[Retain Mike]

One thing that has bothered me about discoveries from fossils is the level of testing to which these revelations are subject. If all the fossils to date were placed in structures with boundaries the size of the Rose Bowl, how many such structures would be filled? Let’s say 20 were filled. Now if we compress all that organic matter into crude oil, would we have enough to run my truck for a year or a decade? With so little examined evidence in relation to the total population, are the such detailed conclusions statistically responsible? Has suitable mathematical analysis ever been applied to these scientific papers? PhD candidates for psychology and sociology have to hire graduate math majors to evaluate their data so their committees can see the level of support the data provides for their conclusions. I don’t believe such a process is considered by these people.

[Liberty1970]

There have been hundreds of millions of fossils, at a raw minimum, that have been evaluated by experts (and billions more that have been observed by amateurs). These include at least 250,000 fossil species (google Dave Raup on the subject for example), most of which correspond to living species. This is not consistent with the evolutionary model - estimates from Ernst Mayr and others are that around 600 billion - 1 trillion species should have existed throughout evolutionary time. So very few fossils should correspond to living species.

There is plenty of evidence for stasis of life forms over time - that is clearly the dominant theme of the fossil record, though evolutionists constantly obscure that fact. And there is good evidence for smale scale diversification and speciation within types of life. But the evidence overall is that of an orchard of multiple unlinked living trees of species, not one single evolutionary tree, or a separate creation of each species.