FossilsDarwin, was a firm believer that the fossil record would in time validate his ideas and prove the actuality of organic macroevolution. More than a century has passed, and the fossil record has left us with more questions than answers.
Complex animals appearing early in the fossil recorded
Most macroevolutionary theory is rooted in the idea that more complex lifeforms evolve over time from less complex lifeforms. However, as we gain a greater knowledge of the fossil record it becomes clear that this is simply not true. Amazingly complex organisms appear far to early in the fossil record.
Animals that forgot to evolve
Darwin, believed that macroevolution came about from a series of random mutations. These random mutations randomly help all life forms adapt and evolve over time. The problem with this is that many animals in the fossil record have not changed. The Horseshoe Crab, is the same today as it appears in 450 million year old fossils. If it is the nature of life to evolve, as the macroevolutionist would have us believe, surly these animals would have undergone significant changes over millions of years; but they haven't.
A lack of transitional fossils
Macroevolutionists, argue that the lack of transitional fossil evidence can be explained with the simple realization that not all organisms fossilize. While this is somewhat true, they more than exaggerate this claim to only 2% of all animals fossilizing. However, according to renown vertebrate paleontologist Björn Kurtén; of all animals currently living in Europe, 88% appear in the European fossil record, and 99% appear somewhere in the fossil record. Two percent? I think not.
As a result of a lack of transitional species in the fossil record, some macroevolutionists have simply made things up. Many of the so called links, are later proven to be mistakes or outright hoaxes. Scientists, actively promote their findings to the public, but when proven false print a small correction in an obscure journal.
In my lifetime, macroevolutionists have been pushing the idea that birds evolved from dinosaurs. Some of you may remember a find from 1999 which received significant media attention. It was a fossil which proved the transition between dinosaurs and feathered birds. It turns out that they had mixed up the the fossils of several; different creatures. Of course, that correction never made it into the popular magazines, and most people still believe science has solidified the connection between birds and dinosaurs. This happens a lot, in fact it's happened thousands of times, and often appears in textbooks for decades after the error is uncovered.
As I stated in the introduction to this series of posts, my purpose is not to prove creationism, it is simply to show the flaws in macroevolutionary theory; and make clear that it should not be taught as absolute fact. As I researched this article, I found large amounts of disinformation on both sides of the argument. I have included links to sources I believe to be reputable. Study it out in your mind and form your own conclusion.
My next post in the Darwin's Fairy Tale series, will deal with what I feel is the most significant problem with Darwin's theory of macroevolution, the astonishing complexity of microbiology.