# How Does Biological Evolution Deal With This?

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/how-does-biological-evolution-deal-with-this/8579>\
**Category:** Side Conversation\
**Created:** [November 25, 2019, 4:23pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/how-does-biological-evolution-deal-with-this/8579 "2019-11-25T16:23:57Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 220

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![scd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6f9a4e/32.png) [@scd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/scd)\
**Post date:** [December 10, 2019, 2:05pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/how-does-biological-evolution-deal-with-this/8579/220 "2019-12-10T14:05:22Z")

</div>

> [@Faizal\_Ali](#):
>
> It does fit the hierarchy.

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> You haven’t shown that they are out of place.

the transitional link between fins and digits (or limb if you want) is the tiktaalik fins. and yet they appearing after the first digits (the tetrapod tracks fossil). so they dont fit with the evolutionery hierarchy.

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> Your point is that if evolution is true then we should see new parts emerging over just a handful of generations

no. its just was a calculation. not a prediction.

> [@Roy](#):
>
> I might be a bit more charitable to @scd if the three ‘examples’ of out of place fossils

we can discuss about the authenticity of these fossils but remember that according to evolutionery biologists like dawkins and others we only need a single out of place fossil to falsify common descent. so do you agree or disagree with dawkins and others about this point?

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/how-does-biological-evolution-deal-with-this/8579)._