|
The Origin of Species According to the Fossil Record: CREATION The theory of evolution claims that all the living species on Earth descended, by means of a series of minute changes, from a common ancestor. To state the theory another way, living species are not separated from one another by absolute differences, but exhibit an inner continuity. However, actual observations in nature have indicated that there is no such continuity as claimed. What we see in the living world are different categories of organisms, separated by vast and distinct differences. Robert Carroll, an expert on vertebrate paleontology, admits this in his book Patterns and Processes of Vertebrate Evolution:
Evolution is a process alleged to have taken place in the past, and fossil discoveries are the only scientific source that can tell us about the history of life. Pierre Grassé says this on the subject:
In order for the fossil record to shed light on this subject, we need to compare what the theory of evolution predicts against the actual fossil discoveries. According to the theory, all living things have descended from various “ancestral” forms. A living species that existed before gradually turned into another species, and every present species emerged in this way. According to the theory, this transition took place slowly over hundreds of millions of years and progressed in stages. That being the case, countless numbers of “intermediate forms” must have emerged and lived over the long process of transition in question. And a few of them must certainly have been fossilized. For example, half-fish, half-amphibian creatures that still bore fish-like characteristics but which had also acquired certain amphibious features must have existed. And reptile-birds with both reptilian and avian features must have emerged. Since these creatures were in a process of transition, they must have been deformed, deficient and flawed. These theoretical creatures claimed to have existed in the distant past are known as “intermediate forms.” If any such living species really did exist, then they should number, in the millions, or even billions. Abundant traces of them should be found in the fossil record, because the number of intermediate forms should be even greater than the number of animal species known today. The geologic strata should be full of the remains of fossilized intermediate forms. Darwin himself admitted this. As he wrote in his book, The Origin of Species:
Yet Darwin was aware that no intermediate forms had yet been found, and regarded this as a major dilemma facing his theory. In the chapter “Difficulties on Theory,” he wrote:
In the face of this difficulty, the only explanation Darwin could offer was that the fossil records of his time were insufficient. He claimed that later, when the fossil records had been examined in detail, the missing intermediate forms would definitely be found. The Sufficiency of the Fossil Record In the face of the lack of intermediate forms, Darwin claimed, 140 years ago, that they were not available then but new research would definitely unearth them. But has it? To put the question another way, after looking at the results of all the fossil research carried out to date, should we accept that intermediate forms never actually existed—or should we await the results of still further excavations?
The answer to that question of course depends on the wealth of the fossil record we already have available. Looking at the paleontological data, we see that the fossil records are extraordinarily rich, with literally billions of fossil specimens obtained from different regions of the world.5 From examining these fossils, experts have identified some 250,000 different species, many of which bear an extraordinarily close resemblance to the 1.5 million species living today.6 (Of the 1.5 million species alive today, fully 1 million are insects.) Yet among these countless fossil specimens, no supposed intermediate form has ever been found. It seems impossible for the intermediate forms, that have not been discovered despite the rich fossil records, to be unearthed in new excavations. T. Neville George, the Glasgow University professor of paleontology, admitted as much many years ago:
Niles Eldredge, a well-known paleontologist and director of the American Museum of Natural History, states that Darwin’s claim to the effect that “the fossil record is deficient, which is why we cannot find any intermediate forms” is invalid:
In his 1991 book, Beyond Natural Selection, Robert Wesson says that the gaps in the fossil record are real and phenomenal:
The argument put forward 140 years ago that “no intermediate forms have been found yet, but they will be in the future” is no longer tenable today. The fossil record is sufficiently rich to account for the origin of life, and it reveals a concrete picture: Different species all emerged independently of one another, suddenly, and with all their different structures. No imaginary evolutionary “intermediate forms” existed among them. Facts Revealed by the Fossil Record What is the origin of the “evolution-paleontology” relationship that has been installed in society’s subconscious? Why is it that when the fossil record is mentioned, most people assume that there’s a definite, positive link between this record and Darwin’s theory? The answers are set out in an article in the magazine Science:
N. Eldredge and Ian Tattershall make the following important comment on that matter:
The American paleontologist S. M. Stanley describes how this fact, revealed by the fossil record, is ignored by the Darwinist dogma that dominates the scientific world, and how others are also encouraged to ignore it:
Let us now examine this truth revealed by the fossil record, which has so far been “suppressed,” in rather more detail. |
1. Robert L. Carroll, Patterns and Processes of Vertebrate Evolution, Cambridge University Press, 1997, p. 9 
2. Pierre Grassé, Evolution of Living Organisms, New York, Academic Press, 1977, p. 82
3. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, p. 179
4. Ibid., p. 172
5. Duane T. Gish, Evolution: Fossils Still Say No, CA, 1995, p. 41
6. David Day, Vanished Species, Gallery Books, New York, 1989
7. T. N. George, “Fossils in Evolutionary Perspective,” Science Progress, Vol. 48, January 1960, p. 1
8. N. Eldredge and I. Tattersall, The Myths of Human Evolution, Columbia University Press, 1982, p. 59
9. Robert G. Wesson, Beyond Natural Selection, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991, p. 45S
10. Science, July 17, 1981, p. 289
11. Eldredge and Tattersall, The Myths of Human Evolution, pp. 45-46
12. S. M. Stanley, The New Evolutionary Timetable: Fossils, Genes, and the Origin of Species, Basic Books Inc. Publishers, N.Y., 1981, p. 71
LIVING FOSSILS 