I find this general statement illuminating, and completely fair to all
parties with one exception. Since the statement on transitional forms
sticks to the "Phyla" level, it is safe, but meaningless. It seems in
fairness to evolutionary proponents it should address the issue of
transitional forms proposed for some classes of organisms. But since this
is a general introductory statement, I guess we can overlook that omission.
I especially like the broad minded approach exemplified in the last statement
> Revision of the AL Textbook Insert
>> This textbook discusses the controversial theory of evolution. As you study
>> this material please keep the following in mind:
>> The word "evolution" may refer to many types of change. "Evolution" is
>> to describe changes that occur at or below the species level. This
>> called microevolution, can be observed and described as fact (e.g., dog
>> breeds), although no new major animal groups have been observed to arise by
>> microevolution. "Evolution" is used to refer to the change from one major
>> body plan into another (e.g., reptiles into birds). This process, called
>> macroevolution, has never been observed and should be considered a theory.
>> Evolution also refers to the unproven belief that random, undirected
>> produced a world of living things.
>> There are many unanswered questions about the origin of life which are not
>> mentioned in your textbooks, including:
>> Why did the major groups of animals (phyla) appear "suddenly" in the
>> record (known as the Cambrian Explosion)?
>> Why have no new major groups (phyla) of living things appeared in the
>> fossil record since the Cambrian Explosion?
>> Why do major groups (phyla) of plants and animals have no transitional
>> forms in the fossil record?
>> How did you and all living things come to possess such a complete and
>> complex set of "instructions" for building a living body?
>> Study hard and keep an open mind. Someday you may contribute to the
>> of how living things appeared on earth.