No Transitional Species
One of the most important pieces of evidence against evolution is the lack of transitional species. A transitional species is a plant or animal that represents a transition between two known, different types of life. For example: the transition between fish and reptiles, reptiles and birds, apes and man, etc. Since these forms link two different species, they are also known as transitional links.
Considering that there are almost 2 million (!) species on earth today and the time it would take for a new species to evolve is many millions of years, there should be billions of transitional forms, had evolution happened.
Duane T. Gish, The Origin of Mammals :
If this view of evolution is true, the fossil record should produce an enormous number of transitional forms. Natural history museums should be overflowing with undoubted intermediate forms. About 250,000 fossil species have been collected and classified…Applying evolution theory and the laws of probability, most of these 250,000 species should represent transitional forms.
The problem that evolutionists have is that there are no transitional links in the fossil record! Nowhere can we find half fish and half chickens, half rabbit and half horses. All we find everywhere are distinct species. And these species appear completely developed; they haven’t evolved from anything and don’t evolve into anything else. All the fossils we find are either species alive today or extinct ones. The extinction of species may be the consequence of the Flood, and it does by no means prove evolution.
Dr. Walt Brown, In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, page 10:
Fossil links are missing between numerous plants, between single-celled forms of life and invertebrates, between invertebrates and vertebrates, between fish and amphibians, between amphibians and reptiles, between reptiles and mammals, between reptiles and birds, between primates and other mammals, and between apes and other primates. The fossil record has been studied so thoroughly that it is safe to conclude that these gaps are real; they will never be filled.
The problem of the fossil gaps between species was already emerging in Darwin’s day. He knew that this was the most serious objection to his theory. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species:
… the number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed [must] truly be enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory [of evolution].
But Darwin tried to assure believers in his theory that this was due to the imperfection of the fossil record. He said that the gaps would be filled as time passed.
It’s 150 years later, and the gaps still haven’t been filled. In fact, there are many new gaps. Evolutionists know that this can shatter their useless theory to pieces, and they still resort to Darwin’s argument about the imperfect fossil record. This argument has lost its meaning, since so many fossils have been found:
W. I. Bird, The Origin of Species Revisited, 1954, p. 48.:
The reason for abrupt appearances and gaps can no longer be attributed to the imperfection of the fossil record as it was by Darwin when paleontology was a young science. With over 200,000,000 catalogued specimens of about 250,000 fossil species, many evolutionist paleontologist such as Stanley argue that the fossil record is sufficient. [emphasis ours]
Not only are there gaps, but each and every species in the fossil record appears out of nowhere completely developed and doesn’t change. Rabbits have always been rabbits, cows have always been cows, and nothing else. There are no signs of evolution in the fossil record.
The evolutionary tree is missing its trunk and branches, which connect the twigs. In fact, it only has the twigs: the different, non-changing species.
No Transitional Organs
Besides the missing transitional species, there are no transitional organs either, e.g. there are no half scale and half feathers, no half leg and half wings (when reptiles are supposed to have turned into birds).
The other problem with transitional species is that if they ever lived, they would quickly have died and not passed on their genes. When evolving into a bird, the leg of a reptile would become a bad leg long before it became a good wing. Natural selection would select the reptile with normal legs, and the one that started to evolve into a bird would be unfit and die. Therefore, evolution would not occur. (see our page: Microevolution and Macroevolution)
How could the eye evolve for example? Natural selection wouldn’t select an animal with a partially evolved eye. For an eye to work properly, all its parts need to be in their place. A transitional eye wouldn’t be any good, and that’s why we never find such things in the fossil record. The eye could only appear with all its parts at the same time. This can only be done by a Creator.
Darwin was speculating in The Origin of Species, how the eye could have evolved, but he admitted:
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.
