Well, I don't know about your copy of that work, but mine has only one
article by Wise which touches on fossils. And he only has one section that
gets specific enough to actually mention the names of actual fossil genera.
By my count there are only 7 genera mentioned: Pikaia, Baragwanathia,
Ichthyostega Archaeopteryx, Purgatorius, Pakicetus and Proconsul. And as
far as I can see he doesn't really discuss ANY anatomical details. If this
is an example of creationism discussing fossil, it isn't very detailed.
>
>Glenn:
>> And if you go to levels below the Families, then the problem becomes worse
>> because modern forms gradually appear as we climb higher in the geologic
>> column and with genera and species, the oldest modern animals found in the
>> fossil record is very late in the game.
>
>Agreed - but this is predicted by Basic Type biologists!
Exactly how? I have tried but failed to understand what they are saying.
Why should the modern forms come late in the game within their view?
>
>I had written:
>> > The creationist model does allow for rapid
>> >change - because the biologic information is already present in the
>> >ancestral animals. The information does not have to be "created" by
>> >the (natural) selection of mutations. This variation is not
>> >evolutionary, but creationary! And it will usually result in a loss
>> >to the gene pool - a testable proposition.
>
>Glenn responded:
>> Then if you think that all the information for future animals is already
>> contained in present day animals, please demonstrate this. What will a
>> house cat turn into in 1000 or 100,000 years? If the information is
>> already there, we should be able to find it and decipher it. Or has all
>> morphological change ceased?
>
>How does one respond to this? Attempts to breed new characters into
>plants using mutations have very few successes to report.
I guess I didn't explain myself well enough. If antievolutionists believe
that the information for all the kinds were in the animals on the ark,
then the post flood world represents an unfolding or unrolling of the
pre-existing information. (Evolution by the way comes from the latin and
means 'unrolling' or something like that). So the questions are: 1. Has
this unfolding process ended? 2. How do we know it is ended? 3. If it
hasn't ended then how can we utilize the DNA to determine the future course
of the unfolding? 4. Can you show that there is an extra amount of
information in living forms, information not required to produce the
current carrier of that information? 5. What is the role of mutation in
this process?
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm