben

Other Comments by benjamintm

4. Comment #98380 by USA_Limey on December 13, 2007 at 2:37 pm

I hate these stupid 'debating points' so much I am going to be childish and petulant.

They completely mess up the 'lates visitor comments' section which helps us keep track of responses to the latest articles posted.

So there.

Other Comments by USA_Limey

5. Comment #98389 by Robert Maynard on December 13, 2007 at 2:41 pm

How do you explain the stuff between the gaps?

Other Comments by Robert Maynard

6. Comment #98408 by ChrisMcL on December 13, 2007 at 2:57 pm

When do we get a nice summary of the best answers?

Other Comments by ChrisMcL

7. Comment #98412 by room101 on December 13, 2007 at 3:02 pm

Wow - incredible when you hear people ask questions about the fossil record. I mean, it's like listening to a bunch of 5 year-olds, isn't it? "Where are all the fossils? Shouldn't there be billions and billions of them?" Makes you think that when these idiots look up in the sky they probably conclude that the sun is revolving around us (I mean, the sun DOES move across the sky while WE appear to be motionless, right?)

I would inquire the individual: Uhhhh - what makes you think that everything that dies gets fossilized? Do you realize just how rare an occurance fossilization is? It is extremely rare that any given organism would leave behind a fossil. The conditions necessary are highly unlikely.

It's just another example of people being too lazy to do a little research (hell, just google "transitional fossil record" and see how many results you get). The July 2007 issue of Newsweek had a segment on "Tiktaalik Roseae", the latest fossil discovered in the Canadian artic that clearly shows a transitional form from fish to land animal. This find was also featured in the NOVA special on the Dover trial.

And that was in Newsweek. You didn't even have to subscribe to Nature magazine. But I guess in this country (US) if it's not on Entertainment Tonight or doesn't involve Paris or Britney, most people will probably miss or ignore it.

Note: I'm reminded of one of Ken Miller's lectures featured on YouTube. At one point, he describes a conversation he had with a paleontologist friend of his, and how she is baffled by all of this "no transitional fossil" babble taking place. She tells him that at seminars there are so many examples of transitional fossils that heated arguments take place as to whether these findings should be classified "reptilian like mammals" or "mammilian like reptiles".

Other Comments by room101

8. Comment #98634 by f0xfree on December 14, 2007 at 1:00 am

By reading The Origin Of Species (1859).

Especially Chapter 9: On the Imperfection of the Geological Record.

The original question begs that the record is perfect to begin with. Darwin showed why it was not... over 100 years ago.

Other Comments by f0xfree

9. Comment #98747 by sidfaiwu on December 14, 2007 at 7:31 am

How do you explain the lack of transitional forms in nature, the gaps in the fossil record?

I generally don't. I leave that up to the professionals.

Other Comments by sidfaiwu

10. Comment #98772 by neyne on December 14, 2007 at 8:42 am

by lack of reading of scientific journals

Other Comments by neyne

11. Comment #98818 by brian_d_w on December 14, 2007 at 1:40 pm

Every time that a paleontologist discovers a new fossil species a creationist gets two more missing links.

Other Comments by brian_d_w

12. Comment #98976 by phasmagigas on December 15, 2007 at 4:47 am

I can explain it by the fact that the vast majority of organisms do not get fossilised. To demonstrate my point see what happens to a chicken body that you leave at a woodland egde, my point will be self evident within a very short time.

The fact that you expect a perfect set of transitional organisms/features demonstartes very well your ignorance of biology and natural processes and a low appreciation that things were not exclusively set out for YOU.

To make you think a bit more deeply you need to appreciate that any organism that leaves descendents (it will of course always had ancestors) is a transitional organism in itself.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

13. Comment #101802 by Jake Atkisson on December 21, 2007 at 1:59 am

"How do you explain the lack of transitional forms in nature, the gaps in the fossil record?"

How the heck should I know, I didn't do it. Just 'cause I can't explain it, however, doesn't automatically indicate that your answer is -right-, no matter what it is.

(Please do remember that my responses to these queries are rendered in the first-person format, but are not intended to be attacks or jabs back at the author on this forum; the platform of delivery is as figurative as the author's)

Other Comments by Jake Atkisson

14. Comment #118356 by Switch89 on January 30, 2008 at 4:01 pm

There are gaps in the fossil record due to geological processes as well as the rarity of fossilization (not to mention the fact that we have uncovered only a small fraction of the world's fossils).

*However* There are many good sequences of fossils and many individual fossils which display traits of two different groups. I have a good list here:
http://aigbusted.blogspot.com/2007/12/smooth-change-in-fossil-record.html

Other Comments by Switch89

15. Comment #125761 by the_ultimate_samurai on February 12, 2008 at 1:53 am

well for one:
if you have two creatures there is a gap between them from where they are and where they were, find a transitional fosil what do you have now? two gaps, with each gap filled 2 take its place. its physically impossible to have a total fossil record.

thank FSM we dont rely solely on that (though it is a powerful indicator) and in fact have a large myriad of other methods which all colloborate one another

Other Comments by the_ultimate_samurai

16. Comment #130228 by martino on February 20, 2008 at 7:26 am

There aren't any. There are gaps in the fossil record, far fewer than in the past and there will be fewer in the future but there was never a be a time when every single transition was fossilized nor could we find all those that exist. We do have a more than sufficient fossil record to know how humans evolved from ancient primates, nothing more is needed.

Other Comments by martino

17. Comment #134494 by Comradepinko on February 27, 2008 at 10:10 pm

What constitutes a gap in a fossil record?

Other Comments by Comradepinko

18. Comment #149620 by rod-the-farmer on March 26, 2008 at 2:19 am

Here is yet another news item showing what looks to me like a transitional fossil.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080325203453.htm

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

19. Comment #160839 by curly on April 14, 2008 at 1:06 pm

The "Talk Origins" website has some really good essays on this question
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

Other Comments by curly

20. Comment #169264 by Reason1958 on April 25, 2008 at 4:50 pm

For reasons already cited (rarity of fossilization, relatively small number of existing fossils so far found), plus the challenge: "I assume you agree that many amphibians, such as frogs, go through a metamorphosis from egg, to tadpole, to transitional phase with traits of both tadpole and frog, and finally frog. You tell ME why there are no fossils of these transitional states--especially considering the number of amphibians that have lived since your accepted time of the 'creation'."

Other Comments by Reason1958

21. Comment #173710 by dadamo on May 1, 2008 at 6:40 am

Question: "How do you explain the lack of transitional forms in nature, the gaps in the fossil record?"

Answ r: Th re are g ps in this sent nce.
A Creat onist fu ls those ga s with G d.
A Sci ntist just says th re is more
w rk to be done.

Other Comments by dadamo

22. Comment #177265 by Destrado on May 8, 2008 at 8:42 pm

New video on YouTube. 10 minutes and 30 seconds of pure repeated and relentless answering of this very question from any and every angle. It was posted today and is receiving a somewhat of a standing ovation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qfoje7jVJpU

Other Comments by Destrado