Part 2

17 EVIDENCES AGAINST EVOLUTION

3. FOSSIL RECORD

Charles Darwin stated, in his Origin of Species, "The geolog-

ical record is extremely imperfect and this fact will to a large

extent explain why we do not find intermediate varieties, con-

necting 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."

Now, 130 years and billions of fossils later, we can

rightly reject the view of an incomplete fossil record or of one

"connecting together all . . . forms of life by the finest gradu-

ated steps."

Out of the millions of fossils in the world, not one

transitional form has been found. All known species show up

abruptly in the fossil record, without intermediate forms, thus

contributing to the fact of special creation. Let's take a look

at Archeopteryx, a fossil that some evolutionists claim to be

transitional between reptile and bird.

Archeopteryx is discussed in evolutionist Francis Hitching's

book, The Neck of the Giraffe - Where Darwin Went Wrong. Hitch-

ing speaks on six aspects of Archeopteryx, following here.

(The following six points are quoted from Luther Sunder-

land's book, Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, pp.

74-75, the facts of which points he gathered from Hitching's

book.)

1. It had a long bony tail, like a reptile's.

In the embryonic stage, some living birds have

more tail vertebrae than Archeopteryx. They later fuse

to become an upstanding bone called the pygostyle. The

tail bone and feather arrangement on swans are very

similar to those of Archeopteryx.

One authority claims

that there is no basic difference between the ancient

and modern forms: the difference lies only in the fact

that the caudal vertebrae are greatly prolonged. But

this does not make a reptile.

2. It had claws on its feet and on its feathered fore-

limbs.

However, many living birds such as the hoatzin in

South America, the touraco in Africa and the ostrich

also have claws. In 1983, the British Museum of Natural

History displayed numerous species within nine families

of birds with claws on the wings.

3. It had teeth.

Modern birds do not have teeth but many ancient

birds did, particularly those in the Mesozoic. There is

no suggestion that these birds were transitional. The

teeth do not show the connection of Archeopteryx with

any other animal since every subclass of vertebrates

has some with teeth and some without.

4. It had a shallow breastbone.

Various modern flying birds such as the hoatzin have

similarly shallow breastbones, and this does not dis-

qualify them from being classified as birds. And there

are, of course, many species of nonflying birds, both

living and extinct.

Recent examination of Archeopteryx's feathers has

shown that they are the same as the feathers of modern

birds that are excellent fliers. Dr. Ostrom says that

there is no question that they are the same as the

feathers of modern birds. They are asymmetrical with a

center shaft and parallel barbs like those of today's

flying birds.

5. Its bones were solid, not hollow, like a bird's.

This idea has been refuted because the long bones of

Archeopteryx are now known to be hollow.

6. It predates the general arrival of birds by millions

of years.

This also has been refuted by recent paleontological

discoveries. In 1977 a geologist from Brigham Young

University, James A. Jensen, discovered in the Dry Mesa

quarry of the Morrison formation in western Colorado a

fossil of an unequivocal bird in Lower Jurassic rock.

This deposit is dated as 60-million years older than

the Upper Jurassic rock in which Archeopteryx was

found. He first found the rear-leg femur and, later,

the remainder of the skeleton.

This was reported in

Science News 24 September 1977. Professor John Ostrom

commented, "It is obvious we must now look for the

ancestors of flying birds in a period of time much

older than that in which Archeopteryx lived."

And so it goes with the fossil that many textbooks set forth

as the best example of a transitional form. No true intermediate

fossils have been found.

In a letter to Luther Sunderland, dated April 10, 1979, Dr.

Colin Patterson, of the British Museum of Natural History, wrote:

"...I fully agree with your comments on the lack of di-

rect illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book.

If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly

have included them. You suggest that an artist should be

used to visualise such transformations, but where would

he get the information from? I could not, honestly, pro-

vide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic licence,

would that not mislead the reader?"

Just think of it! Here is a man sitting amidst one of the

greatest fossil collections ever and he knows of absolutely NO

transitional fossils. So convincing I believe this quote to be

that it will sum up this discussion on fossil evidence.