How Not to Interpret the Fossil Record
It turns out that there are no proofs, scientific or otherwise, for evolutionism. Every supposed "proof" collapses under scrutiny. The fossil record is one of the supposed proofs; here is what Fr. Seraphim Rose says about it:
excerpt from the Chapter:
"A Brief Critique of the Evolutionary Model"
Creation, Genesis and Early Man, 2nd edition
5. Then there are the arguments from paleontology: the study of fossils. Of course, the first seemingly convincing proof is the geological strata, as, for example, in the Grand Canyon where you see all kinds of strata; and the lower you get the more primitive the creatures there seem to be. Scientists date the strata by what kind of creatures are found in them.
In the nineteenth century they discovered these strata and determined which were older and which were younger; and how they have a rather elaborate system by which to tell which strata are older and which are younger. However, the whole dating system is rather circular. Since often these strata are "upside down" according to the evolutionary model, they have to make certain readjustments. ... They have to date them by the fossils in them. But how do they know that the fossils in them are in the right order? They know because somewhere else the fossils were in the "right" order according to the model, and they got the system from that. If you look at it closely, you see that it is a circular* system. One has to have faith that this actually corresponds to reality.
* circular: Some paleontologists acknowledge this. A professor at Kansas State University writes: "Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so, we are guilty of circular reasoning, if we say the fossil record supports this theory."
There are a number of flaws in this. For one thing, the creatures appear quite suddenly in each strata, with no intermediary types leading up to them. Besides this, as the research continues, they are finding animals in strata which are not supposed to be where they are ... because they supposedly should not have evolved until some hundred million years later.
In general, there is no proof that these strata were laid down over millions of years. The creationists who talk about the Flood of Noah say that it is equally conceivable that the Flood caused exactly the same thing. The simpler marine animals on the sea bottoms would generally be the first to be buried, followed by fish and other organisms living nearer the surface...
Moreover, there are only very particular conditions which cause a fossil to be left at all. A creature has to be buried suddenly in a certain kind of mud which allows it to be preserved. The whole idea of gradualness of these phenomena is being called more and more into question...