The fossil record stands as a silent witness to the abrupt appearance of dinosaurs on the earth. If dinosaurs evolved from other reptiles and then evolved into birds (remember the ending of Jurassic Park?) there certainly isn't any evidence for it in the fossil record.

Mr. Poling:

"isn't any evidence" translates into NO evidence, which is a 100% false statement. Scientists do not just "make things up." There is a large body of evidence, both from the fossil record and from studies of extant species, that supports many competing theories of evolution.

Indeed, if one compares the first Dinosaurs of the mid-Triassic to those at the end of the Cretaceous, one will find that the later dinosaurs are much more advanced than the early ones. That's evolution, whether caused by environmental pressure or the hand of god creating them.

Mr. Buckna:

If, after over a century of examining the fossil record, Archaeopteryx is the best single piece of evidence for macro-evolution (as many textbooks have claimed it to be) then what does this say for the entire theory?

Mr. Poling:

I don't know if Archaeopteryx is the best single piece of evidence as my interest and readings in natural history don't go much farther than the dinosauria. But given that there is an incredible number of characteristics that link Archaeopteryx to both modern birds and dinosaurs, that makes Archie a damn good piece of evidence.

Mr. Buckna:

Dinosaur paleontologists would do well to consider what law professor Phillip E. Johnson (University of California at Berkeley) says on the subject of fossil "evidence" for evolution:

"The fossils provide much more discouragement than support for Darwinism when they are examined objectively, but objective examination has rarely been the object of Darwinist paleontology. The Darwinist approach has consistently been to find some supporting fossil evidence, claim it as proof for "evolution," and then ignore all the difficulties." ("Darwin on Trial", 2nd edition 1993, p. 86)

Mr. Poling:

I've seen plenty of "non-Darwinists" who have found "some supporting fossil evidence, claim it as proof [against] evolution, and then ignore all the difficulties." The Paluxy man tracks come to mind.

Assuming for the sake of argument the above quote is true, objective examination has "rarely been the object" of non-Darwinist paleontology as well.