Let's not forget that the creationists here have not been able to answer the question as to why trilobites are at the bottom of the fossil record, dinosaurs above them, and hominids near the top. All around the world. No mixing. There is an effort to dodge this issue here just as the issue about varves, ice cores and tree rings has been dodged in RAZD's thread.

CTD cited the Green River Formation in Utah in an earlier thread here as evidence of organisms having been mixed together in a flood. He seems to think that this must be evidence of global, rather than local, flooding. Yet there is a very large part of that area called the Green River Shale, which consists of 4 million layers of varves, two for every year. It's geologically impossible for them to have formed in a flood. Any flooding that happened there was therefore localised.

Transitional fossils have also been discussed here, particularly the whale; and almost a year ago now, birds and dinosaurs. The person I was talking with at the time was quoting the Lucy's knee PRATT. In the case of the whale or the horse, or even humans, where do you draw a line and say, "That is 100% ape" and "that is 100% human" when there are no clear delineations?

This ain't wishful thinking, folks. It's looking at the evidence and making hypotheses which are not based on preconceived notions. I can't see any other explanation for the global sorting of the fossil record other than evolution, but if anyone can present a good alternative idea I'm listening.