If evolution is true where are the missing links?
Discussion
51 comments
-
Exactly! If scales evolved into feathers, where are all the steps along the way?
-
United States Congress.
-
In the grocery store, for they have a great sausage links… LOL!
-
Evidence and records are Missing.
-
In the imagination of evolutionist.
-
And why are the gay gene still being naturally selected. ….folks it’s a lie
-
How and when was love created? When in the billions of billions of years did the ooze create love? Seek Him and you will find Him…….along with alot of answers.
-
Ain’t none ! That’s why they’re missing ye’all
-
It’s Theory of evolution, let’s clarify that.
-
So short answer, there is no missing link. The Earth as it had became was destroyed. There is a big Span of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. You Question it, start with this thought, everything God created was called Good. So Versus 1 was good, does versus 2 sound like what was made was good? https://youtu.be/e9NzidtayKo
-
They try to simplify evolution, they line up a few random skulls with *some* similarities, say we came from apes and there are Neanderthals in between. They draw lines between pictures of fossils and say anything that doesn’t fit is “missing.” They seem to also stop at “Lucy” as the first “human” ancestor (a chimpanzee somehow having human eye whites, and human feet? With no evidence at all!) What they don’t seem to announce a lot about “human ancestry” we have sea sponge, jawless fish, jawed fish, amphibians, reptiles, lemurs, etc, etc, in there too!! Plus the countless number of intermediate species in between, and that’s just for humans! EVERYTHING in evolution is missing lol
-
There are none because as a theory it falls flat.
-
They’re at home because all concerts have been cancelled due to COVID-19
-
One of the most tiresome creationist arguments against evolution tries to claim that there is an absence of transitional fossils. If the ancestor of the modern horse Miohippus evolved from its predecessor Mesohippus, then surely there must be examples of transitional fossils that would show characteristics of both, or perhaps an intermediate stage. I use the horse example because the fossil record of horses is exceptionally well represented with many finds. If evolution is true, shouldn’t there be examples of transitional stages between Miohippus and Mesohippus? The creationists say that there are not. Well, there are, and in abundance. You can tell people that there aren’t, but you’re either intentionally lying or intentionally refusing to inform yourself on a subject you’re claiming to be authoritative on. Kathleen Hunt of the University of Washington writes:
A typical Miohippus was distinctly larger than a typical Mesohippus, with a slightly longer skull. The facial fossa was deeper and more expanded. In addition, the ankle joint had changed subtly. Miohippus also began to show a variable extra crest on its upper cheek teeth. In later horse species, this crest became a characteristic feature of the teeth. This is an excellent example of how new traits originate as variations in the ancestral population.
The laypersons need look no deeper than Wikipedia to find a long list of transitional fossils. But be aware that many species known only from the fossil record may be known by only one skeleton, often incomplete. The older fossil records are simply too sparse to expect any form of completeness, especially if you’re looking for complete transitions. It’s not going to happen. However, the theory of punctuated equilibrium predicts that in many cases there will be no transitional fossils, so in a lot of these cases, creationists are pointing to the absence of fossils that evolutionary theory predicts probably never existed. -
They don’t exist because there aren’t any, none, nada, not one macroevolutionary fossil from simple to more complex life form! Not one!
-
An example of a transitional fossil might be an animal that glides instead of one that flies. It can’t fully fly like say a bird but it also doesn’t not fly. It’s in between. Another would probably be neanderthal’s.
-
I think my ex might help answer that question for you.
-
There are absolutely no links. My 8 year son figured that out.
-
Missing.
-
They are missing… which is kinda funny since after years of this hypothesis we have NEVER found one! Don’t forget we should find whole groups of these “missing links” not just one. We need at least a male and female, but in reality the “missing links” should have a full group!
It’s a terrible idea that should be repudiated on the basis of both faith and science!
-
Evolution is a big lie, proving there is a sucker born every minute
-
they dont exist
-
Because the change of kinds is only rmtrue in men’s minds
-
To the OP. Please stop asking probing questions. Evolution does not need any thinking outside of the box. Just stay in the box and keep the lid closed.
-
Macroevolution is a big fairy tale with no evidence. It can’t be science because it cannot be observed, tested, or repeated. It also breaks two scientific laws: the law of biogenesis and the second law of thermodynamics.
-
It’s the Democrat party.
-
In thin air⁉️
-
Is it just me or does anybody else think that the people that came up with the name “missing link” did so to allow for those links to never actually be found?
-
Exactly
-
There called evolutionary scientists lol .
-
Evolution is not true in every sense of that word.
-
If evolution is true then why it be called a theory. When Darwin was studying forms of adaptation within beard he came up with evolution by saying that bird evolved. The term often used in this case is Micro-evolution: the change with in it kind, plants, or animal. But a more better term is Adaptive variation…because birds and other animal simply adapt to survive.
Frankly I havent seen a really good reason to believe that evolution is a fact. It just pure nonsense to me.
-
WHY do we allow the evolutionists to brainwash us with terms that reinforce a theory that not only has never been proven, Darwinian Evolution doesn’t even qualify as a Theory! Think: “Missing link,” implies that the chain exists except for a few links. There is no chain! The Fossil Record trashes the claim of a chain. Darwin’s “Common Ancestor” and “Tree of Life” DO NOT EXIST outside of his overactive imagination. They tell us of the “simple cell,” as if Life began with “simple” single-celled organisms. First, there is no such thing as a “simple” cell. Second, the Law of Biogenesis pulls the plug on Life spontaneously arising from the random merging of biochemical. Finally, there is the incessant claim of “adapted” traits and/or characteristics of various species, while there is no evidence that an identified species was ever without the alleged “adaptation.” But evolutionists will not admit that a species always had a particular survival trait: that would point to Creation!
-
Evolution and creation co-exist.
-
there is no proof of evolution. genesis speaks of special creation of original pairs of animals and man.
-
If evolution is true, why hasn’t anything of its kind changed?
-
The missing link is not only absent in the fossil record. Life should be full of organisms with not completely developed parts. But in that case the atheist would say that evolution has probably finalized?
-
Darwin didn’t even know if there were any in his day. There’s still none … why ? Because they don’t exist. God created everything in their Kinds !
-
look around in some of these rooms on here and you might find some of the missing links
-
the mysterious prooooceeeeesss……
-
Evolution is the substance of fossils hoped for the evidence of links not seen.
-
It’s only true in the text books written by evolutionists, and therefore does not require falsifiable evidence
-
Why would somebody come to a religious group to learn about evolution?
-
Calvanists are the missing link ?.
-
There are currently 1.2 million known species on earth, but an estimated 8.7 left to be discovered. If we haven’t even discovered 85% of the living species on earth, imagine how many species we haven’t discovered throughout history. We have fossils from very few extinct species. It is not especially common for remains to be fossilized. And you have to be looking for them.
Many of those “missing links” won’t look terribly different from their predecessors. Evolutionary changes are gradual over thousands of years in complex organisms.
What I’ve never understood is why people think God didn’t use evolution to create the world.
-
Fossil record has 100 million examples and none are “missing links”. Believe me… atheists are pissed!
-
[…] If evolution is true where are the missing links? […]
Comments