[uncommonsense]

"Oh you're going to go through the archives of a Dallas newspaper to find it? But that's not the scientific method. There's no measurement involved."

I can't tell if you are trying to be clever or obtuse, but either way, your comment has nothing to do with the topic of the scientific method and a theory (evolution) that hasn't been scrutinized by the scientific method.

The process of measuring a temperature has been subjected to science. At points in time it is recorded based on this foundational rigor. An authority records. It can be cross referenced across other sources. I have no idea how this is related to the theory of evolution.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

To me (and the vast majority of scientists) tree rings, ice cores, geological strata, variations in DNA, etc. are no different than newspaper archives.

If they are "read" intelligently then the data gleaned can be used to justify scientific theories, e.g. the universe is just over 13 billion years old, the earth is about 4 billion years old, species evolved, etc.