RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (58) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Evolution of the horse; a problem for Darwinism?, For Daniel Smith to present his argument< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 236
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 13 2007,08:29   

Quote (Daniel Smith @ Nov. 12 2007,22:59)
Quote (mitschlag @ Nov. 12 2007,14:07)
The evolution of the horse:

No gradualism here, nossir.  All saltational, yessir.

Fig. 4 from Davison's Manifesto.

The horse is used as an example of evolution in a determined direction - not as an example of saltational change.  The caption reads: "Phyletic size increase in the horse". and is used in the section entitled "Are there laws governing evolution?"

I am well aware of the way Davison was using his Fig. 4.  I quoted it sarcastically for the purpose of showing that the data make the case for gradualism.
Davison (and Schindewolf before him) saw evolution of new types as a saltational event. What followed was a series of constrained variations within that type which usually resulted in over-specialization and extinction.  Oversized organisms were often a sign of this last stage.
Understood.  Interesting ideas.  Any reason to accept them without cocking a skeptical eye and asking for some confirmatory evidence?.  
Did the fact that this illustration was Schindewolf's own - from his book "Basic Questions in Paleontology" - escape you?
You underestimate my reading comprehension, Dan.  Now please let go of my leg.

"You can establish any “rule” you like if you start with the rule and then interpret the evidence accordingly." - George Gaylord Simpson (1902-1984)

  1733 replies since Sep. 18 2007,15:27 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (58) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]