Published with
permission, view the entire EVOLUTION CRUNCHER book with illustrations
online here
paperback is
also available inexpensively at www.evolution-facts.org
Scientific facts which annihilate evolutionary theory
The Evolution Cruncher
Chapter 12 Part 1 of 3
Fossils and Strata Part 1
Why the fossil/strata theory is a remarkable
hoax
This
chapter is based on pp. 497-605 of Origin of Life (Volume Two of our
three-volume Evolution Disproved Series). Not included in this chapter are at
least 472 statements by scientists. You will find them, plus much more, in the
encyclopedia on this website.
This
is the largest and one of the most important chapters in this book. Fossil
remains provide evolutionists with their only real evidence that evolution
might have occurred in the past. If the fossils do not witness to evolution in
the past, then it could not be occurring now either.
The
only substantial evidence that evolution has taken place in past ages, if there
is such evidence, is to be found, in the fossils. The only definite
evidence from the present, that there is a mechanism by which evolution could
occur—past or present—if there is such evidence, is to be found in natural
selection and mutations. There is a chapter dealing with each of
these three topics in this set of books (chapters 12, 9, and 10).
The
subject may seem to be complicated, but it is not. We will begin this
present chapter with an introduction and overview of some of the fossil
problems. Then we shall give enough attention to each of those problems—and
more besides—to provide you with a clear understanding of principles and
conclusions.
And
when you obtain it, you will be astounded at the amount of overwhelming
evidence supporting the fact that there is absolutely no indication, from
the fossil record, that evolution has ever occurred on our planet!
"We
still do not know the mechanics of evolution in spite of the over-confident
claims in some quarters, nor are we likely to make further progress in this by
the classical methods of paleontology or biology; and we shall certainly not
advance matters by jumping up and down shrilling, ‘Darwin is god and I,
So-and-so, am his prophet.’ "—*Errol White, Proceedings of the Linnean Society,
1 - INTRODUCTION
DEFINITIONS—(*#1/9 Introduction*) Most people know very little about any
aspect of geology. Here are some of the major areas of geologic study. Of
the geologic terms defined below, you will want to give special attention to
those in bold italic:
Here
are several of the major branches of Physical Geology: (1) Geochemistry is the study of
the substances in the earth and the chemical changes they undergo. (2) Petrology
is the study of rocks, in general. (3) Minerology
is the study of minerals, such as iron ore and uranium. (4) Geophysics is
the study of the structure, composition, and development of the earth. (5) Structural
geology is the study of positions and shapes of rocks very deep within the
earth.
Both
physical and historical geology include three areas: (1) Geochronology is
the study of geologic time. (2) Earth Processes is the study of the
forces that produce changes in the earth. (3) Sedimentology
is the study of sediment and the ways it is deposited.
Historical
geology has at
least four main fields:
(1) Paleontology is the study of fossils, and paleontologists
are those who study them. (2) Stratigraphy
is the study of the rock strata in which the fossils are found. (3) Paleogeography is the study of the past geography of
the earth. (4) Paleoecology is the study of
the relationships between prehistoric plants and animals and their
surroundings.
Fossils are the remains of living creatures, both plants and animals, or
their tracks. These
are found in sedimentary rock. Sedimentary rock is composed of strata,
which are layers of stone piled up like a layer cake. (Strata is the plural of stratum.) Sedimentary rock is
fossil-bearing or fossiliferous rock.
Fossil
hunters use the word taxa (taxon, singular) to describe the basic, different types
of plants and animals found in the fossil record. By this they generally mean
species, but sometimes genera or more composite classifications, such as
families or even phyla. Taxa is thus something of a loose term; it will be found
in some of the quotations in this chapter. Higher taxa
would mean the larger creatures, such as vertebrates (animals with
backbones).
"The
part of geology that deals with the tracing of the geologic record of the past
is called historic geology. Historic geology relies chiefly on paleontology,
the study of fossil evolution, as preserved in the fossil record, to
identify and correlate the lithic records of ancient
time."—*O.D. von Engeln and *K.E. Caster,
Geology (1952), p. 423.
These
fossil remains may be shells, teeth, bones, or entire skeletons. A
fossil may also be a footprint, bird track, or tail marks of a passing lizard. It can even include
rain drops. Many fossils no longer contain their original material, but
are composed of mineral deposits that have infiltrated them and taken on their
shapes.
Fossils
are extremely important to evolutionary theory, for they provide our only
record of plants and animals in ancient times. The fossil record is of the
highest importance as a proof for evolution. In these fossils, scientists
should be able to find all the evidence needed to prove that one species has
evolved out of another.
"Although
the comparative study of living animals and plants may give very convincing
circumstantial evidence, fossils provide the only historical documentary
evidence that life has evolved from simpler to more complex forms."—*Carl
O. Dunbar, Historical Geology (1949), p. 52.
"Fortunately
there is a science which is able to observe the progress of evolution through
the history of our earth. Geology traces the rocky strata of our earth,
deposited one upon another in the past geological epochs through hundreds of
millions of years, and finds out their order and timing and reveals organisms
which lived in all these periods. Paleontology, which studies the fossil
remains, is thus enabled to present organic evolution as a visible fact."—*Richard
B. Goldschmidt, "An Introduction to a
Popularized Symposium on Evolution," in Scientific Monthly, Vol. 77,
October 1953, p. 184.
PALEONTOLOGISTS
KNOW THE FACTS—(*#3/25
The Experts Speak*) The study of fossils and mutations ranks
as the two key evidences of evolution: The fossil evidence proves or disproves whether evolution
has occurred in the past; mutational facts prove or disprove whether it can
occur at all.
This
is probably why, of all scientists, paleontologists and geneticists are
the most likely to publicly repudiate evolutionary theory in disgust (*A.H. Clark, *Richard Goldschmidt, *Steven Gould, *Steven Stanley, *Colin
Patterson, etc.). They
have spent their lives fruitlessly working, hands on, with one of the two main
factors in the very center of evolution: the evidence (fossils) or the
mechanism by which it occurs (mutations), and that part of the body within
which it must occur (DNA).
THE FOSSIL HUNTERS—(*#2 The Fossil
Hunters"). For over a century, thousands of men have dedicated their
lives to finding, cleaning, cataloguing, and storing millions of fossils. The
work they do is time-consuming, exhausting, yet it has not provided the
evidence they sought.
NO
EVOLUTION TODAY—Evolution (one type of animal changing into another) never
occurs today.
"No
biologist has actually seen the origin by evolution of a major group of
organisms."—*G. Ledyard Stebbins,
Process of Organic Evolution, p. 1. [Stebbins was a
geneticist.]
