GR>In point of fact, in rocks that are physically lower than the Devonian, ther
GR>is no proven evidence of tetrapods at all. Thus the fact that this sequence
GR>occurs in the uppermost Devonian, prior to the appearance of tetrapods shoul
GR>say something. Why are there no tetrapods in the lowermost rocks? If you ar
GR>going to try to tell someone in Sunday school that your position is correct,
GR>what are you going to say when you are someday asked this question?
GR>Remember, that the prime piece of information concerning the age of a rock i
GR>the rocks which are above and below it.
I would say ...
"This is a classic example of interpreting from a presumption of
evolution... i.e. the absence of evidence is interpreted that the
organisms did not exist, that "appearance before" other organisms
demonstrates evolutionary ancestry, and the age of sedimentary rock is
often determined by index fossils of presumed age.
Regarding the Stegocephalia, W.B. Yapp wrote in Borradailes Manual of
Elementary Zoology...
"Although they were, so far as is known, the earliest land animals, the
chance of their having given rise to any existing descendents seems
remote... The modern species of amphibia, which have few ancient
relatives and no known ancestry, are placed in three sub-classes."
Regarding the Choanichthyes...
"In general, apart from the possession of lungs, their characters are
primitive and elasmobranch-like, and ... they are even more primitive
than the cartelaginous fishes... the gut of the modern Dipnoi is
ciliated"
Yes class, evolutionists differ on the meaning of the Devonian series."
----------------------------------------------
I reviewed your post regarding the Devonian fish to amphibian
transitional sequence from August 28th. The data that you gave said the
following.
578-552 mya no gills, lungs present, legs present
378 mya gills present, lungs present, lobe fins
368 mya no gills, lungs present, 7 digit hind legs
362 mya gills present, lungs present, 8 digit hind legs
giving rise to amphibious Tetrapods... gills present, lungs present, 5
digits or less today
If your data is correct this shows oscillation rather than transition,
and is not as smooth as Stephen wisely noted. It can also be interpreted
as existing created diversity seen in sedimentary deposits at relative
points in time. It can be utilized by Steve Jones PC approach because of
the distinct and sudden appearance. A host of models can incorporate it,
but I believe that it is a poor proof of evolutionary transition.
Paul Durham
to: IN:GRMorton@gnn.com
cc: IN:evolution@calvin.edu