“Even if you accept evolutionary theory”
Yo.
“–developing a more sophisticated organism in this theoretically “logical” fashion,”
More sophisticated?
Where is that in the theory?
“then there should be a continuum of organisms.”
Like, what? You think that even if we’re the tool users that can reach the Moon, there should be primates that can only use simple tools like sticking sticks into termite mounds, and primates that don’t use tools, and mammals that don’t, and animals that don’t control their own internal temperature, and maybe birds that cannot fly, and maybe life forms that can’t completely survive on their own but live symbiotically with other forms? One celled, and colony creatures, and so on?
huh.
“And why did evolution divert in so many directions–birds, fish, elephants, apes, humans–if there is some force evolving to the maximum?”
Um, evolution is the theory to explain the diversity of life, not a theory to identify a force FOR evolution with any goal.
“Why isn’t everything a human–a superior human?”
Because evolution doesn’t seem to have a goal?
“Darwin specifically stated that his theory hung on the discovery of intermediate forms, and was sure that we would find them.”
Yeah, we know more now.
“ More than a hundred years later we still haven’t found them. Even the earliest fossils don’t show such intermediates.”
Actually, they do. Like i said, we know better, now, than Darwin imagined.
“Take the simple case of ape to human.”
Humans are apes, so you need to specify more.
“ It should be easy to find abundant fossil remains since, according to evolutionary theory, this is the most recent transition.”
You know fuck-all about evolutionary theory, don’t you?
And there are plenty of fossils, we find more all the time.
“If we can find so many fossils of dinosaurs, which are further back in the evolutionary scheme, we should have plenty of evidence of intermediates between apes and humans.”
Your very statement betrays how little you fucking understand the science.
“But we don’t have them. We have very few supposed intermediates–like “Lucy,” based on fanciful reconstruction with a lot of filling in.”
Feel free to actually point out where they made a mistake, then.
I mean, when they criticized Piltdown Man, they could literally point to where they found tools had been used, and the gap between the two fossils
G’head, tell us where Lucy is unsupported fancy.
“ Today we have people with significant congenital abnormalities whose skeletal remains would seem like a missing link.”
Citation needed. Pretty sure paleontologists could identify known abnormalities, especially if they don’t show up in ALL the fossils from that species.
“ So “Lucy” does not make the case, and there should be multiple “Lucys” if the transition from ape to human were true.”
You’re still so wrong it’s funny.