Refuting Mountains of Fossil Evidence for Evolution

You may rightly ask how we can refute all those mountains of fossil evidence that are presented for evolution. If you start at the foundation, it is far less difficult than my may think. Readers have seen that a fact is a fact, a fossil is a fossil, but it is the interpretations of facts that are the key to correctly understanding evidence.

Darwinists claim that there is a mountain of evidence in the fossil record to prove evolution. Not only is their claim unsupportable, but the evidence actually supports creation science.

Yesterday, we saw that alleged evidence for the dinosaur extinction impact theory actually supports the Genesis Flood. Atheists and other anti-creationists make a wagon train-load of assertions accompanied by fallacies used to intimidate Darwin doubters. You know the kind: "So much evidence for evolution, you don't want people to think you're a st00pid dumb fundie by denying the facts, do you?" Questions and rational thinking can dispel a great deal of inflated claims. Also, a well-informed creationist can show that many evolutionists do not know their own dogma, nor do they keep up to date with findings.

When asked to provide their alleged evidence about fossils proving evolution, we invariably get hit with evolutionary propaganda sites containing lists of fossils. Big deal. Keep in mind that the number of dinosaurs was exaggerated, each new "find" was not necessarily a new find but a version of the same: young, old, male, female, and so on. Actually, there are never indisputable transitional forms (something clearly changing into something else), but simply variations. Even evolutionists admit that there are very few plausible candidates for transitional forms. Why do you think some cling to debunked critters like Archaeopteryx, Australopithecus afarensis, and others? They're desperate to find scraps of evidence to justify their rebellion against the Creator.

One's presuppositions and worldview have a huge impact on how evidence is viewed. We see this time and time again, and correctly interpreting evidence without bad logic of evolution actually supports recent creation. Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ try to bamboozle us with their claims of evidence as well as using ridicule and other methods of manipulation. Ask questions. Challenge them back. Do not be willingly deceived. Pull out the right stones in the foundation, you can see pretty much all of those "mountains of evidence" avalanche into rubble, Barney.
A commenter from Australia describes some of his exchanges with evolutionists and asks about some of the claims they made:
If evolution is only a philosophy, how do you explain all the fossils to support evolution? I was recently called an idiot, and very ignorant for believing in creation. I was told the evidence for evolution is overwhelming considering the thousands of fossils displayed in many museums around the world. These fossils include thousands of intermediate fossils to such an extent that evolution is no longer beyond reasonable doubt. I was told that people who don’t believe in evolution have never visited these museums, or considered the evidence, instead they deliberately ignore it. The majority of scientists say that evolution is one of the most robust and corroborated of modern scientific theories.
CMI’s Shaun Doyle responds:

Thanks for writing in. Life will be much easier if you don’t give credence to these skeptics. By your own account, all they’ve done is insult you, committed the bandwagon fallacy, and given you a bunch of unsubstantiated claims. Don’t let them put you off balance. The following questions will help you see what is going on, restore your confidence, and help you ride over such hostile attacks.
I'd be much obliged if you'd read the rest of "Is the fossil record ‘overwhelming evidence for evolution’?" Note that there are several links in the response and afterward that can give you further insight.