Evolutionists' Intermediate-Form Dilemma
As you have seen, evolutionists appeal to the fossil record to confirm their claims that living species evolved gradually from one another. Yet even though 99% of the fossil record has been unearthed and catalogued, they still do not have a single piece of evidence to support the claim of evolution. For that reason, some evolutionists have attempted to manufacture their own fossils as alleged evidence for their theories, though subsequently these "remains" have been exposed as either hoaxes or distorted misinterpretations.
Fossils in the Earth's strata confirm the fact that all life forms have existed in their original perfect state ever since they were first created. The Glasgow University professor of palaeontology T. Neville George expressed this many years ago:
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.7
The paleontologist Niles Eldredge describes the invalidity of Darwin's blaming the insufficient nature of the fossil record for why no intermediate forms had been found:
The record jumps, and all the evidence shows that the record is real: the gaps we see reflect real events in life's history-not the artifact of a poor fossil record.8
Many people have the mistaken impression that there is a positive correlation between the fossil record and Darwin's theory—a misconception that was explained in an article in Science magazine:
A large number of well-trained scientists outside of evolutionary biology and paleontology have unfortunately gotten the idea that the fossil record is far more Darwinian than it is. This probably comes from the oversimplification inevitable in secondary sources: low-level textbooks, semi-popular articles, and so on. Also, there is probably some wishful thinking involved. In the years after Darwin, his advocates hoped to find predictable progressions. In general these have not been found yet the optimism has died hard, and some pure fantasy has crept into textbooks.9
The American palaeontologist S. M. Stanley describes how the truth revealed by the fossil record is ignored by the Darwinist mind-set that dominates the scientific world, which causes others to ignore it, as well:
The known fossil record is not, and never has been, in accord with gradualism. What is remarkable is that, through a variety of historical circumstances, even the history of opposition has been obscured. ... as the biological historian William Coleman has recently written, 'The majority of paleontologists felt their evidence simply contradicted Darwin's stress on minute, slow, and cumulative changes leading to species transformation.' ... their story has been suppressed.10
EVOLUTIONISTS' FALSE EVIDENCE
The fossils that evolutionists present as evidence, in the face of millions of genuine fossils, consist of outright hoaxes, distortions, sleight of hand and deception. For example:
- "Piltdown Man," strongly defended by Darwinists for many years and portrayed for 40 years as major evidence of evolution everywhere from the newspapers to school textbooks is one example of such a hoax. Piltdown Man never actually existed at all. The "fossil" consisted of a recently deceased orangutan's jawbone being added onto a human cranium.
- "Nebraska Man" was depicted as evidence of evolution by evolutionists on the basis of a single tooth—which actually belonged to a wild American pig!
- The fossils in the fabricated "family tree" known as the Horse Series actually consisted of wholly independent species that lived at different times and in different areas of the world.
- The fossil Ramapithecus and the Australopithecus series actually consisted of extinct species of ancient apes, which fossils were illustrated in a totally misleading manner,
- And the illustrations presented by Ernst Haeckel as a basis for his thesis that the developing embryo in the womb repeated the supposed stages of evolution were fraudulent. This all left Darwinists with nothing with which to defend their theories.
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, p. 59.
9. Science, July 17, 1981, p. 289.
10. S. M. Stanley, The New Evolutionary Timetable: Fossils, Genes, and the Origin of Species, Basic Books Inc. Publishers, N.Y., 1981, p. 71.