Replies

"The fossil record does not actually indicate that species evolved into other species, and evidence of the necessary transitional species has not been found, but we assume that those species did exist because our theory requires it" -- this, of course, is science."

Sounds more like religion to me. It's quite pathetic that lawyers and judges now determine what is science and what is not.

The "fossil record", for the most part was created at one specific period of time, which supports catastrophic event theory (real science with much more scientific support than evolution religion).
There never will be a fossil record showing transitional forms, because none existed at the time the fossil record was created, no did they ever.

The fossil "record" isn't being continuosly created today, because these creatures decay and or are eaten by scavengers before sufficient material can cover them to create a fossil.

Here's an intresting book for those who are tired of the far-fetched evolutionist gospel. fountains of the deep

Evolutionists are like muslims, no matter how much proof you present to them proving their prophet was the furtherst thing from one, they still refuse to accept the facts.

Sounds more like religion to me.

That would be C1.

The "fossil record", for the most part was created at one specific period of time, which supports catastrophic event theory (real science with much more scientific support than evolution religion).
There never will be a fossil record showing transitional forms, because none existed at the time the fossil record was created, no did they ever.

Note the dates of each of these specimens (my means millions of years); there is no evidence for a catastrophic event, sorry. If you want to push YEC, don't try to pretend there is scientific evidence supporting it.

Some of these are transitional forms. Can you tell which ones they are?