Posted by OneGlove [OneGlove] on November 26, 1999 at 14:34:29 {2lTH7z2znE4DjahjRee6VOGhhkwG5g}:
In Reply to: ******H20 IT'S CLOSING TIME!!! posted by DaJahVeu on November 26, 1999 at 13:55:04:
So you admit that my article presented the facts.
Could you please explain why the evolution from Hyracotherium to modern Equus is not "change in species from one form to another." (Especially since you evidently believe the one did evolve from the other.)
Some things to explain:
Features of Hyracotherium
Legs were flexible and rotatable with all major bones present and unfused.
4 toes on each front foot, 3 on hind feet. Vestiges of 1st (& 2nd, behind) toes still present.
Hyracotherium walked on pads; its feet were like a dog's padded feet, except with small
"hoofies" on each toe instead of claws.
Small brain with especially small frontal lobes.
Low-crowned teeth with 3 incisors, 1 canine, 4 distinct premolars and 3 "grinding" molars in
each side of each jaw (this is the "primitive mammalian formula" of teeth). The cusps of the
molars were slightly connected in low crests. Typical teeth of an omnivorous browser.
10-20 INCHES TALL FOR GOD's SAKE
Modern Equus
Fused Leg bones with no rotation.
One toe. (Though genes for making the other toes are present, and rarely some horses are still born with seperate fully formed toes.)
Hooves.
Larger Brain.
Straight teeth, and no fossae.
AS BIG AS A HORSE.
Now, DaJahVeu, please explain how these are the same species and form. (Not to mention that horses and zebras would be the same species and form according to your logic)
--OneGlove