Earth's many rock layers present us with a jackpot of information, including the fossil record. The fossil record is not simply a random amalgamation of ancient bones, but rather a well organized timeline containing more basal fossils the further down you go and more recent ones towards the surface. What makes the record so dynamic is its plasticity. As more and more fossils are found, the record can continually be modified to better represent the whole life history of earth.
In "Your Inner Fish," Neil Shubin gives incredibly examples of the fossil record, one such being fossils from the sea floor being found on the crest of Mount Everest. Such instances are sought after for evolutionists. Discoverys of intermediate fossils act as puzzle pieces for the evolutionist.
My question is: in light of the recent debate between Ken Hamm and Bill Nye, where Hamm argued for Creationism and Nye argued for Evolution, does Hamm have a valid basis for his argument by denying the validity of the fossil record?
My answer to your question: NO! It's so hard to respond to criticism of scientific facts that are based on denying facts. But it's such an important issue in science education...
ReplyDelete