Fossil record radiometric dating
While materials on the Archive have not necessarily been subjected to formal peer-review, many have been subjected to several cycles of commentary in the newsgroup prior to being added to the Archive.
Most of our materials provide links and/or bibliographic references to enable the reader to evaluate the evidence for themselves.
Due to the rarity of preservation and the likelihood that speciation occurs in small populations during geologically short periods of time, transitions between species are uncommon in the fossil record. See the Evolution and Chance FAQ and the Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution FAQ: Evolution Proceeds by Random Chance.
Transitions at higher taxonomic levels, however, are abundant. Evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. Snowflakes form, trees grow, and embryos develop, etc. A scientific theory stands or falls according to how well it is supported by the facts, not according to who believes it. According to numerous, independent dating methods, the earth is known to be approximately 4.5 billion years old. Radiometric isochron dating techniques reveal whether contamination has occurred, while numerous theoretical calculations, experiments, and astronomical observations support the notion that decay rates are constant.
Some were eroded dinosaur tracks, and others were human carvings.
See the The Texas Dinosaur/"Man Track" Controversy FAQ.
Origins Archive's Creationism FAQs, Quotations and Misquotations and Creationist Arguments: Misquotes) advocates often use the very same arguments that the young-earth creationists have used in the past.
See: Not a Free Lunch But a Box of Chocolates, A Presentation Without Arguments Yes, we do.
We keep a copy of the "International Flat Earth Society" flyer here to document that real people in modern times do assert that the earth is flat, not because we think the earth is flat See: Documenting the Existence of "The International Flat Earth Society."You might start with the talk.origins FAQs. Origins Archive just some website that has no particular credibility?
If, however, you want a thorough understanding of evolution, a library would be a more appropriate place to look. Those FAQs and essays aren't peer-reviewed, and many are written by interested laymen rather than specialists, so they can be ignored, right?
The following FAQs provide some good references: the Creation/Evolution Reading List, the Introduction to Evolutionary Biology FAQ, the "What is Evolution? We encourage readers not to take our word on the issues, but rather to look at the primary literature and evaluate the evidence.