Page 185 - Once Upon a Time There Was Darwinism

Harun Yahya
(Adnan Oktar)

served increase in a creature's size represents evolu-
tionary "progress." Looking at the size of modern-day
horses, we can see that this makes no sense. The largest mod-

ern-day horse is the Clydesdale, and the smallest is the Fallabella,
only 43 centimeters high. 134 Despite the large variations in size in
today's horses, evolutionists' past attempts to sequence horses accord-
ing to their size was foolish indeed.
In short, the whole horse series is clearly an evolutionist myth
based on prejudice. It has been left to the evolutionist paleontolo-
gists—the silent witnesses of Darwinism's collapse—to make this

known. Since Darwin's time, they have known that there were no fos-
sil layers of intermediate forms. In 2001, Ernst Mayr said, "Nothing has
more impressed the paleontologists than the discontinuous nature of the fos-
sil record," 135 expressing the longstanding disappointment among pa-
leontologists that the countless intermediate forms that Darwin
envisioned have never been found.
Perhaps for this reason, paleontologists have been speaking for
decades about the invalidity of the horse series, even though other
evolutionists continue to defend it avidly. In 1979, for example, David

Raup said that the horse series was totally meaningless and invalid:
The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we
have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in
Darwin's time. By this I mean that the classic cases of Darwinian change
in the fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North
America, have had to be modified or discarded as a result of more de-
tailed information. What appeared to be a nice simple progression
when relatively few data were available now appears to be much
more complex and less gradualistic. So Darwin's problem
has not been alleviated. 136

183