EVERYTHING
HINGES ON FOSSILS—Clearly, then, because no
evolution is occurring now, all that the evolutionists have to prove their
theory is fossil evidence of life-forms which lived in the past. If
evolution is the cause of life on earth, then there ought to be thousands of
various partly evolved fossil life-forms. For evolution to occur, this had to
occur in great abundance. The fossils should reveal large numbers of
transmuted species—creatures which are half fish-half animal, etc.
Throughout
these studies, we shall refer to the basic types or kinds of plants and animals
as "species." However, as discussed in chapter 11, Animal and
Plant Species, biologists frequently classify plants and animals as
"species," which are subspecies.
UNIFORMITARIANISM—(*#4/29 Uniformitarianism
vs. Catastrophism*) A basic postulate of evolution is the concept of uniformitarianism.A basic postulate of evolution
is the concept of uniformitarianism According
to this theory, the way everything is occurring today is the way it has
always occurred on our planet. This point has strong bearing on the
rock strata. Since no more than an inch or so of sediment is presently being
laid down each year in most non-alluvial areas, therefore no more than this
amount could have been deposited yearly in those places in the past. Since
there are thick sections of rock containing fossils, therefore those rocks and
their contents must have required millions of years to be laid down. That is
how the theory goes.Naturalists,
working in
*Lyell and others worked out those
strata dates in the early 19th century, before very much was known about the
rock strata and their fossils! Some strata in
It
has since been established that *Lyell’s theory does
not agree with reality;
the percentage of still-living species is very, very high throughout all the
strata, and varies from place to place for each stratum in different
localities. Nevertheless, after quarreling over details, Lyell’s
followers extended his scheme; and, though they changed his initial major
strata names, they held on to his mistake and elaborated on it. Although some
of the strata names changed later in the 19th century, scientists in the
20th century have been stuck with this relic of early 19th-century error.
It is what they are taught in the colleges and universities.
THE
ERAS—The fossil-bearing rock strata are said to
fall into three major divisions, called "eras."
At
the top are the Cenozoic Era rocks. Below that comes
the Mesozoic Era levels. Next comes the Pa!eozoic Era strata. At the bottom we find
the Cambrian, which contains the lowest fossil-bearing rocks. Beneath
that is the Precambrian. (Cenozoic means "recent life," mesozoic means "middle
life," and paleozoic means "ancient
life.")
DATES
WHEN GEOLOGICAL TIME SCALES ORIGINATED—This
fossil/strata theory is genuinely archaic. The basics of the theory were
devised when very little was known about strata or fossils. But geology and
paleontology have been saddled with it ever since. Here are the dates when
the various geological time scales were first developed:
THE
PERIODS:
Quaternary
- 1829
Tertiary
- 1759
Cretaceous
- 1822
Jurassic
- 1795
Triassic
- 1834
Permian
- 1841
Carboniferous
- 1822
Devonian
- 1837
Silurian
- 1835
Ordovician
- 1879
Cambrian
- 1835
THE
ERAS:
Cenozoic
- 1841
Mesozoic
- 1841
Paleozoic
- 1838
Perhaps
the most ridiculous part of this is that radiodating
of rocks, which did not exist when the 19th-century theories were devised, is
forced to fit those 19th-century strata dates! It is done by using only a few
test samples which fit the 19th century dates. The rest are discarded. (See
chapter 6, Inaccurate Dating Methods, for more on this.)
EVIDENCE
OF EVOLUTION—If evolution was a fact, we should find in present events and past
records abundant evidence of one species changing into another species. But, throughout all past history and in
present observations, no one has ever seen this happen. Prior to written
history, we only have fossil evidence. Scientists all over the world have been
collecting and studying fossils for over a hundred years. Literally millions
have been collected!
THE
GEOLOGIC COLUMN—Much of this, especially the dates, are imaginary. The complete column almost nowhere. The laying down of
fossil strata primarily occurred below the Pleastocene,
mountain building during it, and post-Flood after it.
Coal is mainly in the Carboniferous.
Geologic time scale Macmillan Dictionary, p. 430
Click to see Fossils and Strata and the Standard Geological Time Scale
click “Back” button to return
In
all their research, this is what they discovered: (1) There
is no evidence of one species having changed into another one. (2) Our
modern species are what we find there, plus some extinct ones. (3) There
are no transitional or halfway forms between species.
Yes,
there are extinct creatures among the fossils. These are plants and
animals which no longer live on the earth. But even scientists agree that extinct
species would not be an evidence of evolution.
Yet
evolutionists parade dinosaur bones as a grand proof of evolution—when they
are no proof at all! Extinction is not evolution!
Before
proceeding further in this study, we should mention two points that will help
clarify the problem:
WHY
SO VERY COMPLEX AT THE BOTTOM?—As we already mentioned, the lowest strata level is
called the Cambrian. Below this lowest of the fossil-bearing strata lies
the Precambrianthe lowest
strata level is called the Cambrian. Below this lowest of the
fossil-bearing strata lies the Precambrian
The
Cambrian has invertebrate (non-backbone) animals, such as trilobites
and brachiopods. These are both very complex little animals. In addition,
many of our modern animals and plants are in that lowest level, just above the
Precambrian. How could such complex, multicelled
creatures be there in the bottom of the Cambrian strata? But there they are. Suddenly,
in the very lowest fossil stratum, we find complex plants and animals—and lots
of them, with no evidence that they evolved from anything lower.
"It
remains true, as every paleontologist knows, that most new species, genera and
families, and that nearly all categories above the level of families, appear in
the [fossil] record suddenly and are not led up to by known, gradual,
completely continuous transitional sequences."—*George G. Simpson, The Major Features of Evolution, p. 360.
Paleontologists
(the fossil hunters) call this immense problem "the Cambrian
Explosion,"
because vast numbers of complex creatures suddenly appear in the fossil
strata—with no evidence that they evolved from any less complicated creatures!
We
will discuss the Precambrian/Cambrian problem later in this chapter.
What
caused this sudden, massive appearance of life-forms? What caused the strata?
Why are all those fossils in the strata? What is the solution to all this?
THE
GENESIS FLOOD—The answer is that a great Flood,—the one described in the
Bible in Genesis 6 to 9—rapidly covered the earth with watera great
Flood,—the one described in the Bible in Genesis 6 to 9—rapidly covered the
earth with water. When it did, sediments of pebbles, gravel, clay, and sand
were laid down in successive strata, covering animal and plant life. Under
great pressure, these sediments turned into what we today call "sedimentary
rock." (Clay
became shale; sand turned into sandstone; mixtures of gravel,
clay and sand formed conglomerate rock.) All that mass of water-laid
material successively covered millions of living creatures. The result is
fossils, which today are only found in the sedimentary rock strata.
