We've crossed swords over this matter before - but on another list. I
write on this occasion as a result of some recent correspondence with
Paul in which I cited the alleged transition as one which stretches the
imagination to breaking point. He responded by suggesting I looked at
the list of evidences that you had compiled at
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/transit.htm
Having now done that, I am wondering whether you would mind clarifying
some of the matters raised, viz
(1) I am a little surprised that the 'timetable' you give fits the
sequence of alleged transitionals so well. Can you confirm that these
temporal data in respect of the sites of discovery - some of which were
widely spread (eg Pennsylvania, Scotland, and Russia) - really preceded
the claimed discoveries? I have to confess, I had no idea that
geological dating in sedimentary deposits was so exact a science these
days! Can you perhaps briefly explain the method(s) used.
(2) Assuming the reported details to be true, how would you respond to
the suggestion that the fossil remains might equally well be interpreted
as relating to created kinds, now extinct?
Sincerely, and with kind regards,
Vernon
Vernon Jenkins MSc
[musician, mining engineer, and formerly Senior Lecturer in Maths and
Computing, the Polytechnic of Wales (now the University of Glamorgan)]
http://homepage.virgin.net/vernon.jenkins/index.htm
http://www.compulink.co.uk/~indexer/miracla1.htm