The horse's fossil record shows several long-extinct species anatomically similar to horses but smaller, and with a greater number of toes per foot. Using radiocarbon dating, scientists have found that the older the species of horse, the smaller it is, and the greater the number of toes. This supports the idea that certain features of modern equine anatomy, such as single hooves and large size, were favored by natural selection, and thus passed down at a greater frequency over the generations.
Here are some statistics on some proto-horse species, compared with the modern horse:
Statistics courtesy of Wikipedia.
how should i know
find it your self horse brain
......haha wow your funny, *sarcasm* :(
Fossils are not used to oppose the theory of evolution. They acutually support it in every way. So far not one fossil has been found that is not exactly where you would expect it to be if evolution were true. As we dig deeper we go further back in time and see by piecing fossils together how organisms evolved over time. Although we don't need fossils to support the fact that evolution is happening, it's a nice bonus to have in support of the theory.
If you mean, "are they ignorant for being in evolution," then no. The theory of evolution is a well-founded, heavily detailed theory with an enormous amount of evidence behind it. The theory of evolution is used to study disease. It's used to study agriculture. It's used to bring together all of the sciences pertaining to life.
The branches of genetics, paleontology, observed natural selection and speciation all support evolution. Examples: (Genetics) Human chromosome 2 resulted from a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes. (Paleontology) Evolution of the horse. (Natural selection) Observed in Peppered moths. (Speciation) The Hawthorn Fly
The transition of the horse from the Eocene to today is well documented in the fossil record and the genetic/biochemical record compares favorable and strongly with the fossil record. So, evolution, the change in allele frequency over time in a population of organisms (change over time ), is shown and only natural selection is known to produce such great adaptive change in individuals leading to a populations evolution.
Intelligent design, Hovind Theory Added: The above are not scientific theories but more ideological assertions in nature. No positive evidence supports either assertion.
to explain the relationship
Fossils can be used as evidence for evolution because they can show the development of a species over a long period of time.
the theory about how organisms change over time.
When we're discussing Darwin's evolutionary theory, we're discussing only one "type of" evolution: evolution by reproductive variation and natural selection. The term 'evolution' is also used in cosmology and astronomy (eg. the evolution of the cosmos, the galaxy, or stellar evolution). But when used in this context, the term refers to something entirely different than what Darwin was talking about, and what evolutionary theory is about.
When we're discussing Darwin's evolutionary theory, we're discussing only one "type of" evolution: evolution by reproductive variation and natural selection. The term 'evolution' is also used in cosmology and Astronomy (eg. the evolution of the cosmos, the galaxy, or stellar evolution). But when used in this context, the term refers to something entirely different than what Darwin was talking about, and what evolutionary theory is about.
It was used to discourage the evolution of minions.
Louis pasteur was the one to support th theory of biogenesis.