Does the fossil record prove that the general theory of evolution is a fact? Is there a clear and consistent pattern found to indicate that all living organisms have a common ancestry? Or does the fossil record present some clear problems for those who believe in the general theory of evolution? This is our topic as we continue to examine the evidence regarding the conflict between the evolutionary explanation of our world and the Bible teaching of divine creation.
In the area of the Paluxy River at Glen Rose, Texas, there are several hundred fossil prints of obvious human origin together with those of dinosaurs. They do not appear to be the product of another animal, nor do they show the signs of being manufactured by man. One set of prints was found perfectly preserved under a 3 ton slab of rock. While there is still considerable discussion among scholars about these fossils, they must be taken at face value until conclusively disproved. As they are presently a part of the fossil record, these prints suggest that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time. Thus, this element of the fossil record is at odds with the general theory of evolution. According to the evolutionists, dinosaurs became extinct over 60 million years before man came along. Would this fossil record present a conflict with the Bible record?
In Job 40 and 41, the Bible gives a brief description of two animals called "behemoth" and "leviathan." Their descriptions match that of dinosaurs better than any known animals extant or extinct. "Behemoth" seems to parallel that which scientists tell us about dinosaurs known as Diplodocids and Brachiosaurids while "leviathan" seems similar to one of the many types of dinosaurs which dwelt by the water. Thus, the fact that we have a fossil record of man and dinosaur living at the same time does not present a problem for the Bible record. The theory of evolution, however, cannot coexist with this fact of the fossil record. What explanation of our world is in harmony with this part of the fossil record?
In 1968, a fossil human sandal print was found in Antelope Springs, Utah. When the fossil was examined, a fossil trilobite was found in the heel of the sandal. However, evolutionists tell us that trilobites lived over 400 million years before man and were extinct by the time man came along. The fossil was in Cambrian rock when man was not supposed to be around, according to the evolutionary explanation of the world. Yet, the Bible story is in harmony with this evidence. Which explanation of our world harmonizes with this part of the fossil record?
Dr. Clifford Burdick did a great deal of work investigating the fossil record laid down in the Grand Canyon. He found fossil evidence for a number of modern plants being present in very old rock strata in which they were not supposed to exist according to the general theory of evolution. In one case, a modern Conifer spore was found in Pre-Cambrian shale which evolutionists claim to have been formed before any such plants existed. Again, it is the theory of evolution which has a problem with the facts, not the Bible account of creation.
If the geological time scale were true, the "younger" strata of rock would be on top and the strata would get progressively older with depth. This is not the case. One formation known by evolutionists as the "Lewis Overthrust" is a layer of rock 350 miles long by 35 miles wide and some 6 miles thick. On top is Pre-Cambrian limestone said to be much older than the black Cretaceous shale which is below. The very opposite of what should be so! The evolutionary explanation of this being an "overthrust" is impossible as evidenced by the sheer size of the formation. Throughout the area, this is the uniform condition. Besides this fact, the condition of the rock argues against an over-thrusting. The line between the rock strata is sharp, unlike conditions if it were an "overthrust." The fact is that the assumptions of the geological time scale are not in harmony with the evidence.
Another problem in the assumption that fossils can be dated by the rock strata in which they were found is seen when one realizes that the facts do not support the idea that the various layers of strata were laid down over millions of years of gradual sedimentation. There are numerous cases of tree trunks and other objects which have fossilized in such strata, but go through two or three separate layers of strata. Obviously, the tree did not just stand there for millions of years while the sediment piled up around it. The various layers of sediment had to be laid down at the same time. Yet, this fact destroys the most basic assumption of the geological time charts.
The "Piltdown Man" found in 1912 was used as the strongest "proof" of human evolution. Encyclopedia Britannica called it the second most important of fossils verifying the general theory of evolution. However, many years later, it was discovered to be a deliberate hoax from the combination of an ape's jaw and the skull from a modern man. After about forty years, it was discredited, but the theory behind it remained - regardless of the lack of evidence.
The "Nebraska Man" was another embarrassment to the human evolutionary theories. The whole man was constructed from one tooth! Worse yet, the tooth was later found to be that of a pig! If the evolutionists can get a hairy, stooped, ape-like man from a pig's tooth, how much confidence can we have in the rest of their suppositions?
The truth is that fossils do not come with a picture of external features. Such features are the imagination of a reconstruction artist, not of scientific fact. In one case, the cranial form of one fossil man known as Pithecanthropus Erectus was reconstructed to be very ape-like by the reconstruction artists, but the structure of the head was found to be identical to that of the Russian delegate to the 1958 Cairo Conference! The facts we look at may be interpreted either way. They do not necessitate the look given to the fossil men by artists with a preconceived notion favoring the evolutionary theories.
The psalmist of long ago declared, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God" (Psa. 14:1; 53:1). Is it not foolish to crack open rocks, chip away at the massive strata of the earth and put the smallest fossil under a microscope in an effort to cast doubt on God's existence while failing to look at the grandeur, magnitude and complexity of the entire universe which abundantly evidences the power and divinity of the Creator? Is it not foolish to claim reconstruction of a "missing link" on the basis of two leg bones and a tooth in order to argue that man is the result of mere chance while ignoring the human body as a whole as it evidences the design of God? It is still the fool who denies God!