If the creation model of life’s origin is correct, the fossil record should show a pattern of distinct breaks between very different “kinds” of creatures. If the classic evolutionary model is correct, the fossil record should be a blurred continuum of creatures.
The most fundamental grouping of animals is the phylum. There are dozens of phyla in the animal kingdom and each phylum represents a vastly different body structure. For instance, all animals with a backbone are in one phylum; most insects are in another; external-shelled creatures, such as clams, are grouped together, while jellyfish are in yet another. The phyla comprises the broadest distinction among life forms. If any group of animals should have transitional forms, it should be the phylum.
Creationists predict that as we examine the fossil record, we should not find organisms which bridge the gap between the very different created body types. Evolutionists reject divine creation, believing instead that all life slowly changed from a simple single cell into the complex forms we see all around us. If they are correct, there should be thousands of “in-between” forms as one basic body type changed into another. This necessitates millions of changes to an organism, (such an amoeba) before it could have turned into a clam. If these transitions between phyla cannot be found, something must be very wrong with the theory of evolution.
What does the fossil record show concerning the appearance of these most basic animal groups? The following quotes are representative of what has been found after extensive searching by an army of evolutionary paleontologists over the last 150 years. These statements are both contextual and relevant to what the fossil record actually reveals:
– “All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt.” 1
– “Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides of ‘seeing’ evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of ‘gaps’ in the fossil record.” 2
– “…no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation…” 3
– “The known fossil record fails to document a single example of phyletic evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition” 4
Evolutionists have lined up some fossils which seem to fill small gaps between closely related creatures. However, accepting small transitions as evidence in support of the grand evolution scenario is like believing a single stepping stone can bridge the Mississippi.
Evolution requires transitional forms between the most basic animal groups … yet none exist. Creation asserts that there never were transitions between basic kinds of life. This is exactly what the fossil record shows. What better evidence for creation could there be?
Evolutionary scientists continue to search for an acceptable explanation for how one type of animal could have turned into a completely different type of animal. Yet there is precious little fossil evidence that this has happened, no experimental evidence that it is currently happening, and no adequate theoretical explanation for how it could have happened. One must wonder if belief in evolution is based more on wishful thinking and faith than on objectivity and science.
1. Gould, Stephen, “The Return of the Hopeful Monster”, Natural History, vol. LXXXVI(6), 1977, p.24.
2. Kitts, David, “Paleontology and the Evolutionary Theory”, Evolution, vol. 28, 1974, p.467.
3. Ridley, Mark, “Who Doubts Evolution?”, New Scientist, Vol. 90, No. 1259, (June 25, 1981), pp. 830- 832.
4. Stanley, Steven, Macro evolution: Pattern and Process, 1979, p.39