Does the fossil records show evidence for evolution?
Tons of it, starting with archaeopteryx, the missing link between reptiles and birds that was discovered between the first and second editions of Darwin’s “Origin of Species”. To take two specific examples, we now have a very well documented fish-to-quadruped transition, and a multitude of fossils intermediate between humans and other apes. See the recent books “Your Inner Fish” and “The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-Two Species of Extinct Humans,” both recent up-to-date expert accounts. Anyone who pretends to you that the fossil record does NOT show convincing evidence for evolution is either lying, or maintaining a state of deliberate ignorance by ignoring the data.
When you hear talk of evidence for evolution, the first thing that frequently comes to mind for most people are fossils. So why place the fossil record at the end of the list of evidence?The main reason is to demonstrate that there is an incredible amount of evidence for evolution without even looking at a single fossil. Our modern wealth of knowledge about anatomy, embryology, biochemistry and biogeography provides ample evidence for evolution on its own. But the fossil record does have a unique characteristic that none of the other evidence does: it is our only actual glimpse into the past where common descent is proposed to have taken place. As such it provides a valuable – or perhaps invaluable – piece of evidence if it supports common descent. The second reason for discussing the fossil record last is to tie it in with the other evidence already addressed. The history of life, as represented by the fossil record, generally supports the theory of evolution without considering other
