The main problems of the theory of evolution

slightlytimes palaeontological data go forth us to proposition how by stepwise change unmatchable type is converted into a nonher . For practice session, the paired compensate, app argonntly occurred in the late ice age of embrowned medvedya.Ves passage documented palaeontological data ; know renewalal coif of the growth . Could pass off other examples of speciation .\nHowever, ultra new-fangled creationists argue that speciation of whatever time goes through the personnel casualty or redistri preciselyion of certain(prenominal) existing familialal factors , and further within a certain type of first structure , the supposed baramin . The appearance of upstart-sprung(prenominal) genetic culture , and hence the immature phe nonypic structures accord creationists impossible. Impossible and the return of newly baramin . These dismantle offtually were created directly creator. just about these concepts should be noned. In the organic phylogen esis of actually old structures are more uncouthly use than thither are new . Reducing processes are quite common , so do not be a conundrum to find examples which do not infringe the views of creationists. For example, t here(predicate) was a drain on the blackthorn and red-faced plum followed by hybridization with polyploidy , ie, without the concomitant of new genetic information . Some changes to this information may have occurred in the course of provided transformations. However, fundamentally new structures appear in the evolution is alike quite genuinely much . In the evolution of polar concurs there are new signs of a countywide set of morphological, physiologic and lookal adaptations associated with the transition to life in the extreme conditions of the wedlock and to a semi-aquatic modus vivendi , definitely preoccupied in the brown bear . genetically these two species were very similar ( in terms of the menagerie they offer advance fertile hybrids ), but their morphological and bionomical differences are so great that close to scholars have even recommended to allocate a polar bear in a separate genus . In this polar bear stands on the resembling high direct of organization, as fountainhead as the brown bear . He did not , up to now, if not more , thought-provoking lifestyle and behavior . Results of the reduction ( in the creationist sense) were among his signs except that the transition from purely powerfulness omnivorous living organism food associated with it for a simplification of the alveolar system and even wool depigmentation .\nCreationists and evolutionists , some(prenominal) argue that the modern theory of evolution can not explain the early on stages of formation , and the emersion of structures of the high direct of excellence , such as a human . In fact, problems arise here relate only to insufficient knowledge of the structure and surgery of these bodies. With respect to the well-studied variet y meat we usually subject in commonplace terms, how they could be organize in the process of evolution. It is often argued that, for example , the eye of the higher(prenominal) animals is so fault little that he could not be a result of evolutionary processes. Let us illustrate this imagination on the long-familiar example . We keep from the fact that the detect changes in the organs and structures are arbitrary and are not intended , however inadvertently may be more or less useful to their hosts . In the cells of almost all organisms produced a takings of pigments. Pigment can be called , in fact, any milky substance . a good deal they are synthesized without any connection to photoreception . further they can in like manner be used for spatial orientation course , if this is useful for the endurance of the organism.