IS
ENOUGH EVIDENCE AVAILABLE?—Before we proceed further,
it is vital that we know whether there is enough evidence available to decide
the fossil problem? Can we at the present time really know for sure whether
or not, according to the fossil record, evolution has or has not occurred?
Yes,
we CAN know! Men
have worked earnestly, since the beginning of the 19th century, to find
evidences of evolution in the fossil strata.
"The
adequacy of the fossil record for conclusive evidence is supported by the
observation that 79.1 percent of the living families of terrestrial vertebrates
have been found as fossils (87.7 percent if birds are excluded)."—R.H.
Brown, "The Great Twentieth-Century Myth," in Origins, January 1986,
p. 40.
"Geology
and paleontology held great expectations for Charles Darwin, although in 1859
[when he published his book, Origin of the Species] he admitted
that they [already] presented the strongest single evidence against his theory.
Fossils were a perplexing puzzlement to him because they did not reveal any
evidence of a gradual and continuous evolution of life from a common ancestor,
proof which he needed to support his theory. Although fossils were an enigma to
"He
stated in his book, The Origin of the Species, ‘The geological record is
extremely imperfect and this fact will to a large extent explain why we do not
find intermediate varieties, connecting together all the extinct and existing
forms of life by the finest graduated steps. He who rejects these views, on the
nature of the geological record, will rightly reject my whole theory.’ [Quoting
from the sixth (1901) edition of
"Now,
after over 120 years of the most extensive and painstaking geological
exploration of every continent and ocean bottom, the picture is infinitely more
vivid and complete than it was in 1859. Formations have been discovered
containing hundreds of billions of fossils and our museums now are filled
with over 100 million fossils of 250,000 different species. The
availability of this profusion of hard scientific data should permit objective
investigators to determine if
"There
are a hundred million fossils, all catalogued and identified, in museums around
the world.—*Porter Kier, quoted in New Scientist,
There
are one hundred million fossils housed in museums and other collections! That ought to be enough to locate the
missing links and prove evolutionary theory! That ought to be enough to locate
the missing links and prove evolutionary theory!
Yes,
enough information is now available that we can have certainty, from the fossil
record, whether evolution ever did occur in our world! The present chapter will
provide you with a brief summary of those facts.
"The
reason for abrupt appearances and gaps can no longer be attributed to the
imperfection of the fossil record as it was by
"In
part, the role of paleontology in evolutionary research has been defined
narrowly because of a false belief, tracing back to Darwin and his early
followers, that the fossil record is woefully incomplete. Actually, the record
is of sufficiently high quality to allow us to undertake certain kinds of
analysis meaningfully at the level of the species."—*
"Over
ten thousand fossil species of insects have been identified, over thirty
thousand species of spiders, and similar numbers for many sea-living creatures.
Yet so far the evidence for step-by-step changes leading to major evolutionary
transitions looks extremely thin. The supposed transition from wingless to
winged insects still has to found, as has the transition between the two main
types of winged insects, the paleoptera (mayflies,
dragonflies) and the neoptera (ordinary flies,
beetles, ants, bees)."—*Fred Hoyle, "The Intelligent Universe: A
New View of Creation and Evolution," 1983, p. 43.
150
YEARS OF COLLECTED EVIDENCE—In spite of such an immense amount of fossil
evidence, *Heribert-Nilsson of Lund University in Sweden, after 40
years of study in paleontology and botany, said the deficiencies—the missing
links—will never be found.
"It
is not even possible to make a caricature [hazy sketch] of an evolution out of paleobiological facts. The fossil material is now so
complete that . . the lack of
transitional series cannot be explained as due to the scarcity of the material.
The deficiencies are real; they will never be filled."—*N. Heribert-Nilsson, Synthetische Artbildung (The Synthetic Origin of Species) (1953), p.
1212.
More
than a century ago, enough evidence had been gathered from the study of fossils
that it was already clear that the fossil gaps between
Genesis kinds was unfillable. Even *Charles Darwin admitted the problem in his book.. Even *Charles Darwin admitted the problem in his book.
". .
intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal
any such finely graduated organic change, and this is perhaps the most obvious
and serious objection which can be urged against the theory [of
evolution]."—*Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, quoted in *David Raup, "Conflicts Between
For
over a century, hundreds of men have dedicated their lives, in an attempt to
find those missing links!
If the transitional forms, connecting one species with another, are really
there—they should have been found by now!
"The
time required for one of these invertebrates to evolve into the vertebrates, or
fishes, has been estimated at about 100 million years, and it is believed that
the evolution of the fish into an amphibian required about 30 million years.
The essence of the new Darwinian view is the slow gradual evolution of one
plant or animal into another by the gradual accumulation of micro-mutations
through natural selection of favored variants.
"If
this view of evolution is true, the fossil record should produce an enormous
number of transitional forms. Natural history museums should be overflowing
with undoubted intermediate forms. About 250,000 fossil species have been
collected and classified. These fossils have been collected at random from
rocks that are supposed to represent all of the geological periods of earth’s
history. Applying evolution theory and the laws of probability, most of these
250,000 species should represent transitional forms. Thus, if evolution is
true, there should be no doubt, question, or debate as to the fact of
evolution."—Duane T. Gish, "The Origin
of Mammals" in Creation: the Cutting Edge (1982), p. 76.
The
above quotation provides an excellent summary of the fossil gap problem. The
fossil record purportedly contains a record of all the billions of years of
life on earth. If it takes "100 million years" for an invertebrate
to evolve through transitional forms into a fish, the fossil strata should show
vast numbers of the in-between forms. But it never does! Scientists
discuss these facts among themselves; they have a responsibility to tell them
to the public.
The
evidence supports the information given in the oldest extant book in the world:
the book of Genesis.
2 - DATING THE STRATA AND FOSSILS
HOW
ARE ROCKS DATED?—There
are vast quantities of fossils, scattered in various sedimentary strata
throughout the world. Yet how are the rocks and the fossils dated? In
this section we are going to learn that the rocks, from the fossils, and the
fossils are dated from their theories about the dating of the rocks!
"We
can hardly pick up a copy of a newspaper or magazine nowadays without being
informed exactly how many million years ago some remarkable event in the
history of the earth occurred."—*Adolph Knopf, quoted in Isaac Asimov’s Book of Science and Nature Quotations, p. 62
[Knopf was an American geologist].
