Darwinian evolutionists have done many acrobatic hoops and jumps to try to prove that evolution is true. One such attempt is Punctuated Equilibrium, as proposed by two American scientists, Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge in the early 1970s. Punctuated Equilibrium is defined as: "the hypothesis that evolutionary development is marked by isolated episodes of rapid speciation between long periods of little or no change."
Now, a simple question: Does this definition not argue against Darwinian evolution? According to Darwinian evolution "Evolution is a process of gradual change that takes place over many generations, during which species of animals, plants, or insects slowly change some of their physical characteristics." So, I'm confused; is evolution change over time or a sudden explosion? According to proponents of Punctuated Equilibrium it's not change over time but a sudden happening. If you Google for the proof of Punctuated Equilibrium you will see that they say that scientists have found proof of it in the genetic sequence. But, sorry, I don't get it. Where is the beef? Show me the transitional forms. I've yet to see any of them. Click here for a short video of an explanation of Punctuated Equilibrium. The skeptic may say, you don't know what you're talking about; you're not a scientist. Well, yes, I'm not, but show me the transitional forms. I don't see them. Scientific mumbo jumbo will not do. Don't tell me you see it in the genetic code; show me the transitional forms.
Supporters of Punctuated Equilibrium may have the Cambrian Explosion in mind. It is true that the fossils in the Cambrian appeared fully formed; no transitional forms, but how does this lead you to Punctuated Equilibrium? Here is a fine article by Casey Luskin explaining this. Click here to read it.
