~ Excellent point. Again, I’ve struggled with the concept of evolution since my Biology undergrad- and had never thought of this tangent until now. It still does not explain the “chemicals-to-life” conundrum- at least any better than what I already believe to be the case. :) This is a fantastic article… especially your summary points at the end.

I wish I had more time to write them! It’s hard to be really thorough in this kind of article.

A couple of resources detailing problems with the fossil record:
One on the geological column.
One on the fossils themselves.

Both of these are written by scientists who are proponents of a young earth, so they have a young earth bias…but their reasons for whether or not the fossil record supports evolution are valid whether you believe in a young or old earth…the difference is in interpretation. There is a lot of debate amongst Creationists re: the age of the earth…some believe the earth is billions of years old and God used evolution to change his creation. Others that it’s under 10,000 years old and the current sceintific time scales are all wrong.

I’m not going to get into much ‘age-of-the-earth’ stuff on this site. I think there are good arguments on both sides…however, the arguments for evolution itself, at least the way it is currently taught, don’t make sense to me.

The articles above should give some food for thought. I’ll be putting something out in the next week.

Thanks again for commenting.
Make it a Great Day!
Rod

I really enjoy reading your posts. I am also extremely excited to read your upcoming post on the fossil record, as it is something I have always struggled with and have not yet been directed towards an answer.

Matt