"Paleontologists ever since Darwin have been searching (largely in vain) for the sequences of insensibly graded series of fossils that would stand as examples of the sort of wholesale transformation of species that Darwin envisioned as the natural product of the evolutionary process. Few saw any reason to demur - though it is a startling fact that ...most species remain recognizably themselves, virtually unchanged throughout their occurrence in geological sediments of various ages." (Eldredge, Niles, "Progress in Evolution?" New Scientist, vol. 110, 1986, p. 55.)
Wrong. First of all Charles Darwin is not the end all be all father of evolution. He didn't even understand the most basic reason for WHY it occurs.
Second, there are examples of gradation of species from one to another. You don't see crap tons and tons of evidence because frankly we haven't uncovered a quarter of all species that have ever went extinct on the planet. Still, regardless, we DO have examples of a long progressive evolution for instance of man from its ancestors. And no, man did not evolve from APES. That is the fallacy all creationists use, mostly because they don't even understand what they are arguing against. Orangutans (our closest living relative) and man evolved from a common _ancestor_, however far that may have been.
Finally, sometimes there are species that have survived far longer than most other species do. However, that does not in fact suggest that other species did not arise from the still existing ancestor. It is specifically the case that a species can arive _and_ die before its originating parent species.
You sir need to go back to school.
A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of their first breath to the moment of their last.
  |
  |
