letsdance on 08 October 2009
| Rath said: Fair enough, that last insult was fairly petty =P. I just find it amusing that someone is claiming the fossil record is a scam =P. In any case those sources are not meant to be in depth - they are to give an overview of a subject, something that wikipedia is fine for. If I were posting detailed evidence of anything I wouldn't use wikipedia, but it really is very good for giving a general overview of something. However if you want; http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/lenski.html http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fhc/hyraco1.htm |
I find it funny that someone is claiming fossil records are proof. I mean... youre telling me fossils are proof of evolution... I mean... as rare as fossils are (and they are very rare) you claim it proves of evolution...
So let me get this straight.
A. A rare occurance of finding fossils
B. All of them pristine condition that over the billions of years hasn't been tampered with.
C. With the limited amount of fossils found you can prove that the species found in these fossils are all related when the fossils found are years and years and years apart and they weren't deformed or mutated or tampered or damaged.