The Archaeopteryx Fraud
If you ask an evolutionist to tell you a transitional link, he will probably say: Archaeopteryx. So, what is, or what was this creature? Archaeopteryx is supposed to be a transition between a dinosaur—a reptile— and a bird, basically a bird-sized, feathered reptile. There is much evidence that this fossil is a fraud. If this is a real transitional species, it is the only one to be found anywhere on earth.
There are 6 alleged fossils of this animal. There should be millions, if it was a transitional link. Only 2 of these 6 fossils have feathers, the London and Berlin specimens. Since 1980, prominent scientists have charged that the two Archaeopteryx fossils with visible feathers are forgeries. “Allegedly, thin layers of cement were spread on two fossils of a chicken-size dinosaur, called Compsognathus. Bird feathers were then imprinted into the wet cement.
After examining this fossil from closer, we will see that everything points to it being a fraud. (See a detailed study with pictures at What Was Archaeopteryx?)
All Archaeopteryx fossils come from the Solnhofen limestone formation in Bavaria, Germany. It is interesting that they were all found here, and that the owners of the mine made a great profit from selling the fossils.
The body of this animal strangely resembles Compsognathus, a bird-sized dinosaur. Were it not for the feathers, Archaeopteryx would be classified as Compsognathus. The feathers are exactly the same as for modern birds. The forger of Archaeopteryx probably just made feather imprints on a fossil of Compsognathus. This is also proven by the fact that all the feathers of Archaeopteryx are all laid out flat where the main slab and counterslab meet (these are the two sides of a fossil).
This animal probably couldn’t fly, since it doesn’t have a sternum (breast bone), which all birds and even bats need to have.
Other evidence pointing to forgery:
- The feather imprints show double strike, which means that the feathers were imprinted twice in slightly displaced positions, when the forger placed the two blocks of limestone together.
- Only the London specimen has a visible furcula, unique feature of birds.This furcula (or wishbone) is abnormally large and upside-down. It is even broken. How could such a flexible bone buried in soft sediments break, unless the forger accidentally broke it when taking it out of another fossil? The imprint of the furcula on the counter slab is not smooth, and shows the rough work of a chisel.
- There is a strange, small grained material (called a “chewing gum blob”) under the feather imprints. This material differs from the limestone surrounding the fossil. This is probably the wet cement used by the forger to make the feather imprints.
- The main and counter slabs do not perfectly mate. There are bumps on the counterslab, made of the same fine-grained material found under the feathers. These bumps don’t have any corresponding depressions on the other slab.
There was much disagreement about these fossils until 1986, when they were analyzed with an X-ray resonance spectrograph, and definitive conclusions reached. It was found that the fine-grained material was significantly different in chemistry from the surrounding limestone, and the rock of the quarry in Germany where the fossils were found.
It has been proven that Archaeopteryx is a forgery that has deceived scientists for over 125 years.
- Stephen Jay Gould, “Evolution’s Erratic Pace”, Natural History, May 1977:
“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.”
- Dr. Niles Eldredge, paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History, “Missing, Believed Nonexistent”, Manchester Guardian, 26 November 1978:
“The search for ‘missing links’ between various living creatures, like humans and apes, is probably fruitless…because they probably never existed as distinct transitional types…But no one has yet found any evidence of such transitional creatures…If it is not the fossil record which is incomplete then it must be the theory.”
- Lyall Watson, “The Water People”, Science Digest, May 1982:
“Modern apes, for instance, seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no yesterday, no fossil record. And the true origin of modern humans—of upright, naked, toolmaking, big-brained beings—is, if we are to be honest with ourselves, an equally mysterious matter.”
- Dr. Collin Patterson, a paleontologist at the Natural History Museum in Britain, when asked why he hadn’t included any illustrations of transitional forms in his book, Evolution, he replied in a letter:
“I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them…I will lay it on the line—there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.” (Letter of Dr. Collin Patterson to Luther D. Sunderland)
- Dr. Walt Brown, In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, page148.
1. Dr. Walt Brown, In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood
2. Vance Ferrell, Evolution Disproved Series, Origin of Life, Fossils and Strata.