I have wondered for a while if I should buy the NFL book, but after having
seen such a bunch of nonsense, my decision is clear...
Just one remark:
David "Fats Avocado" Wolfe:
>There is no more conclusive refutation of Darwinism than that furnished by
>paleontology. Simple probability indicates that fossil records can only be
>test samples. Each sample, then, should represent a different stage of
>evolution/adaptation, and there ought to be "transition" types, not
>particularly of one species or another. Instead, what we find, in the actual
>fossil record, are genus forms that have not developed themselves on the
>fitness principle, *but appear suddenly and at once in their definite shape*;
>that do not thereafter evolve towards better adaptation, but become rarer or
>finally disappear, while quite different forms arise again.
It is certainly true that "transition" types do not appear in fossiles,
and that problem is discussed in many books about Evolution. It is
absolutely not a refutation of the theory.
Evolution proceeds by "jumps", i.e. the transition periods are very short
(just a few thousand years) compared to the million years of the geological
history. The transition forms are extremely localized in time and space,
so finding fossils of them is very unlikely.