Let
us examine this dating process more closely:
REAL
HISTORY—Real history only goes back about 4,500 years. The First
Dynasty in
NOT
DATED BY APPEARANCE—Rocks are not dated by their appearance, for rocks of all types (limestones, shales, gabbro, etc.) may be found in all evolutionary "ages."
Rocks are not dated by their mineral, metallic, or petroleum content;
for any type of mineral may be found in practically any "age."
NOT
DATED BY LOCATION—Rocks are not dated by the rocks they are near. The rocks above them in one
sedimentary sequence may be the rocks below them in the next. The "oldest
rocks" may lie above so-called "younger rocks." Rocks
are not dated by their structure, breaks, faults, or folds. None of
this has any bearing on the dating that evolutionists apply to rocks. Textbooks,
magazines, and museum displays give the impression that it is the location of
the strata that decides the dating, but this is not true.
"It
is, indeed, a well-established fact that the (physical-stratigraphical)
rock units and their boundaries often transgress geologic time planes in most
irregular fashion even within the shortest distances."—*J.A. Jeletzsky, "Paleontology, Basis of Practical
Geochronology," in Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, April 1956, p. 685.
NOT
DATED BY VERTICAL LOCATION—Rocks are not dated by their height or depth in
the strata, or
which rocks are "at the top," which are "at the
bottom," or which are "in the middle." Their
vertical placement and sequence has little bearing on the matter. This
would have to be so, since the arrangement of the strata shows little hint of
uniformity anywhere in the world. (Much more on this later in
this chapter.)
NOT
DATED BY RADIOACTIVITY—The rock strata are
not dated by the radioactive minerals within them. The dating was all worked
out decades before anyone heard or thought of radioactive datingThe rock
strata are not dated by the radioactive minerals within them. The dating was
all worked out decades before anyone heard or thought of radioactive dating. In addition, we learned in the chapter
on Dating Methods, that there are so many ways in which radiometric
dating can be incorrect, that we dare not rely on uranium and similar minerals
as reliable dating methods.
Index Fossils
Click to see Fossil Index Eras
click “Back” button to
return
INDEX
FOSSILS—Are you able to pick up a seashell, and know
it died 52½ months earlier? Evolutionists can pick up a fossil shell and tell
you it died 525 million years ago!
The
fact is that rocks are not dated by any physical characteristic at all.
What then ARE they dated by?
DATED
BY FOSSILS?—The strata are said to be dated
by FOSSILS! Well, now we have arrived at something concrete.
The strata are all mixed up, piled on top or under where they should go, or
totally missing. But at least we can date by all their fossils.
But
wait a minute! We cannot even use 99 percent of the fossils to date them
by, since we can find the same type of fossils in one stratum as in many
others! And in each stratum are millions of fossils, representing hundreds
and even thousands of different species of plant and/or animal life. The
result is a bewildering maze of mixed-up or missing strata, each with fossil
prints from a wide variety of ancient plants and animals that we can find in
still other rock strata.
Yet,
amid all this confusion, evolutionists tell us that fossil dating is of extreme
importance. That is very true, for without it the evolutionary scientist would
have no way to try to theorize "earlier ages" on the earth. Fossil
dating is crucial to their entire theoretical house of cards.
But
if rocks cannot be dated by most of the fossils they contain,—how are the
rocks dated?
ROCKS
ARE DATED BY INDEX FOSSILS—(*#5/6 Index Fossils*) The strata are dated by what the evolutionists call "index
fossils." in each stratum there are a few fossils which are
not observed quite as often in the other strata. As a pretext, these are the
fossils which are used to "date" that stratum and all the other
fossils within it!
It
may sound ridiculous, but that is the way it is done. What are these magical
fossils that have the power to tell men finding them the DATE—so many millions
of years ago—when they lived? These special "index" fossils are
generally small marine invertebrates— backboneless sea animals These
special "index" fossils are generally small marine invertebrates—
backboneless sea animals that could not climb to higher ground when the Flood
came! These special "index" fossils are generally small marine
invertebrates— backboneless sea animals that could not climb to higher ground
when the Flood came! Their presence in a sedimentary stratum is supposed to
provide absolutely certain proof that that stratum is just so many millions of
years "younger" or millions of years "older" than other
strata! These special "index" fossils are generally small marine
invertebrates— backboneless sea animals that could not climb to higher ground
when the Flood came! Their presence in a sedimentary stratum is supposed to
provide absolutely certain proof that that stratum is just so many millions of
years "younger" or millions of years "older" than other
strata!
But
then, just as oddly, the magic disappears when the index fossil is found alive:
"Most
of the species of maidenhair are extinct; indeed they served as index fossils
for their strata until one was found alive." "The youngest fossil
coelacanth is about sixty million years old. Since one was rediscovered off
In
reality, within each stratum is to be found an utter confusion of thousands of
different types of plants and/or animals. The evolutionists maintain that if
just one of a certain type of creature (an "index fossil") is found
anywhere in that stratum, it must automatically be given a certain name,—and
more: a certain date millions of years ago when all the creatures in
that stratum are supposed to have lived. Yet, just by examining that
particular index fossil, there is no way to tell that it lived just so many
millions of years ago! It is all part of a marvelous theory, which is actually
nothing more than a grand evolutionary hoax. Experienced scientists
denounce it as untrue.
Any
rock containing fossils of one type of trilobite (Paradoxides)
is called a "Cambrian" rock, thus supposedly dating all the
creatures in that rock to a time period 120 million years long and beginning 60
million years in the past. But rocks containing another type of trilobite (Bathyurus) are arbitrarily classified as
"Ordovician," which is claimed to have spanned 45 million years and
begun 480 million years ago.
—But
how can anyone come up with such ancient dates simply by examining two
different varieties of trilobite? The truth is that it cannot be done.
Add
to this the problem of mixed-up index fossils—when "index fossils"
from different levels are found together! That is a problem which paleontologists do not publicly
discuss. As we analyze one aspect after another of evolution (stellar,
geologic, biologic, genetic, etc.), we find it all to be little more than a
carefully contrived science fiction storybook.
FOSSILS ARE DATED BY A THEORY—But now comes the catch: How can evolutionary
geologists know what dates to apply to those index fossils? The answer to this
question is a theory! How can evolutionary geologists know what dates
to apply to those index fossils? The answer to this question is a theory! Here
is how they do it:
Darwinists
theorize which animals came first—and when they appeared on the scene. And then they date
the rocks according to their theory—not according to the wide mixture of
fossils creatures in it—but by assigning dates—based on their theory—to
certain "index" fossils.
