A thought popped into my head this morning as I was out pulling weeds (yep, they're up already) in my garden. We indeed already have evidence of transitional species, right under our very noses. It must have been the horse manure in the garden that opened my eyes (and nose apparently). You see, for many years, people have been breeding Horses with Donkeys. They are closely related, but not quite fully -- they are genetically close enough that they can mate; the female horse gives birth to a mule. The offspring however is sterile, which implies that they have genetically diverged enough that the results do not get sustained. All of this argues for evolution -- and a common ancestor. Over time, the two have become separate enough that the differences keep them apart. True also for lions and tigers -- breedable, but the resulting "liger" (calm down, Napoleon!) is also sterile. Again, they apparently had a common ancestor (as do all cats presumably), but we now see a good deal of distinction in size, habitat, and prey. Other evidence -- there are a number of species of fish that display transitional characteristics -- gills AND lungs, fins that act like feet that allow them to crawl over land and exist outside of water for long periods, etc. Is my thinking skewed...? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com