These sound like insurmountable problems, but if evolution is true
there must have been creatures that made the leap successfully. In 2004
Neil Shubin and his team set themselves the challenge of finding exactly
this transitional fossil. What they discovered was astonishing.
Their
success was not entirely down to good luck. The critical time period
was already known. Fossils from rocks 385 million years old all look
like fish, younger rocks dated at 365 million years old reveal fossils
that are all recognisably amphibian or reptile. To find a relative of
the transitional species between fish and land-dwelling animals Shubin
knew he had to concentrate on rocks that were 375 million years old,
preferably laid down in an ancient river or stream and which were now
exposed on the surface.
And along comes Tiktaalik. Proof of transition from water dweller to land dweller. Amazing. So much information from one fossil.
A picture is brought into a court room. A snap shot of a man. We'll call him Joe. Three lawyers are going to give their argument to the court based on one picture. Each will use the picture to prove something completely different.
Lawyer 1 will prove that Joe was walking forward when the picture was taken.
Lawyer 2 will prove that Joe was walking backward when the picture was taken.
Lawyer 3 will prove that Joe was neither walking forwards or backwards when the picture was taken. He was motionless.
The judge dismisses them all. None have proven their case. No matter what colourful language and illustrations they used they do not have sufficient evidence. After all, it is only a picture.
Why would anyone jump to the conclusion that transition from water dweller to land dweller is taking place, from one fossil? Why could not a similar case be given for this fossil proving transition from land dweller to water dweller? Why not a strong case for an animal, complete and able to function just fine the way it is?