—That is a gigantic, circular-reasoning hoax!
"Fossils
provide the only historical, documentary evidence that life has evolved from
simpler to more and more complex forms."—*Carl O. Dunbar, Historical
Geology, 2nd edition (1960), p. 47.
The
conclusions about which fossils came first are based on the assumptions of
evolution. Rock strata are studied, a few index fossils are located (when they
can be found at all), and each stratum is then given a name. Since the
strata are above, below, and in-between one another, with most of the strata
missing in any one location,—just how can the theorists possibly
"date" each stratum? They do it by applying evolutionary speculation
to what they imagine those dates should be.
This
type of activity classifies as interesting fiction, but it surely should not be
regarded as science. The truth is this: it was the evolutionary
theory that was used to date the fossils; it was not the strata and it was not
"index fossils."
"Vertebrate
paleontologists have relied upon ‘stage of evolution’ as the criterion for
determining the chronologic relationships of faunas.
Before establishment of physical dates, evolutionary progression was the best
method for dating fossiliferous strata."—*J.F.
Evernden, *O.E. Savage, *G.H. Curtis, and *G.T.
James, "K/A Dates and the Cenozoic Mammalian Chronology of
"Fossiliferous strata" means fossil-bearing strata. Keep in
mind that only the sedimentary rocks have fossils, for they were the
sediments laid down at the time of the Flood, which hardened under pressure and
dried into rock. You will find no fossils in granite, basalt, etc.
"The
dating of each stratum—and all the fossils in it—is supposedly based on index
fossils, when it is actually based on evolutionary speculations, and nothing
more.
"The
more one studies paleontology, the more certain one
becomes that evolution is based on faith alone."—Randy Wysong, The Creation-Evolution
Controversy (1976), p. 31.
The
"index fossils" are dated by the theory. Amid all the confusion of
mixed up and missing strata, there would be no possible way to "date"
rocks—or fossils—by the catastrophic conditions found in sedimentary strata. It
is all utter confusion. So the evolutionists apply a theory to the strata.
They
decided that certain water worms in one stratum are 80,000 years older than
certain water worms in another stratum,—and then they date all the other
fossils in those same strata accordingly! (That is a little foolish, is it not?
How can you date a water worm as being so many hundred million years ago?)
"Because
of the sterility of its concepts, historical geology, which includes
paleontology [the study of fossils] and stratigraphy
[the study of rock strata], has become static and unreproductive.
Current methods of delimiting intervals of time, which are the fundamental
units of historical geology, and of establishing
chronology are of dubious validity. Worse than that, the criteria of
correlation—the attempt to equate in time, or synchronize, the geological
history of one area with that of another—are logically vulnerable. The findings
of historical geology are suspect because the principles upon which they are
based are either inadequate, in which case they should be reformulated, or
false, in which case they should be discarded. Most of us [geologists] refuse
to discard or reformulate, and the result is the present deplorable state of
our discipline."—*Robin S. Allen, "Geological Correlation and Paleoecology," Bulletin of the Geological Society of
Big
names and big numbers have been assigned to various strata, thus imparting an
air of scientific authority to them.
Common people, lacking expertise in the nomenclature of paleontology, when
faced with these lists of big words tend to give up. It all looks too awesome
to be understood, much less challenged. But the big words and big numbers just
cover over an empty theory which lacks substantial evidence to support it.
CIRCULAR
REASONING—(*#6/10
Circular Reasoning*) When
we examine it, we find that the strata-dating theory is based on circular
reasoning.
"Circular
reasoning" is a method of false logic, by which "this is used to prove that, and that is
used to prove this." It is also called "reasoning in a
circle." Over a hundred years ago, it was described by the phrase, circulus in probando,
which is Latin for "a circle in a proof."
There
are several types of circular reasoning found in support of evolutionary
theory. One of these is the geological dating position that "fossils
are dated by the type of stratum they are in while at the same time the stratum
is dated by the fossils found in it." An alternative evolutionary
statement is that "the fossils and rocks are interpreted by the theory of
evolution, and the theory is proven by the interpretation given to the fossils
and rocks."
Evolutionists
(1) use their theory of rock strata to date the fossils, (2) and then use their theory of
fossils to date the rock strata!
A
number of scientists have commented on this problem of circularity.
"The
charge that the construction of the geologic scale involves circularity has a
certain amount of validity."—*David M. Raup,
"Geology and Creationism,"
"The
intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to
date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to
think of a good reply, feeling the explanations are not worth the trouble as
long as the work brings results. This is supposed to be hard-headed
pragmatism."—*J.E. O’Rourke, "Pragmatism versus Materialism and Stratigraphy," American Journal of Science, January
1976, p. 48.
"Are
the authorities maintaining, on the one hand, that evolution is documented by
geology and on the other hand, that geology is documented by evolution? Isn’t
this a circular argument?"—*Larry Azar,
"Biologists, Help!" BioScience, November
1978, p. 714.
The
professor of paleobiology at
"Contrary
to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian
theory of evolution, because it is this theory (there are several) which we use
to interpret the fossil record. By doing so, we are guilty of circular
reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory."—*Ronald
R. West, "Paleontology and Uniformitarianism,"
in Compass, May 1968, p. 216.
*Niles
Eldredge, head of the Paleontology Department at the
"And
this poses something of a problem. If we date the rocks by their fossils, how
can we then turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through
time in the fossil record?"—*
The
curator of zoological collections at
"A
circular argument arises: Interpret the fossil record in the terms of a
particular theory of evolution, inspect the interpretation, and note that it
confirms the theory. Well, it would, wouldn’t it?"—*Tom Kemp, "A
Fresh Look at the Fossil Record," New Scientist 108,
First,
reasoning in a circle is the basis of the "evidence" that evolution
has occurred in the past. (The fossils are dated by the
theory of strata dating; the strata are then dated by the fossils are
dated by the theory of strata dating; the strata are then dated by the
fossils).
Second,
reasoning in a circle is the basis of the "mechanism" by which
evolution is supposed to occurred any time. (The
survivors survive. The fittest survive because they are fittest,—yet,
according to that, all they do is survive! not
evolve into something better!) (See chapter 9, Natural Selection).
Throughout
this set of books, we shall find many other examples of strange logic on
the part of the evolutionists: (1) Matter had to come from something, therefore it somehow came from nothing
(chapter 2, The Big Bang and Stellar Evolution). (2) Living
creatures had to come from something, therefore they
somehow came from dirt that is not alive (chapter 7, The Primitive
Environment).
