That’s correct. There will be evolutionary steps in the history of life that will probably never be known.
Actually, we have intermediate fossils for all of those evolutionary transitions, so we do know.
All of the evidence we do have points to random mutations, natural selection, speciation, neutral drift, and the rest of the known evolutionary mechanisms. For example, the evidence for random mutations producing the genetic differences between species can be found here:
When we compare the same gene across many species we observe that introns differ more than exons. This is evidence for natural selection.
When we compare the genomes, physical characteristics, and fossils of many species we observe a nested hierarchy which is evidence for speciation and vertical inheritance.
There is mountains of evidence demonstrating how evolution has shaped life over Earth’s history.
Similarly, meteorologists cannot explain exactly why hurricanes form precisely where and when they do. They know the basic forces that go into creating hurricanes and can simulate the formation of hurricanes, but they can’t explain the origin of any one hurricane in detail. You should be equally dismissive of meteorology. Are you? Ditto for astronomy, geology, epidemiology, zoology, and a bunch of other scientific fields. Are you consistent?
A tempest in a teapot refers to an event that is exaggerated out of proportion, whereas a SEU is an insignificant event that may have far reaching consequences.
If you know how evolution works, please describe the steps involved in the evolution of the breathing-hole on top of a whale’s head from its land-animal ancestor, replete with a description of how and what natural selections and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.
Then please describe the steps involved in the evolution of a whale’s tail from the two hind-legs its land-animal ancestor, replete with a description of how and what natural selections and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.
Finally, please demonstrate that your description is factual, and not just a figment of your imagination.
Considering that whale evolution is somewhat of a poster-child for Darwinism and that scientists claim to know so much about it, surely the abovementioned requests shouldn’t be too difficult to fulfill.
What you’ve described is evidence that evolution has occurred, which I don’t dispute, but which has nothing to do with the point I made. My contention is that science doesn’t know how the macro-evolutionary changes evident in the fossil record occurred … in fact, science seems quite clueless.
For example, let’s start at the beginning with a very basic and primitive macroevolution …
If you know how evolution works, please explain the steps involved in the evolution of a eurkayote from a prokaryote, replete with a description of how and what natural selections and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.
Finally, please demonstrate that your description is factual, and not just a figment of your imagination.
You mean the "blowhole” (the exterior opening to the bony nostrils). Can you not see how the blowhole on the top of the head would be a HUGE advantage for an aquatic creature? We can even see it move from the snout to the top of the head in successive species of whales!!! see this link
If you are going to poo-poo everything I’d like to hear your alternative explanation.
Hm, you can actually see multiple mechanisms in nature currently–not just natural selection, but founder effect, all kinds of things.
Does this make sense? We can demonstrate that all my ancestors (from the Netherlands, Ireland, and German) got together by marriage records and even 23 and Me–but how they exactly met each other, while a known mechanism, isn’t recorded for each individual relationship. It’s not how, that is a question; nor whether.
Thanks.
If you have any clue what minimal criteria are sufficient to demonstrate an adequate understanding of evolution please explain exactly why those are indeed the best choice. Otherwise why should anyone be the least bit interested in what you think it means to “know how evolution works”?
It seems like you’re not really interested in changing your mind or considering evidence given how this thread’s been going. Maybe we could try to narrow this down even further for you, because there’s a lot of great evidence already for the evolution of whales and several fossil finds that were discovered because of the fact of common ancestry. There are also a lot of genetic markers in modern whales that indicate their ancestors used to live on the land. And some other fine pieces of evidence already shared in this thread.
As @beaglelady shared, if you just simply plot out the characteristics that we find in fossils in a chronological timeline, you see the gradual addition of various features that lead to modern cetaceans. A figure of such is reproduced below for you:
I’m not really sure how to best help you, as there seems to be a lot of evidence you are not familiar with or have some built-in default responses for rejecting. It’s pretty tough, but if we can play any role in your journey I am happy for this thread to continue. Otherwise I feel that further conversation with you on this topic is a waste of everyone’s time.
I wasn’t, not until college–there’s a ton of nuance. I think you might find it interesting. I took evolutionary biology as my capstone, led by a guy who discovered a mosquito species in the Himalayas. There’s been a lot of new info in the last few decades, too, that I would have to learn. There are texts out here on how prokaryotes became eukaryotes, for example
Thanks.
