Sunday, April 02, 2006

Missing Link: My Gap Theory

Ever notice how scientists always claim to fill some colossal gap in the fossil record and, thus, the human evolutionary chain? What's interesting is that they never really admit such a gap exists until they discover some "transitional form" that fills in the afore unmentioned gap! Scientists give the impression that the fossil record is pretty much complete, and speaks with one voice about the origins of man. But when you catch them in a frank moment (y' gotta' be pretty alert), they sometimes admit how sparsely the fossil record is populated.


Their theories about how fossils are made (casual, every-day circumsces) are just flat wrong. Creationists, on the other had, believe the majority of the fossils were created through cataclismic events. The Bible has a great explanation about how the fossils got here. It's called the flood of Noah. Of course, the last thing (and I mean, the very last thing) that scientists want to do is lend credibility to something so "unscientific" as the Bible. Yet, given what an evolutionist expects to find, the fossil record is terribly "incomplete".

To use an analogy that we can understand, let's imagine that we wanted to write a thesis on the topic of what people wore in the 1980's; and so we hire a research firm to give us all available photographic records of people walking down a populated street in down town New York City in the '80's. The evolutionists on the project believe that there were clear and constant video feeds that should render a very complete record of everyone who ever walked down that street. The creationists, on the other hand, believe that the only record was from occasional snapshots taken by tourists on the street and city survey teams that were working on a re-surfacing project for the city public works department. Well, after a few weeks, the research company comes back with around a hundred snapshots that represent only fractions of a second from about once every few months during the '80's. Only about 10 seconds of lens exposure was recorded in all the photos combined. The creationists on the project are delighted with the quality of the prints and the broad sampling available to them to write their thesis. The evolutionists on the team, however, are irate that only 100 snapshots could be salvaged from the many video cameras and millions of miles of film that they believe should be available from the '80's.

So the creationists believe that all the available photographic artifacts were recorded during only a tiny portion of time compared to the decade being studied. The evolutionists, on the other hand, believe that the available photographic artifacts are a full and complete record of everyone that passed by for a full ten years.

Well, that's the situation that we have with the fossil record. Creationists are delighted with the snapshots that make up the fossil record. They are fascinated by the variety and broad representative sampling available to them. They know that the fossil record only represents a few moments in time when the conditions were right for forming fossils. They don't believe in the transition from one kind of plant or animal into another, thus they don't see any "gaps".

Evolutionists, however, who fashion themselves the stewards of the fossil record, are puzzled. They hide their embarrassment at the incompleteness of the fossil record given what they expected to find based upon their theories. They contrive fancy theories as to why skin sometimes fossilizes just fine, but whole species groups, such as marine animals constructed mostly of cartilage, don't. They come up with far-fetched ideas to explain why the layers of strata as they believe them to be, aren't found anywhere in the world, and when found, are often found out of order! They have no explanations for some anomalies such as why many petrified trees are standing right through their precious layers of strata that are supposed to be composed of build up and sediment from millions of years per layer! They come up with complex systems of relationships between disparate species and try to classify every new find as a "gap filler". They entertain B-class contrivances to help explain why some things vanished and where other things came from (see dinosaurs to birds) given no previous fossil record of those species. They've learned that ridicule is a powerful tool, and that by speaking with a unified voice (see global cooli...er...warming), the majority of people will be intimidated into asking few questions.

Creationists are increasingly less intimidated by the poor logic and naked faith of the evolutionary, pseudo-scientific world. As science advances, many of scientists' original beliefs fall to new evidence. Yet their faith continues. Each generation of scientist thinks he's an authority and scoffs at Christians. Yet the next generation of scientist comes along and disproves the last generation of scientists, claims to "really know", and, again, scoffs at the Bible. When you consider this pattern throughout modern history, the Christian you see over there quaking in front of an ape-man display at the Field Museum in Chicago, is probably just chuckling.


See this article for an example of research and interpretation that counters what the lemmings of the scientific community suggest.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I like your ideas and theories, as I too have similar beliefs. Do you have any published data to help support your ideas? If so I'd like to see them. :)