By
the use of circular reasoning, evolutionary theory attempts to separate itself
from the laws of nature!
Limiting factors of chemical, biological, and physical law forbid matter or
living creatures from originating or evolving,
Actually,
the entire theory of evolution is based on one vast
circularity in reasoning! Because they accept the theory, evolutionists
accept all the foolish ideas which attempt to prove it.
"But
the danger of circularity is still present. For most biologists the strongest
reason for accepting the evolutionary hypothesis is their acceptance of some
theory that entails it. There is another difficulty. The temporal ordering of
biological events beyond the local section may critically involve paleontological correlation, which necessarily presupposes
the nonrepeatability of organic events in geologic
history. There are various justifications for this assumption but for almost
all contemporary paleontologists it rests upon the acceptance of the
evolutionary hypothesis."—*David G. Kitts, "Paleontology and
Evolutionary Theory," in Evolution, September 1974, p. 466.
FUNDAMENTAL
PROBLEMS—As we
study the fossil record, we come upon a variety of very serious problems which
undermine the strata/fossil theory. Three of the most important are these:
(1) At the very bottom of all the strata (the geologic column) is the Cambrian
strata, which is filled with complex, multi-celled life. This is termed the
"Cambrian explosion" of sudden life-forms all at once. (2) There
are no transitional species throughout the column. This problem is also called fossil
gaps or missing links. (3) (3) Mixed-up and
out-of-order strata are regularly found. Singly or together, they
destroy the evolutionary argument from the rock strata. But there are many more
problems.
3 - COMPLEXITY AT THE BEGINNING
SIMPLEST
JUST AS COMPLEX—Because the waters of the Flood first covered the creatures
which were not able to rapidly escape to higher ground, some of the
"simplest animals" are found in the lowest of the sedimentary strata.
Yet those creatures have complicated internal structuresBecause the
waters of the Flood first covered the creatures which were not able to rapidly
escape to higher ground, some of the "simplest animals" are found in
the lowest of the sedimentary strata. Yet those creatures have complicated
internal structures.
One
of the most common creatures found in the lowest—the Cambrian—strata, are the trilobites. These
were small swimming creatures belonging to the same group as the insects (the
arthropods). Yet careful study reveals that they had extremely complex eyes.
The mathematics needed to work out the lens structure of these little
creatures is so complicated, that it was not developed until the middle of the
last century!
Here
is how an expert describes it. *Norman Macbeth, in a
speech at
"I
have dealt with biologists over the last twenty years now. I have found that,
in a way, they are hampered by having too much education. They have been
steeped from their childhood in the Darwinian views, and, as a result, it has
taken possession of their minds to such an extent that they are almost unable
to see many facts that are not in harmony with Darwinism. These facts simply
aren’t there for them often, and other ones are sort of suppressed or
distorted. I’ll give you some examples.
"First,
and perhaps most important, is the first appearance of fossils. This occurs at
a time called the ‘Cambrian,’ 600 million years ago by the fossil
reckoning. The fossils appear at that time [in the Cambrian] in a pretty highly
developed form. They don’t start very low and evolve bit by bit over long
periods of time. In the lowest fossil-bearing strata of all [the Cambrian, they
are already there, and are pretty complicated in more-or-less modern form.
"One
example of this is the little animal called the trilobite. There are a great
many fossils of the trilobite right there at the beginning with no buildup to
it [no evolution of life-forms leading to it]. And, if you examine them
closely, you will find that they are not simple animals. They are small, but
they have an eye that has been discussed a great deal in recent years—an eye
that is simply incredible.
"It
is made up of dozens of little tubes which are all at slightly different angles
so that it covers the entire field of vision, with a different tube pointing at
each spot on the horizon. But these tubes are all more complicated than that,
by far. They have a lens on them that is optically arranged in a very
complicated way, and it is bound into another layer that has to be just exactly
right for them to see anything . . But the more
complicated it is, the less likely it is simply to have grown up out
of nothing.
"And
this situation has troubled everybody from the beginning—to have everything at
the very opening of the drama. The curtain goes up [life-forms first appear in
the Cambrian strata] and you have the players on the stage already, entirely in
modern costumes."—*Norman Macbeth, Speech at
Harvard University, September 24, 1983, quoted in L.D. Sunderland,
Remember,
we are here discussing one of the most common creatures at the very bottom of
the fossil strata. Science News declared that the trilobite had
"the most sophisticated eye lenses ever produced by nature." (*Science
News 105,
"In
fact, this optical doublet is a device so typically associated with human
invention that its disovery in trilobites comes as
something of a shock. The realization that trilobites developed and used such
devices half a billion years ago makes the shock even greater. And a final
discovery—that the refracting interface between the two lense
elements in a trilobite’s eye was designed ["designed"] in accordance
with optical constructions worked out by Descartes and Huygens
in the mid-seventeenth century—borders on sheer science fiction . . The design
of the trilobite’s eye lens could well qualify for a patent disclosure."—*Riccardo Levi-Setti, Trilobites,
2nd ed., University of
Extremely
complicated creatures at the very beginning, with nothing leading up to them;
that is the testimony of the strata. The rocks cry out; they have a message to tell us. Are we
listening?
THOSE
MARVELOUS TRILOBITES—There are enormous numbers of complex trilobites in the Cambrian
strata, yet below the Cambrian there is hardly anything that resembles a
fossil. As mentioned above, these little creatures had marvelously complicated
eyes. But they also had other very advanced features: (1) Jointed legs and
appendages, which indicate that they had a complex system of muscles. (2) Chitinous exos`````````keleton
(horny substance as their outer covering), which indicates that they grew by
periodic ecdysis, a very complicated
process of molting. (3) Compound eyes and antennae, which indicate a complex
nervous system. (4) Special respiratory organs, which indicate a blood
circulation system. (5) Complex mouth parts, which indicate specialized food
requirements.
(Another
of the many types of creatures, found in great numbers in the Cambrian strata, are segmented marine worms. As with trilobites, we find that
they also had a complex musculature, specialized food habits and requirements,
blood circulatory system, and advanced nervous system.)
NOT
SIMPLE TO COMPLEX—The evolutionists maintain
that the fossil record goes from the simple to the complex. But researchers
have discovered that the simple creatures were also complexThe
evolutionists maintain that the fossil record goes from the simple to the
complex. But researchers have discovered that the simple creatures were also
complex. In fact, there are actually few examples in the fossil record of
anything like "from simple to complex" progression. This is partly due to the fact that the
fossils suddenly appear in great numbers and variety,—too much so for much
simple-to-complex progression to be sorted out.
