Scientific Evidence against Evolution, Rock Strata (Evidence part 1) (Evolution post B)

Evidence against evolution? Does such a thing exist? That is, beyond "God created the earth..."* Yes, actually it does, although many evolutionists will tell you otherwise. In possibly the next several posts in my thread of evolution posts, I'll provide you with weapons, and defenses when discussing evolution.

Moving on,

Evidence against evolution Part 1: The Rock strata

The rock strata is layers and layers of rock in the ground that (according to evolutionists) took millions of years to form (ea. layer that is). They claim that each one often represents a different era. And as we look at it we should see less complex organisms on the bottom (as that part was formed longest ago.


Figure 1, rock strata


Problems in the Rock Strata

1. The rock strata consists of many levels of rock which supposedly took millions (billions) of years to form. however, in areas of the strata, scientists have found ancient trees protruding through several levels of strata. 1 tree shouldn't be able to push through several levels that took b/millions of years to form

2. If evolutionary science were true, then (in each level of rock strata) we would find more simple organisms (less evolved) near the bottom, and more complex organisms (more evolved) near the top. However in many areas we find that this is exactly opposite of what occurs. Or the Rock strata fossil record can be completely jumbled.

3. There are NO (0%) transitional fossils in the record. Since we have discovered fossils, (if evolution were true) 99% of what we do find should be "links" or transitionary fossils. The possibility of there being links, and we just haven't found them yet, is so small as to be considered impossible.

4. The first nine of the supposed hominids are actually apes/monkeys and nothing more. (hominids are supposedly apes----people transitions)

1. PLIOPITHECUS:
* (A) #5, Ramapithecus, was shown to be that of an extinct relative of the orangutan. #1 was placed on the chart before #5 because it seemed more monkey-like than #5. It stands to reason that it too was a monkey and not part human.
* (B) #1 was named as a hominid because it looked like a cross between two monkeys, the spider monkey and the gibbon, not because it looked part human.
2. PROCONSUL:
* (A) Same as above.
* (B) Same as above.
3. DRYOPITHECUS:
* (A) Same as (A) of #1 and #2.
* (B) #3 is based only on a lower jaw fragment which later became known as that of an extinct ape's.
4. OREOPITHECUS:
* (A) Same as (A) of #1, #2, and #3.
* (B) #4 is based only on teeth and pelvis remains.
5. RAMIPITHECUS:
* (A) Fossil finds in 1982 and 1988 showed that #5 was only an extinct relative of the orangutan and not part human at all.
* (B) #5 was based only on a set of teeth.
6. AUSTRALOPITHECUS AFRICANUS:
* (A) #6 was found to be the skull of a baby ape whose apelike features had not yet fully developed because it was still a baby.
* (B) #6 was studied by a team of scientists which concluded that the skull had no human features at all.
7. AUSTRALOPITHECUS ROBUSTUS:
* (A) #7 was based only on a skull with a crest on the top which is a feature in apes but not in humans. The feature does not appear in any supposed hominid skulls before or after it to any degree.
* (B) Same as (B) of #6.
8. AUSTRALOPITHECUS BOISEI:
* (A) Same as (A) of #7.
* (B) Same as (B) of #6 and #7.
9. AUSTRALOPITHECUS AFARENSIS: (Lucy)
* (A) #9 is based on fragments to a skeleton found miles apart and at greatly varying depths and then placed together as if from the same individual. The fragments are also small with most of the skeleton missing.
* (B) Same as (B) of #6, #7, and #8.


5.The final three supposed hominids put forth by evolutionists are actually modern human beings and not part monkey/ ape at all. Therefore, all twelve of the supposed hominids can be explained as being either fully monkey/ ape or fully modern human but not as something in between.


* 10. HOMO ERECTUS ** waits for the laughter to subside...**: #10 was regarded as sub-human because its brain size was once thought to be out of the range of humans being too small. It is now known that its size is nearly the average size of a modern European's.
* 11. NEANDERTHAL MAN: #11 was found by medical experts to be a full modern human being whose brain was deformed simply by arthritis deformans.
* 12. CRO MAGNON MAN: #12 is indistinguishable from a modern human being. It was placed on the chart only because of cave drawings that were found and thought to be primitive.

Rock strata evidence: finished for now.


Coming arguments: Evolution from Natural Selection, Evolution from Biochemistry and more....


Source for 4 and 5: http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/top.htm

That link is the main source that I used, but other sources for that information are available.