Somebody forgot to tell the late SJ Gould and the rest of the evos who keep inventing creative ways to explain the lack of transitionals.
Why do you imagine I'm panicking now?
Because of the way you and others ignore the content of the posted article and quickly slip into name calling and other forms of the ad hominem fallacy.
Now I know you've read the actual quote by Gould as it's been posted on these threads numerous times. He did not say there wes a lack of transitionals. He said there was a dearth of transitionals. There is a universe of difference between the two concepts, at least for those of us with a modicum of intelligence.
Gould said no such thing, as I'm sure you well know.
This is the old creationist "quote Gould grossly out of context" misrepresentation. Let's hear what Gould himself had to say about that, shall we?
Kirtley Mather, who died last year at age ninety, was a pillar of both science and Christian religion in America and one of my dearest friends. The difference of a half-century in our ages evaporated before our common interests. The most curious thing we shared was a battle we each fought at the same age. For Kirtley had gone to Tennessee with Clarence Darrow to testify for evolution at the Scopes trial of 1925. When I think that we are enmeshed again in the same struggle for one of the best documented, most compelling and exciting concepts in all of science, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.Note that this was written in 1981. Since then, countless more transitional fossils, both between species and between larger groups, have been found.[...]
Scientists regard debates on fundamental issues of theory as a sign of intellectual health and a source of excitement. Science is—and how else can I say it?—most fun when it plays with interesting ideas, examines their implications, and recognizes that old information might be explained in surprisingly new ways. Evolutionary theory is now enjoying this uncommon vigor. Yet amidst all this turmoil no biologist has been lead to doubt the fact that evolution occurred; we are debating how it happened. We are all trying to explain the same thing: the tree of evolutionary descent linking all organisms by ties of genealogy. Creationists pervert and caricature this debate by conveniently neglecting the common conviction that underlies it, and by falsely suggesting that evolutionists now doubt the very phenomenon we are struggling to understand.
[...]
The third argument is more direct: transitions are often found in the fossil record. [...] For that matter, what better transitional form could we expect to find than the oldest human, Australopithecus afarensis, with its apelike palate, its human upright stance, and a cranial capacity larger than any ape’s of the same body size but a full 1,000 cubic centimeters below ours? If God made each of the half-dozen human species discovered in ancient rocks, why did he create in an unbroken temporal sequence of progressively more modern features—increasing cranial capacity, reduced face and teeth, larder body size? Did he create to mimic evolution and test our faith thereby?
Faced with these facts of evolution and the philosophical bankruptcy of their own position, creationists rely upon distortion and innuendo to buttress their rhetorical claim. If I sound sharp or bitter, indeed I am—for I have become a major target of these practices.
[...]
A trend, we argued, is more like climbing a flight of stairs (punctuated and stasis) than rolling up an inclined plane. Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists—whether through design or stupidity, I do not know—as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups. Yet a pamphlet entitled "Harvard Scientists Agree Evolution Is a Hoax" states: "The facts of punctuated equilibrium which Gould and Eldredge…are forcing Darwinists to swallow fit the picture that Bryan insisted on, and which God has revealed to us in the Bible."
-- Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory," May 1981
Come back when you've got something to "support" your side which isn't just a dishonest twisting of someone's actual position.
One way to judge the validity of the creationists is by how often they lie about things. Misquoting people for deceitful "support" is so common among creationists that there are now countless webpages devoted to correcting their lies. For example:
Online resources documenting antievolutionist misquotations
The Fossil Hominid FAQ of The Talk.Origins Archive has several pages on creationist misquotations on human evolution:Here are some other pages of The Talk.Origins Archive that are about creationist misquotes:
- Creationist Arguments: Misquotes (Many specific examples are provided.)
- Duane Gish quote about ER 1470
- Creationist Arguments: The Monkey Quote
- Rear view of Sinanthropus
The following articles from The Talk.Origins Archive that that, in part, address creationist misquotations:
- The Revised Quote Book: Looking at how Creationists Quote Evolutionists
- Patterson Misquoted: A Tale of Two 'Cites'
- Clarence Darrow: Misquoted by Creationists
- Missing Supernova Remnants as Evidence of a Young Universe?: A Case of Fabrication
- Muller and Mutations
Here are some pages on the web that address creationist misquotations:
- Lucy's Knee Joint: A Case Study in Creationists' Willingness to Admit their Errors
- Creationist Whoppers
- Geochronology kata John Woodmorappe
- Supernovae, Supernova Remnants and Young Earth Creationism FAQs
- Thrust Faults
- 29 Evidences for Macroevolution: A Response to Ashby Camp's "Critique"
- January 2003 Feedback: Ilya Prigogine Quote
A searchable archive on creationist quotes can be found at Antievolution Quotes and Misquotes: The Archive.
- Hiding the Numbers to Defame Radiometric Dating: A Few Examples of the Many Misused References in Woodmorappe (1999)
- More Classic Misquotations in Woodmorappe (1999)
- Chopping a Title Hides the Truth
- Quote-Mining...The Tradition Continues - ICR Representative Frank Sherwin Visits Eureka College
- Creationist Misquotations
- Quotes About Evolution
- Gee Responds to Discovery Institute Use of Quotations
- Discovery Institute Quotes Clark Out of Context
- Gilbert Rebukes Discovery Institute for Use of Quote
- Coyne Exposes Discovery Institute's "old tricks"
- Doubting Darwinism through Creative License
- Intelligent Design Bibliography Misleading
- Misquotations in the Creation Book
- George Gaylord Simpson Said There Are No Transitional Fossils?
- Tom Kemp Said that the Mammal-like Reptiles Are Not Transitions Between Mammals and Reptiles?
- "Dawn Horse" Is a Good "Ancestor" For Rhinos Discredits Horse Evolution?
- Simpson Rejected the Transformation From "Dawn Horse" to Modern Horse?
- Niles Eldredge Says that the Geologic Column is Circular Reasoning?
- D.M.S. Watson Admitted Evolutionists Dogmatically Rejected Creation?
- Creation Science is Garbage (This article has an example of a creationist citing a negative review as if it were an endorsement.)
- Criticism of moth study no challenge to evolution
- Charges of fraud misleading
- Famous Quotes found in books
- Just what DO they say Dr. Morris?
- Does Dr Jonathan Sarfati Have Any Integrity?
- Creationist "Out of Context" Quotes
- Creation Book: a critical analysis
- Re: Disowing Darwin
- Ted Holden's "intermediate fossil" quotes from Walter ReMine's "Biotic Message"
- Another Creationist Misquote (News report in Science two decades ago screwed-up and the creationists continue the error.)
- Lie Ho! Lie Ho! It's off to the quote mine we go...
- Michael Ruse on the misuse of his religion comments