Included
here are complex organs,
such as intestines, stomachs, bristles and spines. Eyes and feelers show the
presence of nervous systems. For example, consider the specialized sting cells (nematocysts)
in the bodies of jellyfish, with their coiled, thread-like harpoons which
are explosively triggered. How could this evolve?,
such as intestines, stomachs, bristles and spines. Eyes and feelers show the
presence of nervous systems. For example, consider the specialized sting cells (nematocysts)
in the bodies of jellyfish, with their coiled, thread-like harpoons which
are explosively triggered. How could this evolve?
EVERY
PHYLUM IN THE CAMBRIAN—The startling fact is that
every phylum is represented in the lowest sedimentary strata of all: the
Cambrian. The "Cambrian explosion" is, for evolutionary theory, a
catastrophe from which it will never recover.
Every phylum in the Cambrian
Let
no one say that the Cambrian level only has "simple, primitive," or
"half-formed" creatures.
Click to see Every Phylum in the Cambrian
click “Back” button to return
4 - SUDDEN APPEARANCE OF LIFE
CAMBRIAN
EXPLOSION—(*#7/52
The Cambrian and Precambrian Problem*) The lowest strata that has fossils is
the Cambrian. Below that is the Precambrian which has no fossils,
other than an occasional algae on its surface. Paleontologists
call that amazing situation the "Cambrian explosion."
Beginning
with the very lowest of the fossil strata—the Cambrian,—we find a wealth of
fossil types. But each type—each species—of fossil in the Cambrian is
different from the others. There is no blending between them! It requires
evolving—blending across species—to produce evolution, but this never occurs
today, and it never occurred earlier. Look at the fossils: in the ancient
world there were only distinct species. Look at the world around you: in the
modern world there are only distinct species.
There
are vast numbers—billions—of fossils of thousands of different species of
complex creatures in the Cambrian,—and below it is next to nothing. The
vast host of transitional species leading up to the complex
Cambrian species are totally missing!
EVERY
MAJOR LIFE GROUP HAS BEEN FOUND IN THE CAMBRIAN—In the Cambrian we find sponges, corals, jellyfish, mollusks,
trilobites, crustaceans, and, in fact, every one of the major
invertebrate forms of life. In 1961, *Kai Peterson wrote:
"The
invertebrate animal phyla are all represented in Cambrian deposits."— *Kai
Peterson, Prehistoric Life on Earth, p. 56.
That
means there, in the Cambrian fossil strata, is to be found at least one species
from every phyla of backboneless animal. Only one phylum had been missing:
the vertebrates.
At the
time when Peterson wrote, it was believed that no vertebrates (animals with
backbones) appeared until the Lower Ordovician (just above the Cambrian).
But in 1977 that belief was shattered, when fully developed fish (heterostracan vertebrate fish fossils) were discovered in
the Upper Cambrian strata of
With
the "Cambrian Explosion" suddenly appears every major type of living
thing. This fact totally devastates the basis of evolutionary theory. Plants
and every type of animal have been found in the Cambrian strata.
Although evolutionists prefer not to discuss it, the truth is that at least
one representative of EVERY PHYLUM has been found in the Cambrian!
"Until
recently, the oldest fish fossils known were from the Middle Ordovician Harding
Sandstone of Colorado. These were of ‘primitive’ heterostracan
fishes (Class Agnatha) which are
jawless. The Vertebrates were the only major animal group not found as fossils
in Cambrian rocks.
"[The
1976 discovery of heterostracan fish fossils in
Cambrian is discussed in detail] . . This discovery of
fishes (vertebrates) in the Cambrian is without question the most significant
fossil discovery in the period 1958-1979. The evidence is now complete that all
of the major categories of animal and plant life are found in the
Cambrian."—Marvin L. Lubenow,
"Significant Fossil Discoveries Since 1958,"
in Creation Research Society Quarterly, December 1980, p. 157.
Not
only complex animal life, but complex plant life is represented in the
Cambrian! Flowering plants are generally considered to be one of the most
advanced forms of life in the plant kingdom. Spores from flowering plants have
also been found in Cambrian strata.
"Spores
attributed to terrestrial plants have been found in Precambrian and Cambrian
rocks in the Baltic. Whether some of these are from bryophytes is
uncertain."—*Robert F. Scagel, et. al., Plant Diversity: an Evolutionary Approach (1969),
p. 25.
During
the Genesis Flood, plants would tend to have washed into higher strata, but
their pollen could easily have been carried into the earliest alluvial layers:
the Cambrian and even the Precambrian.
"Just
as fossils of most of the other land plants have been discovered in Cambrian
deposits, so it is with the flowering plants. In 1947, Ghosh
and Bose reported discovering angiosperm vessels with
alternate pitting and libriform fibres
of higher dicotyledons from the Salt Pseudomorph Beds and the Dandot overfold,
5 - NO LIFE BELOW THE CAMBRIAN
PRECAMBRIAN—In contrast, there is next to nothing
answering to life-forms beneath the Cambrian!
The
Cambrian rocks contain literally billions of the little trilobites, plus many,
many other complex species. Yet below the Cambrian—called the "Precambrian,"—we
find almost nothing in the way of life-forms. The message of the rock strata is "SUDDENLY
abundant life; below that, NO LIFE!" Where this terrific explosion of abundance of
life begins—in the Cambrian,—we find complexity, not simplicity of life-forms.
Multicellular animals appear suddenly and in rich profusion in the Cambrian,
and none are ever found beneath it in the Precambrian (*
It
is true that, in a very few disputed instances, there
may be a few items in the Precambrian, which some suggest to be life-forms. But
a majority of scientists recognize that, at best, these are only algae. Blue-green algae, although small plants, are biochemically quite complex; for they utilize an elaborate
solar-to-chemical energy transformation, or photosynthesis. Such
organisms could have been growing on the ground when the waters of the Flood
first inundated it.
STROMATOLITES—The only macrofossils that are of widespread
occurrence in the Precambrian are stromatolitesThe only
macrofossils that are of widespread occurrence in the Precambrian are stromatolites. These are reef-like remnants usually
thought to have been formed from precipitated mineral matter on microbial
communities, primarily blue-green algae, growing by photosynthesis. So stromatolites are
remnants of chemical formations—and never were alive!
