Evolution Cruncher Chapter 12
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, London, 177:8 (1966).
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 is 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.
The opposite viewpoint
is known as catastrophism, and teaches that there has been a
great catastrophe in the past—the Flood—which within a few months
laid down all the sedimentary rock strata, entombing the
animals
contained within them, which became fossils.
THE
THEORY THAT STARTED IT—Naturalists,
working in Paris a few years before *Charles Lyell was born, discovered
fossil-bearing rock strata. *Lyell used this information in his
important book, Principles of Geology, and divided the strata
into three divisions. He dated one as youngest, another as older, and
the third as very ancient.
*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 England, Scotland, and France were the primary ones studied. *Lyell
based his age-theory on the number of still-living species represented
by fossils in each stratum. If a given stratum had few fossils
represented by species alive today, then *Lyell dated it more anciently.
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
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.
When the Flood
overwhelmed the world, the first to be covered were slow-moving
animals, the next to be covered were somewhat larger, somewhat
faster-moving animals, and so it went.
Today
we can dig into these rock strata and find that the lowest stratum tends
to have the slowest-moving creatures; above them are faster ones.
Evolutionary scientists declare these lowest strata are many millions of
years old (570 million for the oldest, the Cambrian), and the
topmost to be the most recent (the Pliocene at 10 million, and
the Pleistocene at 2 million years).
But, in actuality, we
will discover that the evidence indicates that all the sedimentary
strata with their hoards of fossils were laid down within a very short
time.
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 Darwin, he ignored the
problem and found comfort in the faith that future explorations would
reverse the situation and ultimately prove his theory correct.
"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 Darwin’s
book, pages 341-342.]
"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 Darwin was on the right
track."—Luther D. Sunderland, Darwin’s Enigma (1988), p. 9
[italics ours].
"There are a
hundred million fossils, all catalogued and identified, in museums
around the world.—*Porter Kier, quoted in New Scientist, January
15, 1981, p. 129.
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 Darwin when paleontology
was a young science. With over 200,000,000 catalogued specimens of
about 250,000 fossil species, many evolutionary paleontologists such
as Stanley argue that the fossil record is sufficient."—W.R.
Bird, The Origin of Species Revisited (1954), p. 48 [italics ours].
"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."—*S.
Stanley, "Macroevolutíon," p. 1 (1979).
"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 Darwin and Paleontology," in Field Museum Bulletin, January
1979.
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!
Sunderland, quoted
above, said "Our museums now are filled with
over 100 million fossils of 250,000 different species."
Here, in two brief paragraphs, is a clear description of the enormity of
this missing link problem:
"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 Egypt has
left us records that date back to about 2200 B.C. (that
is the corrected date as determined by scholars; Manetho’s account
reaches to 3500 B.C. See chapter 21, Archaeological Dating. [Due
to a lack of space, we had to omit nearly all of the chapter from this
book, but it is on our website.]). Moses began writing part of the
Bible about 1480 B.C. He wrote of events going back to about 4000 B.C.
Yet evolutionists claim
that they can date this rock or that rock—going back into the millions
of years! The entire geologic column—from bottom to top—is supposed
to have taken 2 billion years, with millions of years being assigned to
each level of strata. On what basis do they presume to think they can
assign such ancient dates to the origin of various rocks? With the
exception of some recently erupted volcanic lava, no one was present
when any rocks were laid down. A man picks up a piece of rock from the
distant past and, although he himself may be only half a century old, he
claims to be able to date that rock as being 110 billion years old!
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
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! 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 Madagascar, they are no longer claimed as ‘index
fossils’—fossils which tell you that all other fossils in that layer
are the same ripe old age."—Michael Pitman, Adam and Evolution
(1984), pp. 186, 198.
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 North America," in American
Journal of Science, February 1964, p. 166.
"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 America, January 1984, p. 2.
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," Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, March 1983,
p. 21.
"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 Kansas State University wrote this:
"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 American Museum of Natural History,
in Chicago, made this comment:
"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?"—*Niles Eldredge, Time
Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution, 1985, p. 52.
The curator of
zoological collections at Oxford University wrote this:
"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,
December 5, 1985, p. 66.
A
DOUBLE CIRCLE—Circular
reasoning is the basis, not only of the fossil theory,—but of the
whole theory of evolution!
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 Harvard University in
1983, said this:
"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,
Darwin’s Enigma (1988), p. 150.
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, February 2, 1974, p. 72). Each eye of the
trilobite had two lenses! Here is what one of the world’s leading
trilobite researchers wrote:
"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 Chicago Press, 1993, pp. 54, 57.
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.
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 Wyoming. Reported in Science magazine for
May 5, 1 978,—this discovery placed every major animal
phylum group in the Cambrian rocks! Although never discussed in
school textbooks, this news came as a distinct shock to the
professional world. For evolutionists, the situation continues
to get worse.
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, Salt Range, Punjab, India. These are Cambrian deposits.
They later confirmed that further investigation confirmed their original
report, and the same results were obtained from the Cambrian Vindbyan
System, and the Cambrian of Kashmir—these Kashmir beds also contained
several types of trilobites. The review articles of Axelrod and Leclercq
acknowledge these findings."—Marvin L. Lubenow,
"Significant Fossil Discoveries Since 1958," in Creation
Research Society Quarterly, December 1980, p. 154.
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 (*Preston Cloud, "Pseudofossils:
A Plea for Caution," in Geology, November 1973, pp. 123-127).
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!
The "3.8
billion-year-old" Isua outcrop in Greenland was previously
believed to contain the oldest evidence of life. Then in 1981 it was
discovered that the evidence was nothing more than weathered crystals of
calcium magnesium carbonates:
"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 Crystals," in New Scientist, October 15, 1981, p.
164.
Two years later, an
update report in New Scientist on "the world’s oldest
(Precambrian) rocks" in Greenland said this:
"Geologists have
found no conclusive evidence of life in these Greenland rocks."—*Chris
Peat and *Will Diver, "First Signs of Life on Earth,"
in New Scientist, September 16, 1983, pp. 776-781.
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 Darwin believed should be usual in
evolution."—*G.G. Simpson, in The Evolution of Life, p. 149.
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 (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. Darwin’s "survival
of the fittest" [the fittest will survive better than the
others] apparently did not apply to the nautiloids, which were
distinctly different than the octopi and squid, but apparently more
capable than either.)
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 Sunderland and *Kier, that 100 million fossils have been
examined by paleontologists around the world.
"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!
You have just completed
Chapter 12 Fossils and Strata Part 1
NEXT—
Go to the next file in
this series,
Chapter 12 Fossils and Strata Part
2
|