Punctuated equilibrium was ad hoc to justify gaps (Talk.Origins)

Claim CC201.1:


 * The theory of punctuated equilibrium was proposed ad hoc to explain away the embarrassing gaps in the fossil record.

Source: Yahya, Harun, 2003. Darwinism Refuted, The invalidity of punctuated equilibrium.

CreationWiki response:

The cited source does not call punctuated equilibrium an ad hoc theory, it simply explains how it was proposed to explain away the gaps in the fossil record. It needs to be noted that it only succeeds in explaining relatively small gaps, not the larger ones between major groups.

Which does not change the fact that punctuated equilibrium was proposed to explain away the gaps in the fossil record. Also it shows that both living and extinct species groups do not objectively support evolution.

Which is exactly the point made by Darwinism Refuted and other creationist references to punctuated equilibrium. The fact is that like other evolutionary theories in astronomy, cosmology and geology, biological evolution repeatedly needs secondary hypotheses to save the theory from its disagreements with reality.

While this is true, there is also nothing wrong with pointing out that a secondary theory was proposed to save the primary theory form its failure to agree with reality. Furthermore, it is a problem when the result is to render the primary theory harder to test or completely untestable.

O equilíbrio pontuado foi um ad hoc para justificar as lacunas (Talk.Origins)