Thanks CTD and Russ for your comments/compliments. Here is something else to consider. Since they rely so much on the geologic column as proving evolution by the order of the fossils in the layers. Consider this:

Since we've seen an example of the fossils themselves, we've also seen that not only are the missing links "missing" (non existent), but even the ones they claim as "missing links" (e.g. dinosaur to bird - Archaeopteryx) were shown to exist around the sametime period as the very birds they had supposedly evolved into.

With this in mind, how then can the evolutionist excuse this by saying "this is possible, they can still exist around the sametime" and then explain their previous statements on the order of evolution dictated to us by the fossils in the layers? So in other words, the animals can mix together around the sametime period with their supposed missing links whilst alive, but they all died in a particular order....did they have some agreement with eachother over who was to die first? (perhaps they said it would be for the glory of evolution and therefore a good cause).

Note: Give time for the pictures below to load.

I'll give an example: (Archaeoptryx). Which is dated to be around 150 million years old - (according to old age dating).


Here are a couple of ancient bird examples (no different than today) dated around the sametime period (according to old age dating).




This is only one such example. Consider all the others they are claiming evolved and check out them existing around the sametime above. Reptiles, birds, mammals, etc etc.

I'll give an example of the horse evolution senario also. In case people are fooled to believing that horses came from the creatures RAZD is proposing: (I threw a donkey in here also)
Give pictures time to load.

Horse skull. 2,8 million years old


Asian horse skull. 33 million years old.


Wild horse skull. 45 million years old.


Tibetan wild donkey. 29 million years old.


Pony skull. 48 million years old.


Pony skull. 53 million years old.


Horses, ponies, donkeys, showing all existing around the sametime. The supposed horse evolution is an evolutionary myth. Not only does the horse show it hasn't evolved, but neither has the pony or donkey (subspecies). And no transitional forms.

Consider that different researchers have come up with completely different (20 or so) horse evolution scenarios. Gathering fossils belonging to extinct animals that existed at different times in India, South America, North America and Europe in order of size—from small-large to large-small. However, regardless of the jigsaw with fictitious family trees, all horse fossils ever discovered have proved that horses have always existed as horses, ponies as ponies, donkeys and donkeys and it looks like they still do. A different species or an extinct species, does not = a transitional form.

These are only a few examples. Consider all the others they are claiming evolved and check out them existing around the sametime above. Reptiles, birds, mammals, etc etc.