re: A Scientific dissent from Darwin

quote:

---

No it wouldn't... we have fossils. The macro changes should be seen more broadly in the fossil record based on how many different random variations would have to occur.

---

Only a small percentage of living organisms become fossilized, which require a number of conditions for it to happen. And of that small percentage, we’ve only likely only found a small percentage of those. In fact, it’s estimates that we’ve only found about 15% of the LIVING SPECIES.

So to expect fossil records across a history (depending on what one is loooking) that spans of hundreds of thousands, millions, and even billions of years, to provide anything close to a complete picture of something very specific (e.g., species to species) is just illogical, especially given the limitations to find fossils that have actually been preserved.

Evolution is such a massive interdisciplinary area of research, maybe the largest in history. And some of the most important and strongest research has little or even nothing to do with fossil records. Yet, those who criticize the theory always seem to ignore all the other research and focus solely on the fossil record. It’s ignorant at best for those who don’t know any better, but I think those that do know better use it dishonestly to deceive those who don’t and are not discussing the theory in good faith.