0
Some creationists use this argument as "evidence" against evolution.
However, the flaw in their argument is that fossils do occur, they are in order, they are separated by a large time difference, and they are transitional.
The argument is commonly called the "missing link" problem, and when Darwin first developed his ideas, it actually was. He explicitly recognised it as such, and came up with several ways it would either deny or help support his theory (such as by finding rabbits in the PreCambrian era, or by the presence of missing links, which were later found). However, in the 140 years since then, we have uncovered thousands of fossilized species, each of which is a tranistional form in the evolution of several other species.
The best example is that of our own ancestry; several species have been discovered, each getting closer and closer to human as we know it, and at the same time, further from the simple ape-like mammals we began as. All of this happened - according to the geological timeframe - over a period of several million years.
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoWe don't know what idea is correct, natural catastrophes or Charles Lyells assumption of macroevolution, therefore the geological column can be neither evidence for or against macroevolution.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What are the three major strengths of darwins work?
evidence in real time - finches fossil evidence evidence now backed up by genetics geological evidence of strata not just fossils
What are Large-scale evolutionary changes that usually take place over long periods of time?
Macroevolution
Which scientific principle states that younger rock layers are generally deposited on top of older rock layers and why?
Superposition
Changes in groups of organisms over time produce variations in a population this relates to?
both Macroevolution and Microevolution Good luck with Novanet. God help you.
Oligocene and Miocene are?
They are geological epochs.
Why is the geological column considered evidence for evolution?
cause of county affirs
Why his the geological column not really evidence for evolution?
The geological column is an abstract, and ideal. What it really signifies is the mechanism of superposition, the fact that through geological times, newer layers are formed on top of older layers. The geological column can be used as a guide for reconstructing the geological history of a formation, but one should take care: geological processes, like all of nature, are messy, and geological strate can be inverted or skewed, so that newer strata may be beside or even below older strata. The inferred age of a geological stratum may be used to assist in dating fossils, and thereby aid in constructing histories for particular lineages. But in itself, this geological notion has little to do with biological evolution.
Why is the geological column considered to be evidence for evolution?
In itself, it isn't. The geological column is a principle used in the preliminary dating of geological features relative to other features. Palaeontology uses estimates gained through geological dating to establish timeframes for the emergence of particular forms in the fossil record. These timeframes in themselves also aren't evidence for common descent, in themselves. What is evidence for common descent is that derived forms are almost always found in geological features that are younger than the layers the oldest basal forms are found in. For example: no primates before mammals; no apes before primates; no humans before apes; and so on.
What is geological column used for?
the geologic column is used for identifying the layers in a rock sequence.
Compare geologic time with geologic column?
a geologic time scale has eras, made up of periods, epochs, etc. hope this helps! :D
Geological evidence of the age of the earth includes?
To summarize, there are three types of geological evidence of the age of the earth. These are:Gradual processes of rock formationThe fossil recordRadioactive dating
Which statements about microevolution and macroevolution is true?
microevolution can lead to macroevolution
Is it possible to go somewhere in the world and see all major layers of the geological column in one geological formation?
answ2. No. For several reasons. When there is a major extinction event, there is not necessarily any carry-through of evolution of species.Where there is a physical interruption to a column, for example by erosion, there may be a 'regional unconformity'.But there are enough of the pieces of the puzzle left for the concept to be very useful, even if no perfect example can be found.By analogy, the Rosetta Stone is incomplete - would we consider that evidence that it was never complete.There is a valuable saying "Absence of evidence does not prove evidence of absence."A1. No. The idea of the geologic column is a hypothetical one. There is no proof that it exists, so nowhere like this on Earth.
What is true about microevolution and macroevolution?
Micro evolution can lead to macroevolution
Large scale evolutionary trends are the result of?
macroevolution .........novanet
What remains or physical evidence of an organism preserved by geological processes?
fossils
How does anyone know when the Grand Canyon was formed?
By studying the geological evidence.
