Gould contradicted himself as much as Clinton. Fact is though that he fought against Darwinists most of his life and he insisted that the Cambrian species could not be explained by gradual evolution.
As to his theory, it is just an excuse for lack of evidence and part of the totally unscientific credo of evolutionists that 'lack of evidence is not evidence of lack'. Such may be okay in the Art Bell show, but it is not science, never was, never will be.
Not that I've seen. But feel free to provide actually support for your claim. Be sure to actually quote him instead of "paraphrase" him, and provide a citation to the original source(s).
Fact is though that he fought against Darwinists most of his life
No he didn't, but I look forward to your attempt to support this.
and he insisted that the Cambrian species could not be explained by gradual evolution.
Define "gradual". And quote him on that too, please.
As to his theory, it is just an excuse for lack of evidence and part of the totally unscientific credo of evolutionists that 'lack of evidence is not evidence of lack'.
We've given plenty of actual evidence.
Such may be okay in the Art Bell show, but it is not science, never was, never will be.
Which is why evolutionary science does not proceed in the manner you describe.