"Further
analysis of the world’s oldest rocks has confirmed that microscopic inclusions
are not the fossilized remains of living cells; instead they are
crystals of dolomite-type carbonates, rusted by water that has seeped into the
rock."—*Nigel Henbest, "‘Oldest Cells’
are Only Weathered
Two
years later, an update report in New Scientist on "the world’s
oldest (Precambrian) rocks" in
"Geologists
have found no conclusive evidence of life in these
Scientists
have remarked on how there seems to be a sudden vast quantity of living
creatures as soon as the Cambrian begins. All this favors the concept of
Creation and a Genesis Flood, not that of slowly occurring evolution over
millions of years.
6 - NO TRANSITIONAL SPECIES
THE
GAP PROBLEM—(*#8/55
No Transitions: Only Gaps*) In this section we will deal
with three specific problems, but we will frequently intermingle them in the discussion:
(1) There
are no transitional species preceding or leading up to the first multi-celled
creatures that appear in the Cambrian, the lowest stratum level.
(2) There
are no transitional species elsewhere in the fossil record.
(3) The
species that appear in the fossils are frequently found in many different
strata.
(4) The
great majority of the species found in the fossils are alive today.
NO
TRANSITIONS—The Cambrian explosion is the first major
problem with the fossil record. The lack of transitions is the second. But of all the problems, this
lack of transitional creatures—halfway between different species—is, for the
evolutionist, probably the biggest single crisis in the geologic column.
Indeed, it is one of the biggest of the many crises in evolutionary theory!
"Evolution
requires intermediate forms between species, and paleontology does not provide
them."—*D.B. Kitts, Paleontology and Evolutionary Theory (1974), p.
467.
Throughout
the fossils, we find no transitions from one kind of creature to another.
Instead, only individual, distinctive plant or animal kinds..
"It
is a feature of the known fossil record that most taxa
appear abruptly. They are not, as a rule, led up to by a sequence of almost
imperceptible changing forerunners such as
To
make matters worse, in the fossil record we find the very same creatures
that we have today, plus a few extinct types which died out before our time!
Neither now nor earlier are there transitional forms, halfway between true
species.
"When
we examine a series of fossils of any age we may pick out one and say with
confidence, ‘This is a crustacean’—or starfish, or a brachiopod, or annelid, or
any other type of creature as the case may be."—*A.H. Clark, The New Evolution: Zoogenesis, p.
100.
In
the rock strata, we find horses, tigers, fish, insects, but no transitional
forms. For example, we find large horses and small horses, but nothing that is
part horse and part something else.
After
giving years to a careful examination of the fossil record, comparing it with
that of species alive today, a famous biologist on the staff of the Smithsonian
Institute wrote these words:
"All
the major groups of animals have maintained the same relationship to each other
from the very first [from the very lowest level of the geologic column].
Crustaceans have always been crustaceans, echinoderms have always been
echinoderms, and mollusks have always been mollusks. There is not the slightest
evidence which supports any other viewpoint."—*A.H. Clark, The New Evolution: Zoogenesis
(1930), p. 114.
"From
the tangible evidence that we now have been able to discover, we are forced to
the conclusion that all the major groups of animals at the very first held just
about the same relation to each other that they do today."—*Op. cit.,
p. 211.
FOSSIL
GAPS—This glaring fact is a repudiation of
evolutionary theory. Evolutionists even have a name for the problem: they
call it "fossil gaps." No creatures that are
half fish and half bird, or half pig and half cow are to be found—only distinct
animal and plant types such as we know today.
A
related problem is the fact that great numbers of fossils span across many
strata, supposedly covering millions of years. This means that, throughout the
fossil record, those species made no changes during those "millions of
years."
THE
OCTOPUS—Here is an
excellent example of what we are talking about: the squid and octopus
are the most complex of the invertebrates the squid and octopus
are the most complex of the invertebrates the squid and octopus are
the most complex of the invertebrates (animals without backbones). The eye of
the octopus is extremely complicated, and equal to the human eye! Checking
carefully through the fossil record, you will find only squid and octopi,
nothing else. There was nothing evolved or evolving about them; they
were always just squid and octopi. (You will also find an extinct species,
called the nautiloids. But they seem to
have been even more complex!)
Checking
into this more carefully, you will find that octopi first appear quite early
in the fossil strata. The reason for that would be simple enough: When an
octopus is frightened, it may curl up in a cave or corner someplace, or it may
shoot out quickly using jets of water. For this reason, some octopi would be
buried early while others would be buried in higher strata.
Checking
still further, you will find that the octopus is found in nearly every stratum,
from bottom to top!
Many octopi continued to jet their way to the top of the waters as they rose.
(Later,
after the Flood was finished, the balance of nature worked against the nautiloid and they were devoured by their enemies. Today
there are none.
Checking
still further, you will find that octopi and squid in all strata are
identical to octopi and squid today.
MISSING LINKS—(*#11/133 Searching for Transitions [over a hundred quotations!]*) (*#11/133 Searching for
Transitions [over a hundred quotations!]*) [It should be mentioned here that Appendix
11, at the back of our Fossils and Strata chapter on our website
(evolution-facts.org), is the largest quotation appendix of all. It has 25
categories and 133 quotations. There are enough quotations here to form the
basis for a major thesis.]
The
links are missing. Nearly all the fossils are just our present animals, and the
links between them are just not there. Few scientists today are still looking for fossil links
between the major vertebrate or invertebrate groups. They have given up! The links just do not exist and have
never existed..
Evolutionists
know exactly what those transitional forms should look like, but they cannot
find them in the
fossil record! They are not to be found, even though thousands of men have
searched for them since the beginning of the 19th century! Everywhere they
turn, the paleontologists (the fossil hunters) find the same regular, distinct
species that exist today, plus some that are extinct. The extinct ones are
obviously not transitional forms between the regular species. For example, the
large dinosaurs are not transitional forms, but are just definite species which
became extinct in ancient times—probably by the waters of the Flood.
(Contrary
to the lurid paintings of dinosaurs which evolutionists like to display as
proof of their theory—extinction of a distinct species is not evolution,
and provides no evidence of it.)
The
search to find the missing links and fill the gaps between the distinct kinds
has resulted in enormous collections of fossils. Recall to mind the earlier
statements by
"There
is no need to apologize any longer for the poverty of the fossil record. In
some ways it has become almost unmanageably rich, and discovery is outpacing integration . . The fossil record nevertheless
continues to be composed mainly of gaps."—*T. Neville George,
"Fossils in Evolutionary Perspective," in Science Progress, January
1960, pp. 1, 3.
If
there are no transitional forms in the fossil record, there has been no
evolution!
CONTINUE: Chapter 12 Fossils and Strata Part 2
.
 | ||||
