Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Clandestine
But I have a hard time believing in macroevolution when all of the transitional fossils that you speak of are nowhere to be found. Even though they're supposed to be everywhere. Darwin even stated that in order for his theory to be proven scientifically, there would need to be proof in these transitional fossils. So, why are we unable to find any?
When Darwin first proposed his theory, he had no understanding of how genetics works. As we learn more about genetics, we begin to understand how a small genetic mutation can result in a huge change in the organism. There are certain genes that regulate the functions of other genes or multiple systems of genes. So it is possible that by having a mutation in one of the controller-type genes you could have what looks like a huge leap in evolution in a single generation. In that case, there would be no transition fossils between the two organisms. In Darwin's time, it was believed that evolution happened gradually, with transition organisms, but as the underlying mechanism is better understood, that is no longer believed to be always the case.