How do biologist use the fact that fossils exist do support the Theory of Evolution?
The mere fact that fossils *exist* is not evidence of the theory of evolution. It’s the following: 1. The relative *ages* of the fossils (established not only by many kinds of dating methods, but just the mere fact that they occur in successive *layers* of soil); 2. The fact that the specific *structures* of the fossils show clear progressions of species changing *dramatically* through time; and 3. The biogeography of fossils … where on the planet they are found (tropical plant life in northern latitudes, aquatic fossils on mountains, the lack of kangaroo fossils in Europe or elephant fossils in Australia). —– @spiderman … You are making the same mistake the Creationists make when you try to defend evolution from being called a ‘theory’, because you think that ‘theory’ is some sort of diminishment. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the phrase “the theory of evolution”, as long as it is not being used to imply that evolution is somehow “in doubt” or “not yet proved.” The wor
