Question by Dreamstuff Entity: Creationists, is it honest to quote a Question Darwin asked but not his answer, implying he had no answer?
Posted a few minutes ago:
“Even Charles Darwin was honest when he confesses in ‘Origin of Species’; ” But as by THIS THEORY innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we NOT find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?” -Charles Darwin”
Apart from the capitalization (implying, of course, that a scientific theory is the same as the layperson’s definition of the word), the quote is accurate – but let’s look at the whole paragraph.
“But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?It will be more convenient to discuss this question in the chapter on the Imperfection of the Geological Record; and I will here only state that I believe the answer mainly lies in the record being incomparably less perfect than is generally supposed. The crust of the earth is a vast museum; but the natural collections have been imperfectly made, and only at long intervals of time.”
Besides leaving out the context, this is misleading in a subtler way when used for the proposition that there are no transitional forms. Darwin is not talking about the existence or nonexistence of transitionals here, but of an “innumerable” series of finely-graded transitionals linking together all extinct and existing forms.
Do you believe this kind of argument is honest?
(more detail here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part2.html#quote2.6 )
(more creationist quote mining: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/author.html )
Answer by Eian Boyett
Its very very stupid to do that, but hey, can’t stop the stupid…
What do you think? Answer below!