[Dominic Harr]

Fossil record proof?

That's exactly the point.

That's not "proof", as I understand it. That's the argument that, "if we haven't found it yet, it doesn't exist".

Which is not, in my experience, even close to true. Yet you consider that "proof".

We can't even begin to have a useful discussion if that's your idea of logic.

[Heartlander]

Wait a minute… It seems that you have made up your mind prior to this discussion. Read the article if you are truly interested in knowledge.

[gore3000]

That's not "proof", as I understand it. That's the argument that, "if we haven't found it yet, it doesn't exist".

But the question is how long can you keep saying that absence of proof does not disprove evolution? Is not 150 years enough? What is most important, how can you say that evolution is true if you admit that the proof for it is not to be found? It's like saying there definitely are Martians, we just have not found them. One can make up almost any silly theory one wants with such an argument.