The Bible and Science 3:
Fossil Evidence Supports the Bible
“So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds…” Genesis 1:21 (NIV)
As more fossils are discovered and knowledge about them increases, is the Theory of Evolution gaining or losing ground?
The facts speak for themselves.
A quote on the Creation Research website (www.creationresearch.net) from Dr David Raup, Curator of Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, states:
“Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin, and knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded…ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition that we had in Darwin’s time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information.”
It is unfortunate the ‘evolution of the horse’ is still put forward as proved in educational articles. For more information on the gaping flaws in the theory, visit www.creation.com/horse-evolution.
So the horse is no longer pictured on the evolutionary tree, but what do other fossils show us?
The first fossil creatures, found in the Cambrian Period record, are little sea creatures; trilobites (large numbers but now extinct) jellyfish, coral, shellfish, starfish and sponges which are still around today.
These fossils appear suddenly with no trace of creatures they could have evolved from.
They all appear together.
They are all fully formed.
They show no developing parts.
And they are complex in their own way with eyes, jointed legs or segmented bodies etc.
If evolution were true, much of their evolutionary process must have happened before this but there is not the slightest scientific evidence.
An Evolutionist’s explanation of this lack is that previous animals had soft bodies which disappeared leaving no trace. The BBC schools’ GCSE science webpage gives an example of this theory:
“Fossils show how much, or how little, organisms have changed over time. One of the problems with the fossil record is that it contains gaps. Not all organisms fossilise well, and there will be many fossils that have been destroyed by the movements of the Earth, or simply not yet been discovered.”
The first soft bodied creatures are well preserved in the Cambrian Period, however.
Another theory put forward by Evolution is that the earlier rock strata are too deep to explore. But plenty of rock below the fossil-bearing rock has been sorted through and no fossil creatures were found.
Again, another suggestion for the absence of earlier fossils is that the pre-Cambrian rocks were pushed down low, pressured until fossils were destroyed. Maybe that did happen in some areas but in many places there is no evidence of it. In other locations the ancient rocks have risen, not sunk into oblivion. For example: Glacier National Park, USA and in the Decan Plateau in India.
Fossil algae are found in these lower rocks. How come it survived and fossils that might prove evolution didn’t survive?
And how is it possible for soft-bodied creatures and plants to be fossilized at all?
Scientists do not know.
But each new discovery and the increased knowledge that comes with them supports the Genesis account of creation. Here’s an extract from an amazing report on the Creation Research website about a fossil squid:
WRITING WITH JURASSIC INK, reported in BBC News and Times Online 19 Aug 2009. British palaeontologists have found the perfectly preserved squid and squid ink sac in Jurassic rocks in Wiltshire, England. The squid ink was solidified, but so well preserved the scientists were able to liquefy it using an ammonia solution and use it to draw a picture of the squid.
The excavation was led by Phil Wilby of the British Geological Survey, who described the fossil: “It’s among the world’s best fossil preservation. It’s a squid-like creature, but it’s not like anything we have in the world today. You really don’t imagine anything so soft could be so well preserved three dimensionally. It still looks as if it is modern squid ink. It’s absolutely incredible to find something like this.”
Wilby explained: “About 155 million years ago, millions of these animals were dying in this precise area. We don’t know why that is. In normal circumstances, the decomposition process means only the hard parts of animal are preserved, such as the bones, shell and teeth. The odds of this find are easily a billion to one and probably much greater. We call it the Medusa effect: specimens turn to stone within a matter of days, before the soft parts can be eaten away.”
The editor of Creation Research website made this comment: “It is good to see scientists admitting such fine preservation could only happen if a creature was rapidly fossilised before any degradation of tissue structure took place. The fact that it was found buried with large numbers of similarly preserved soft bodied creatures, indicates it was victim of a catastrophic upheaval which caught many sea creatures, mixed them with sediment and quickly dumped and buried them.
Given the known shelf life for inks, it is most unlikely that the fossil squid ink inside the sac could simply be liquefied in ammonia if it really was 155 million years old. The fresh state of this ink points to a much more recent burial than that. This fossil fits better into the Biblical (Noah’s Flood) catastrophic history of the world, rather than the slow gradual evolution of life mixed with long slow fossilisation stories repeated in high school textbooks.”
References: New International Version of the Bible (NIV), Genesis + Creation = Science by H R Jamieson, Creation Research website, Creation.com website, BBC schools’ GCSE science webpage