Argument #1: Transitional Fossils

[Fidel_Castronaut]

What about what these scholars have said?

"transitional fossils have not been found because they don't exist" (Jeffrey H. Schwartz, University of Pittsburgh professor of anthropology).

A Google search of this quote only results in three Creationist blog posts.

Source?

"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution" (Stephen J. Gould, evolutionary paleontologist of Harvard University).

Hey look, you forgot the rest of the text your creationist blog post quote-mined that from:

"All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt. Gradualists usually extract themselves from this dilemma by invoking the extreme imperfection of the fossil record." (Gould, Stephen J., The Panda's Thumb, 1980, p. 189)

[Following right after]

"Although I reject this argument (for reasons discussed in ["The Episodic Nature of Evolutionary Change"]), let us grant the traditional escape and ask a different question. Even though we have no direct evidence for smooth transitions, can we invent a reasonable sequence of intermediate forms -- that is, viable, functioning organisms -- between ancestors and descendants in major structural transitions? Of what possible use are the imperfect incipient stages of useful structures? What good is half a jaw or half a wing? The concept of preadaptation provides the conventional answer by permitting us to argue that incipient stages performed different functions. The half jaw worked perfectly well as a series of gill-supporting bones; the half wing may have trapped prey or controlled body temperature. I regard preadaptation as an important, even an indispensable, concept. But a plausible story is not necessarily true. I do not doubt that preadaptation can save gradualism in some cases, but does it permit us to invent a tale of continuity in most or all cases? I submit, although it may only reflect my lack of imagination, that the answer is no, and I invoke two recently supported cases of discontinuous change in my defense.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/m...rt1-3.html

Gould isn't arguing against evolution, he's arguing against gradualism.

Rev, why do you not think "thou shall not steal" and "thou shall not lie" do not apply to you?

Answer this, Rev.

You have been caught cherry picking a quotation out of context.