While I'm not entirely sure this description is right for an article, I figure it's a good analogy:
The fossil record can be thought of as a book. Or at least what remains of a book after thousands, if not millions, of years of it getting tattered and torn. Creationists like to cite the lack of fossils as evidence but really, the fossil record can only really be evidence in favour of evolution and more specifically, how it occurs. When creationists desparately cling to this idea that there are no transitional forms, or that there are new gaps between transitions, they are expecting a complete book. The reality is different. What we have, instead of a complete book, is the remains of a book. Occaisionally we'll have whole pages, sometimes partial pages. If we're lucky, we can still see the page numbers and get them in the right order easily. Other times, you have to read what you have and then figure out where it fits in the story; "Valjean is with Cosette in this paragraph, so they're probably in Paris, not the hard labour camp". What the creationists are essentially saying, is denying the existence of a book because page 63 is missing!
- There's a guy out there making money off getting a computer to compile books on extremely specialist subjects for the print-to-order market...Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)Approach the Presence 08:38, 2 December 2008 (EST)
Can a bad pun be made involving the 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_sound_recording history of sound recording] and a wax cylinder as a fossil record?
- I legitimately thought this was the talk page for the revision history. — Dysk (contribs) 19:33, 27 December 2018 (UTC)