(March 2, 2014 at 10:20 pm)Spage Wrote: Lots of the species that actually have pictures are either silly drawings
Have you considered what they might be drawings of?
(March 2, 2014 at 10:20 pm)Spage Wrote: or look like they were run over by a car.
Or several thousands tons pressure in rock strata. At least you concede they exist.
(March 2, 2014 at 10:20 pm)Spage Wrote: Similarly, a ton of them are fish and other smaller creatures, which we see an abundance of today.
And?
(March 2, 2014 at 10:20 pm)Spage Wrote: Fossils like tiktaalik are great; few more of those would be fantastic. But I still just see a lot of gaps.
I guess you either missed my post or dismissed it. I shall reiterate the core point here.
How many gaps, do you think, are there between this stage:
and this one:
?
Does our inability to provide a continuous, unbroken, step-by-step chain of photographs for your benefit mean that biological procreation and maturity is impossible?
(March 2, 2014 at 10:20 pm)Spage Wrote: And if big creatures are so hard to fossilize, why are there multiple fossils of so many dinosaurs?
It's not only big creatures that are hard to fossilise; the conditions for fossilisation are so complex that it's remarkable we have as many fossils as we do.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'