Replies

How about these (not to scale):

Thanks for the pictures. But that doesn't look to be any more variation then has happened to the dog, in the last 150 years or whatever. Compare a great dane to a teacup poodle -- the bones you list don't appear to me to provide evidence of anything other then variation within a kind (which I already know is true. I grew up on a farm.)

Is that really all the change there was in 45 million years? No more then intentional dog variation in 150 years?

But the sort of "yet undiscovered intermediate fossils" which I was talking about are the sort that get from dog to horse, and from fish to dog. There are certainly lots of fossils from each group, but what's lacking is the fossils that build a fine chain from one group to another.

-Jesse

PS: Also let us not forget that the shape of these skeletons and their posture has been somewhat influenced by the preconceptions of the people who pinned them all back together. I'm not saying they did it wrong just that we need to remember that a person, who never saw the animal alive, did pin them together.

Is that really all the change there was in 45 million years? No more then intentional dog variation in 150 years?

No. To imply that is to ignore the huge changes that occurred.

For example, you are not seeing the change from 4 toes on each front foot and 3 on the hind feet, to only one on each foot in modern horses.

the bones you list don't appear to me to provide evidence of anything other then variation within a kind

You might have a point if they were all running around today, or if Equus skeletons were found mixed in with Orohippus skeletons. But they're not.

But the sort of "yet undiscovered intermediate fossils" which I was talking about are the sort that get from dog to horse, and from fish to dog.

Maybe you don't mean that literally, but in case you do: nobody thinks dogs evolved into horses, and only in the broadest sense do they think fish evolved into dogs. You've got to go all the way back to the development of jaws to find the common ancestor of fish and dogs, and then you have one line developing into today's fishes, and another leading to dogs (with lots of other branches, of course). There are transitional specimens along each branch, but nothing that shows something intermediate between branches--one wouldn't expect there to be.