Fossil Time Ranges Create Evolutionary Havoc

Propagandists for universal common descent evolution as well as Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ on teh interwebs insist that the geologic column and the fossil record show an orderly progression of evolution. That is the opposite of the truth.

Knowledgeable evolutionists admit that the fossil record is cattywampus, so they have to constantly make adjustments to the fossil time ranges in an effort to make the evidence fit their paradigm. The Bearded Buddha admitted to problems with the fossil record, and things only got worse since then.

As Gru knows, evolutionary scientists know the fossil record does not support their views, so discoveries are forced in by extending date ranges and using bad logic.
Expressions like "earlier than we thought" frequently occur in the secular science industry, so the ranges are adjusted. Pollen from flowering plants (Darwin's Abominable Mystery), "oldest" primates and monkeys, the origin of mammals, and other findings frequently occur that cause consternation for evolutionists. To make things appear to work, Darwin's disciples use circular reasoning and confirmation bias. The fossil record is not accurate (never has been), and evidence continually reveals not only its flaws, but also recent creation.
I believe these reports are the ‘tip of the iceberg’ because these are only the ones I find by accident in my reading of many earth science journals. There is so much dogmatism over the accuracy and precision of the fossil record making up the geological column, and yet it appears that the order, even within the uniformitarian paradigm, is really not well established. There are, of course, other problems associated with the geological column.
In this article I limit myself to time range expansions of global significance. Changes affecting particular localities or environments are not considered, nor are revised identifications of pre­viously fragmentary fossils.

The full article can be seen at "Fossil time ranges continue to be increased." For a short case in point, this video came out after that article was released. It is supposed to start at 5 minutes, 10 seconds:

Comments