Darwin, Huxley And The Truth About FossilsIn 1859, when Darwin produced his famous book, "The Origin of Species", very few fossils had been found. In chapter 10 of his book, Darwin predicted that evidence for evolution would eventually be found in the fossils buried in the earth's strata.
Darwin's supporters knew that a lot depended upon what the fossils would show. If evolutionary theory was true, the fossil record would show more complex species in the top strata and more simple and primitive species in the bottom strata. It would show how the species living in our world today had earlier prototypes in ages past.
If evolution has taken place, there will its marks be found; if it has not taken place, there will be its refutation. T.A. Huxley
Since the middle of the nineteenth century, millions of fossils have been found. And what they tell us about the earth's history is problematic for evolutionists.
The earliest fossils have no ancestors. Complex fossils appear "suddenly", fully formed, in the "earliest" strata, with no evidence of evolutionary ancestors. The trilobite, for example, which has been found in the first animal fossil la
The "later" fossils have no evolutionary links. Each plant and animal type appears abruptly, as an already complete, functional unit. They would have to be in order to eat, breathe and reproduce. Some 90% of fossils found are of species familiar to us. The rest are of species now extinct.
"Older" and "younger" are mixed in any sequence. Fossils are found in the "wrong" order - thus destroying the evolutionary progression sequence.
There is no time lapse between the different strata. There is no evidence of erosion between the la
Individual fossils penetrate several different strata. This destroys the "long ages" theory for the formation of strata.
The evolution "ages" chart is supported nowhere on Earth. No geological site on earth shows the expected complete evolution sequence.
"Extinct" early forms "leap" ages - and live today. Animals thought to be extinct for aeons and which were used to date the strata in which they were found, have since been discovered still alive.
Living descendants have survived unchanged. Those plant and animal varieties that survive today are basically unchanged from their first fossil ancestors.
Mutation produces no new genes. Mutation selects what already exists in the gene pool.
The fossil record has proven to be a massive embarrassment and disappointment to the evolutionists.
You must never contradict them though their premises are flawed.
If you do you must expect to be howled down with one accord,
For evolution theorists proclaim infallibility
And this you can't contest without disturbing their tranquillity.
It is said of two hypotheses the simpler we should choose,
But evolution theory demands that we refuse.
Did a group of beasts with itchy feet transfer their range and then,
Abroad, mutate or anyway change and then mutate again,
Migrating, homesick, back again to their range in years gone by
To wipe out all their old root stock that Darwinists should cry,
Creating a deep mystery because the rocks are bare
Of fossils that the Darwinists expected to be there?
The pilgrim beasts, so Dawkins says, found the other side of the hill
Or mountain (if the hill was small), and they stayed until
It was time to travel back to the home of their ancestral beast,
Relentlessly competing till the ancestors deceased.
One wonders how a species could be utterly ungrateful
And leave behind a record which the Darwinists find hateful.
But modern evolutionists want this to be believed
And if you do you're welcomed and into their ranks received.
They like to dance the haka as a substitue for reason,
Always chanting loud, indignant sounds that float the breeze on.
They have an inclination to deny they ever erred -
A little bit more honesty and this you might have heard:
We're a breed of funny paleonts without the missing link,
Who just pretend it's really there for that's the way we think.
We believe in evolution 'cause we won't believe in God -
To abandon that belief would show us up as very odd.
A 'controversial' article condemned our fond belief
Without the author's name - unfair, and greatly to our grief.
If we do not know who wrote it, then we cannot make him cease,
Frustrating our appointment as the science thought police.
Some of us protested, and as soon as we are able
We'll write a definition for a 'controversial' label.
All we've thought of so far is it disagrees with us,
But we can't have that adopted or there's nothing to discuss.
We delved into geology, in hope of great rewards,
But finds acclaimed with great applause oft turned out to be frauds.
The missing links, connected, would suffice to make a chain,
So we dug and dug and turned up rocks, but laboured all in vain.
A chain with missing links could not our fixed idea sustain-
It takes a lot of fantasy their absence to explain.
Since we need a few discoveries from the scientific fountain,
We would set the past behind us on the other side o' the mountain.
We try to work in terrain new to keep up flagging hopes -
Who knows what fossils may turn up upon the other slopes?
As to why there's nothing yet to show there's simply no accountin'
Unless it be we cannot find the other side o' the mountain.
You and I are not aware when they'll admit defeat
Or how they will announce it, but it's bound to be a treat.
At least we'll know which way to look, and, ready with a thumb,
We shall see that they'll be coming round the mountain when they come.
Jonathan Gray, "What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs?" www.surprisingdiscoveries.com
G.D. Lyons, "The Other Side of the Mountain"