Examples Of Transitional Fossils
1.3 Transitional fossils
A transitional fossil is any fossilised remains of a life form that has traits common to both a presumed ancestral group and its presumed derived descendant group. Transitional fossils are used as evidence to support evolutionary theory as they are suggested to demonstrate the gradual transition from one species to another through a multitude of changes.
In essence, the transitional fossils are the remains of the species that have gone extinct, and these species are represented on the phylogenetic tree. As reportedly most species go extinct, finding fossilised remains of them is virtually the only way of proving their one-time existence. However, only a very tiny fraction of species fossilise and can be found in fossil …show more content…
These are known as atavisms and are considered to be the reappearance of a lost trait or characteristic. This is proposed as supporting evidence for evolutionary theory as it suggests that through some form of mechanism an old developmental pathway may be reactivated causing an old feature or characteristic to reappear.
Now, firstly it is important to note that there are very few examples of actual atavisms because they are considered to be a rare occurrence. The most cited examples are new-born babies with tails, and wales and dolphins with hind legs. However, even if a large proportion of atavisms were present, would this be good scientific evidence for evolutionary theory? The answer is no. This is not scientific evidence at all. It is an interesting observation, that is all. It goes nowhere to proving our default hypothesis. Just because a rare abnormality arises in one member of a species, this does not mean a single-cell organism can change into a man through a series of random mutations and to think so would be irrational. It is a presumption to state that these features arise due to ancestors having had them previously as this has never been witnessed, observed, or reproduced, and this is not a testable statement. It is therefore an unscientific claim. All we can scientifically state from the observation of atavisms is that some members of a species develop strange features that are presumed to have existed on older or extinct species. Remember, many mutations create very strange new features (such as with diseases) which have nothing to do with evolutionary theory, so therefore there is no reason to presume that atavisms have anything to do with evolution and common
A transitional fossil is any fossilised remains of a life form that has traits common to both a presumed ancestral group and its presumed derived descendant group. Transitional fossils are used as evidence to support evolutionary theory as they are suggested to demonstrate the gradual transition from one species to another through a multitude of changes.
In essence, the transitional fossils are the remains of the species that have gone extinct, and these species are represented on the phylogenetic tree. As reportedly most species go extinct, finding fossilised remains of them is virtually the only way of proving their one-time existence. However, only a very tiny fraction of species fossilise and can be found in fossil …show more content…
These are known as atavisms and are considered to be the reappearance of a lost trait or characteristic. This is proposed as supporting evidence for evolutionary theory as it suggests that through some form of mechanism an old developmental pathway may be reactivated causing an old feature or characteristic to reappear.
Now, firstly it is important to note that there are very few examples of actual atavisms because they are considered to be a rare occurrence. The most cited examples are new-born babies with tails, and wales and dolphins with hind legs. However, even if a large proportion of atavisms were present, would this be good scientific evidence for evolutionary theory? The answer is no. This is not scientific evidence at all. It is an interesting observation, that is all. It goes nowhere to proving our default hypothesis. Just because a rare abnormality arises in one member of a species, this does not mean a single-cell organism can change into a man through a series of random mutations and to think so would be irrational. It is a presumption to state that these features arise due to ancestors having had them previously as this has never been witnessed, observed, or reproduced, and this is not a testable statement. It is therefore an unscientific claim. All we can scientifically state from the observation of atavisms is that some members of a species develop strange features that are presumed to have existed on older or extinct species. Remember, many mutations create very strange new features (such as with diseases) which have nothing to do with evolutionary theory, so therefore there is no reason to presume that atavisms have anything to do with evolution and common