The missing link argument is a well-known one. Using the fossil record, evolutionary biologists have shown the development of traits among many organisms. Examples include the ancestors of human, in which the change from quadrupedal to bipedal movement can be seen, and the transition of whales from land animals to ocean dwelling ones, in which the loss of hind limbs can be observed. However, some organisms have remained inexplicable using missing links.
One such group is the flatfishes, which includes halibut and flounder. Flatfishes have both eyes on one side of their head and, when at rest, display only one side of their body. For years, biologists have tried and failed to find any proof that these fish developed their odd eye placement through transition species. The flatfish have been explained through the ‘hopeful monster’ hypothesis, which is the idea that an organism was at random born with a severe but extremely helpful allele that then became common throughout the population.
Supporters of intelligent design have claimed that the hopeful monster is actually the work of God. They argue that God seized the chance to create a better functioning organism, a decision that gave rise to a hopeful monster. Intelligent design believers have pointed to the conspicuous lack of fossil evidence for many transitional species as proof that organisms are often created by the hand of God, and flatfishes are one of their common examples.
Recently, though, transition fossils have been found for flatfishes. These fossils have eyes on both sides of their heads, but one eye is higher on the head than the other, which evolutionists are arguing is proof that this species was likely undergoing natural selection in favor of both eyes on one side of the head.
Believers in intelligent design often ask why random changes, such as the partial movement of one eye, could possibly be favored in any way. In the case of flatfishes, evolutionists have proposed that once the fish developed their behavior of lying with only one side revealed, even the slight movement of one eye would increase their ability to see and thus increase their fitness.
Despite this fossil find, many creationists still believe that the fish could have been intelligently designed. They do not oppose that organisms are widely varied, but they disagree that any of that variation is due to evolution. As far as the flatfishes are concerned, creationists appear content to accept this new fossil as a slight variant of the fish found now. In no way do they think it proves that the fish evolved.
And so, the debate between evolutionists and creationists rages on.
(Here's the link to the article I found this information in, if you're interested: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/07/080709-evolution-fish_2.html)
Interesting post Katelyn! It's unfortunate that we have these missing links but it's just the way it is. There will never be a day where we have discovered all of the transitioning fossils that exist out there because there are so many. Seems like this is a never-ending debate...
ReplyDelete