Evolution: the fill-in-the-blanks Theory
or
Is it a bird? Is it a fish? Or is it a lizard?
or
Where are all the fossils?
or
Have these fossils just been strategically placed in the rock layers?
or
Are all these fossils simply fabrications built into the rock layers?
or...

Honestly I could keep going.

What could possibly happen if you piss off a deity?

The Evolutionists of course, believe in Evolution. And they have been digging into the rocks looking for support for their theory. And they certainly have found a lot of interesting stuff.

How do we know that evolution is really happening?

Given enough time, these changes mount up and lead to the appearance of new species and new types of organism, one small change at a time. Step by step, worms became fish, fish came onto land and developed four legs, those four-legged animals grew hair and - eventually - some of them started walking around on two legs ...

"That's what evolution is," says Steve Jones of University College London in the UK. "It's a series of mistakes that build up."
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150803-how-do-we-know-evolution-is-real

That's pretty much the general idea I have had: fish to amphibians to reptiles. That sort of thing. Here's an example pic giving this sort of view, here fish to tetrapods:

A cladogram of the evolution of tetrapods showing some of the best-known transitional fossils. It starts with Eusthenopteron at the bottom, indisputably still a fish, through Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega and Ichthyostega to Pederpes at the top, indisputably a tetrapod
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_fish

A cladogram of the evolution of tetrapods showing some of the best-known transitional fossils. It starts with Eusthenopteron at the bottom, indisputably still a fish, through Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega and Ichthyostega to Pederpes at the top, indisputably a tetrapod
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_fish

A cladogram of the evolution of tetrapods showing some of the best-known transitional fossils. It starts with Eusthenopteron at the bottom, indisputably still a fish, through Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega and Ichthyostega to Pederpes at the top, indisputably a tetrapod
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_fish

Nice pic. Seems pretty straight forward. After some time we find these other animals that sure enough look like they have progressed. Well that's the assumption. But just because you might find some fossil of a sheep-like animal and later a cow does this mean that cows evolved from sheep? And when you look at these animals separately a slightly different picture emerges. One that is not obvious from this 'nice' cladogram which is usually trotted out as 'proof' of Evolution.

The supposed cladogram of the evolution of tetrapods being displayed here is:

Eusthenopteron [385 Ma 1.8m]
Panderichthys [380 Ma 1.3m]
Tiktaalik [375 Ma 2.74m]
Acanthostega [365 Ma 60cm] and Ichthyostega [365 Ma 1.5m]
Pederpes 348 Ma Length: 1m

The first obvious thing is the gaps in time. The first three, 5 million years.
The next jump from there is 10 million for the next two, conjointly, and clearly not shown on the 'nice' diagram.
And the last jump is 17 million years!

So there are no other intermediate animals between these jumps? That should give people some cause for thought.

Then there is the problem of the lengths of these animals. If we believe one evolved into the next we should expect the lengths to be reasonably similar. But there are some very strange jumps here. And when you reconstruct a picture showing the actual relative sizes and times it looks very different to the 'nice' pic!

A cladogram of the evolution of tetrapods showing some of the best-known transitional fossils? It starts with Eusthenopteron at the bottom, indisputably still a fish, through Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega and Ichthyostega to Pederpes at the top, indisputably a tetrapod. But this time scaled with size and time!

A cladogram of the evolution of tetrapods showing some of the best-known transitional fossils? It starts with Eusthenopteron at the bottom, indisputably still a fish, through Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega and Ichthyostega to Pederpes at the top, indisputably a tetrapod. But this time scaled with size and time!

A cladogram of the evolution of tetrapods showing some of the best-known transitional fossils? It starts with Eusthenopteron at the bottom, indisputably still a fish, through Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega and Ichthyostega to Pederpes at the top, indisputably a tetrapod. But this time scaled with size and time!

Doesn't look quite the same, does it? This scaling really brings it to life. And makes it painfully obvious there are some really serious problems here! Does this really look like Evolution? The way it looks now I find this pic very entertaining!

There is also another dimension that can be examined. Roughly where were these fossils found and were they regionally close or a long way away?

The following map shows roughly where each was found:

World map showing where the fishapod cladogram fossils were roughly found

World map showing where the fishapod cladogram fossils were roughly found

World map showing where the fishapod cladogram fossils were roughly found

The only two that are regionally close are Acanthostega and Ichthyostega both found in Eastern Greenland and are conjointly not really part of the flow of evolutionary progress as indicated by the 'nice' pic.

However, as much as I would like to make a song and dance about this I really can't. According to the Evolutionists the prehistoric world at about 366 Ma [an average] would not look like the above map but something more like Pangea when all these continents were joined together and of course a lot closer to each other. And without putting a pic of it here, suffice to say it, these 5 main positions would also be closer together! Even though there would have been some land masses separating them all. And Pederpes found in central Scotland is/was still really separated from the rest!!

What happened to all of the fossils?

The Pangea approach may not help my case but the distance by land masses is still interesting. Even though closer together, excepting for two of them, they are still reasonably far enough apart to make you wonder how they could be evolutionarily related. It is definitely a stretch that there is supposedly some Evolution happening from Panderichthys [380 Ma 1.3m] to Tiktaalik [375 Ma 2.74m] to Acanthostega [365 Ma 60cm] and finally Pederpes [348 Ma 1m] with a final gap of 17 M years! And it's definitely a stretch with these weird fluctuating lengths and shapes. And different regional locations.

And the time gaps. 5M, 5M, 10M, and 17M??

If 5M years is enough for Evolution, then what happened during the 10M years? And what about the 17M years to Pederpes? One simple question to ask here is, What happened to all of the fossils during these gaps, especially the longer ones?

And just have a real close look at Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega, and finally Pederpes and ask yourself, does this really make any sense?

Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega, and Pederpes. Does this really look like Evolution?

Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega, and Pederpes. Does this really look like Evolution?

Panderichthys, Tiktaalik, Acanthostega, and Pederpes. Does this really look like Evolution?

You could probably argue that the 'nice' pic is a little dishonest but that may be a little harsh. It just might be safer to say that the pic is not being completely honest with the statistics. That would be a more reasonable assumption.

But in all fairness, the Evolutionists are just trying to make sense of all of the stuff they have been pulling out of the ground. And this was one attempt at it.

But it does raise a few interesting questions.

It could be argued that the amount of stuff they have to wade through is overwhelming. And more and more of it is being found. As of 2018 the claim was that a new dinosaur was/is currently being found every week:

Somewhere around the world—from the deserts of Argentina to the frozen wastelands of Alaska—a new species of dinosaur is currently being found, on average, once a week. Let that sink in: a new dinosaur every ... single ... week. That's about fifty new species each year. p.6.
The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs, Steve Brusatte, 2018.

And we're not talking another T-rex or brontosaurus find. No. These are completely new species. As Steve Brusatte said, Let that sink in! That's a minimium of 50 new species. Each year. It just gives an indication of just how many of these fossils there are in the ground.

And if there are that many being found, just where are all the intermediate fossils? It's a question that has been asked before. Between extinctions and whatever, new species of dinosaurs just pop up out of nowhere.

It doesn't really seem to support Evolution at all. No, there is definitely something else going on here.

Page still possibly under construction

So will most likely add to this some time. Maybe. Perhaps. Or not.

Beringer has absolutely nothing to be ashamed of.

He can hold his head high.

He at least did come to realize that he was being hoaxed.

Not this bunch.

REFERENCES

Page design/construction Stephen Buckley 2021.