神创论者有时指责化石记录不完整，宣称这就是表明生命自产生起就具有现代形态的证据。但这种论调完全无视于过去两个世纪以来，古生物学家和其他生物学家积累了丰富而且极为详细的进化史记录，而且，这些记录还在与日俱增。古生物学家的研究已经填补了查尔斯?达尔文时代缺失的许多化石记录。所谓化石记录“百孔千疮”，进化论无所依赖的断言只不过是一派胡言。实际上，今天的古生物学家关于沉积物年龄的知识已经足以使他们预测，在什么地方能够找到特异的重要过渡型化石，就像“大淡水鱼”和现代人类祖先的发现一样。
这种诡辩只不过清楚地揭示，有些神创论者对科学推理的重要特征一无所知
没有人看见进化发生的这种诡辩，进一步无视无可争辩的证据都在证明进化
已经发生和正在继续
有些反对进化论教学的人，不顾语言环境地引用著名科学家的话，并宣称这
些科学家不支持进化论
神创论者拒绝接受科学的事实，部分是由于他们排斥从自然过程中得到的证
据，因为它们与《圣经》发生冲突
俺确实不知道该怎样回答你这些加了黑字的问题了。俺反复宣称：除了粗心忽视，俺贴出来的证据都是
secular、并且
支持进化论的科学家。为什么现在还在那神创论说事？
俺也反复讲过，俺贴那些东西不是在假设那些证据是“正确”的，俺是在揭示进化论相关理论在科学界的分歧有多大，进化论究竟有多成熟。你对那些证据直接忽视，现在将俺质疑的这些东西直接搬出来，俺确实很是迷惑
比如这里讲了很多化石，俺从大量的不同意见中重复少数几个，你怎么看这个问题？----
当一个科学理论（或者科学发现、观点，whatever the term it is），在科学界有很大争议的时候，怎样判断这个东西是彻底检验过，或者不可置疑的真理？莫非一切以科学院的红头文件为准？
"Thus the main evidence for Archaeopteryx（始祖鸟） having been a terrestrial, cursorial predator is
invalidated. There is nothing in the structure of the pectoral girdle of Archaeopteryx that would preclude its having been a powered flier." (Olson, Storrs L., and Alan Feduccia, "Flight Capability and the Pectoral Girdle of Archaeopteryx," Nature, vol. 278 (March 15, 1979))
“
Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn’t changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically,
we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin’s time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record,
such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information…” (Raup, David M.，著名古生物学家, “Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology,” Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, vol. 50, 1979, p. 25.)
“
Paleontologists are traditionally famous (or infamous) for reconstructing whole animals from the debris of death. Mostly they cheat. …If any event in life’s history resembles man’s creation myths, it is this sudden diversification of marine life when multicellular organisms took over as the dominant actors in ecology and evolution. Baffling (and embarrassing) to Darwin, this event still dazzles us and stands as a major biological revolution on a par with the invention of self-replication and the origin of the eukaryotic cell. The animal phyla emerged out of the Precambrian mists with most of the attributes of their modern descendants.” (Bengtson, Stefan, “The Solution to a Jigsaw Puzzle,” Nature, vol. 345 (June 28, 1990), pp. 765-766.)
“Just as we have long known about stasis and abrupt appearance, but have
chose to fob it off upon an imperfect fossil record, so too have we long recognized the rapid, if not sudden, turnover of faunas in episodes of mass extinction. We have based our geological alphabet, the time scale, upon these faunal replacements. Yet we have chosen to blunt or mitigate the rapidity and extent of extinctions with two habits of argument rooted in uniformitarian commitments.” (Gould, Stephen J., “The Paradox of the First Tier: An Agenda for Paleobiology,” Paleobiology, 1985, p. 7.)
“And it has been the paleontologist my own breed who have been most responsible for letting ideas dominate reality: ….
We paleontologist have said that the history of life supports that interpretation [gradual adaptive change], all the while knowing that it does not.” (Niles Eldredge, Columbia Univ., American Museum Of Natural History, Time Frames, 1986, p.144.)
“It is, indeed, a very curious state of affairs, I think, that paleontologists have been insisting that their record is consistent with slow, steady, gradual evolution where I think that privately,
they’ve known for over a hundred years that such is not the case. …It’s the only reason why they can correlate rocks with their fossils, for instance. …They’ve ignored the question completely.” (Eldredge, Niles, “Did Darwin Get It Wrong?” Nova (November 1, 1981), 22 p. 6.)
