Skip to content

Today's Creation Moment

Midnight Migrating Moths
Genesis 12:1
"Now the Lord had said unto Abraham, 'Get thee out of thy country ... unto a land that I will shew thee.'"
It was a moonless night over England. A specially designed radar picks up something that has never been seen before. The radar is picking up silver Y moths as they migrate south for the winter. What...

The Problems with Evolution, Part 3: Transitional Fossils and the Geologic Column

This blog posting was written by Steve Risner and is used with his permission. Steve is a member of the Creation Moments group on Facebook. He wrote this as a letter to the editor of his local newspaper. We have broken up the letter into four parts and are posting it on successive days.

Another major problem for evolution is there isn’t a single indisputable transition fossil when the record should be full of them. It was said that evolution is “obvious in fossils.” This is known as elephant hurling and is completely false. The trouble for the evolutionist is that with the hundreds of millions if not billions of fossils that we have found, there is not a single fossil anyone can say for sure is slowly changing into a different type of organism. Most alleged “missing links” are later found to be false. The best contenders are made from a piece of jaw, a rib and a leg bone found on the same 10 acres of ground at varying depths. Darwin even said the fossil record was the most powerful evidence against his theory, and he believed in time it would reveal the evidence he needed. Over 150 years later, we’re still looking for a single piece of evidence in the fossil record.

Continuing with the geologic column, we see there are no known processes that would add to the geologic column today. Common thought in the scientific community is that things are happening the same now as they were for the last few billion years. This, of course, is purely because the theory of evolution demands it. There is nothing that suggests this without first believing evolution is true.

Here are some basics about geology: When we view rock layers around the world, there are some things that are very simple to see. First, if a layer has fossils in it, it had to have been covered by the next layer very quickly or the animal fossilized would have been scavenged. We also do not see any signs of weathering or erosion between layers, which also confirms the layers were laid down rapidly. Fossils that travel through multiple layers of rock also show the layers were laid down rather quickly; otherwise, the fossils would have decomposed in the supposed millions of years that went by between depositions. Oftentimes we see many rock layers that are bent without cracks or breaking. Hard rock cannot be bent without fracturing. So the multiple layers were still soft when this happened. This also suggests they were laid down in a short time together. All this confirms the Flood account in the Bible and contradicts evolutionary time scales. In some of these cases the maximum time would be hours, days or months. When you combine all of this evidence, where multiple characteristics apply to certain layers, the claim of millions of years is again positively ruled out. 


Evolution is one of the major theories in the world and it can be mistaken as true. In my opinion, this article that you have written is the only one I have seen with all the evidence about the Geological column, fossils and others. In science, this is what we are learning: evolution and how scientists think it is true. I go to a Christian school, and I can tell you that all the evidence you need to prove that Jesus is real is the Bible.

Here is one thing that I think is very interesting. If you were to get some dirt from your backyard and put it in an empty water bottle (one third of the way) and put another third of water in it. Now shake it and leave it for approx. 1 to 2 weeks and you will be able to see the layers of matter that is in the soil in your backyard and that is what I believe that has happened to the Grand Canyon (geological column), caused by the worldwide flood that happened.

Thank you for your time.

Elizabeth, If your Christian school doesn't have the DVD, "Mount St. Helens: Explosive Evidence for Catastrophe," I highly recommend it! It explains - on a smaller scale - how the Grand Canyon was most likely formed. Here's an excerpt from a review found at

<a href="" title=""></a>
"...The eruption of Mount St. Helens demonstrated rapid depostition of sedimentary layers, rapid canyon formation, an explanation for petrified trees standing upright through multiple rock strata and even showed a theory for the rapid formation of peat and coal. Dr. Austin's lecture is easily understandable by the layman, and is supplemented by many photos and diagrams that hold your interest."

These days, I hover between what you would call a theistic evolutionist and something else, taught to me before I could reason much myself.

One thought I have about the implications of your fossil record analysis. It seems to me that the lack of gradation of any slowly morphing species could be rendered as the result of the fossil records being recorded only within specific widely spaced time periods where conditions were appropos to preserve the fossils?

If you are really interested in reason, then I suggest you seek the wisdom of God, not of man, for you will only tangle yourself up in stupidity if you try to deny specific design so that you can have "slowly morphing species." Making assumptions instead of doing your research will lead you straight into error.

Here are two errors that you've got in your post: (1) the assumption that time is a given and exists in and of itself, self-created, and (2) there was plenty of time in which evolutionary theory could take place, all unrecorded by historical eyewitnesses.

If you really had any understanding of time, you would not make such statements, nor would you be in such a tremendous fuddle. Since you lack wisdom, seek it from the Lord, not from meanderings of the human mind, and then you might finally come to a realization that evolutionism is not factual, but a philosophy designed to flatter men's egos.

So explain why Archaeopteryx, known from a half-dozen nearly complete fossils, isn't a transitional fossil. It is a mixture of both bird traits and dinosaur traits. Even though it is classified as a bird, it is in fact, more similar to dinosaurs like Microraptor that it is to any living bird. It had feathers like a bird, but it had teeth and a long bony tail like earlier dinosaurs. It also lacks a bill, fused bones in the hand, wrist and feet, and the shoulder joint of modern birds.

I actually haven't done too much research or kept to date on the evolution vs creation debate, but your comment intrigued me and I googled Archaeopteryx and as I was typing Google suggested adding hoax to the end of the search terms, which I did. One of the top results was this article (<a href="" title=""></a>) which references an interview with Dr. David Menton, who examined the Archaeopteryx and determined it to be a bird and much more similar to birds than anything else. See interview at: <a href="" title=""></a>. I would love to know if you had seen this before and your response to Dr. Menton. Thanks! (Disclaimer: I am a believer in Creationism.)

Evolutionists also ignore polystrate fossils, or fossils, such as trees, buried in multiple geological layers. If those layers were indeed laid down over millions of years, how is it that the same tree cuts right through them all? The answer is, of course, that the layers were laid down rapidly, most likely during the same year.

By the way, the common response from evolutionists is that polystrate fossils are "not a problem" for their theory. Of course they aren't, because evolutionists don't base their theory on fact, such as physical evidence, but on a belief system. They hold beliefs, based on philosophies, not on fact, and therefore, nothing in the physical world will shake their beliefs, for they care nothing for science. They only care for something that can be called "science" and used to support their vain theories. Evolutionists are so predisposed to reject evidence of a higher authority than their own that they will categorically deny every fact in order to cling to their false belief.

Why is this belief popular? It isn't because of science. It's because of human arrogance. Find a way to convince people that they are higher than the Most High, help them deny Him, and you'll get plenty of people who happily enthrone themselves in God's seat.

Again, in case you missed it, the only thing that motivates an evolutionist is to put himself above God. It's no surprise that evolutionists lack even the basic humility to admit when they are wrong in the face of physical facts, because they refuse to humble themselves before God. Anyone who can do that lacks judgment. He cannot be trusted on any subject.