Why should specimens like these NOT be considered transitional fossils between dinosaurs and birds by creationists? [Spirituality & Religion]
The definition of a transitional form is one which exhibits features which are characteristic of the ancestral organism and other features which are characteristic of the descendant organism.
These fossils fit that description exactly. They show dinosaur features like a toothy snout, long bony tail, clawed forelimbs and gastralia. But they also show avian features like feet adapted to perching rather than running, hollow bones and most conspicuously [i]feathers [/i]which were slightly asymmetrical making them more aerodynamic.
So does the creationist have a legitimate reason to deny this as a transitional form or is their denial anchored in their faith and not in science?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
No that doesn't really clarify anything. What do you mean by a "complete" creature and how does that invalidate the fact that these specimens exhibit characteristics two different "kinds" ?
Please be respectful and do not ignore my question. If you don't want to answer it then at least show me the respect of acknowledging that the question has been asked.
This is the question:
[i][c=#BF0000]What do you mean by a "complete" creature and how does that invalidate the fact that these specimens exhibit characteristics two different "kinds" ?[/c][/i]
The definition of a transitional form is one which exhibits features which are characteristic of the ancestral organism and other features which are characteristic of the descendant organism.
These fossils fit that description exactly. They show exactly what evolution would predict from an intermediary stage between dinosaurs and birds.
If you want more evidence that they should be considered transitional and not just bird "kind" or dinosaur "kind" then take it up with creationists who believe like you that they can't be transition but who can't agree on whether animals like these are birds or dinosaurs😉
@Pikachu [quote]The definition of a transitional form is one which exhibits features which are characteristic of the ancestral organism and other features which are characteristic of the descendant organism.[/quote]
Well then can you be more precise about what kind of answer you're looking for?
I'm not sure what better reason i can give than "Here are the requirements of a transitional fossil and this is why these fossils meet those requirements".🤷🏻
@Pikachu The lack of understanding displayed here would be laughable, if it wasn't so concerning. Even when given a logical and concise answer to his question, @GodSpeed63 can't understand what is being presented.
I'm not sure if he really didn't understand or if he's just trying to tit for tat me since i often point out where his answers have not addressed the question.
Experts in the field told me they were transitional. Although actually i was able to identify a few of the more obvious features like feathers and gastralia myself. I believe them for two reasons. First, because their definition of a transitional form is a reasonable one and these fossils do indeed appear to meet the requirements of that definition. Second, because they belong to a group of people who like [i]nothing better[/i] than proving the other guy wrong about something. So if the vast majority of them agree on what we're looking at, this is sufficient reason to trust that they are correct in their conclusions.
So now that i've answered your question, i'd appreciate it if you answered the last one i asked you:
Is your reason for denying that these fossils are transitional fossils simply that god made them and they didn't evolve?
Uh no. Actually the people who spend their lives studying something tend to [i]understand[/i] it much better than a layman. That's actually what [i]makes [/i]them experts in the field.
Now. I have asked you a question. Please do no continue to be disrespectful by ignoring the question. If you don't want to answer it then at least show me the respect of acknowledging that the question has been asked.
This is the question:
[i][b]Is your reason for denying that these fossils are transitional fossils simply that god made them and they didn't evolve?[/b][/i]
