But those who support evolution say that these small changes will accumulate over time, and after billions of years, they will form great changes, enough to turn fish into amphibians and apes into adults. This assumption is called "macroevolution".
Professor john Moore Moore, a natural scientist, said, "There are absolutely no experimental examples that show that one animal has become another animal or one plant has become another. The only evidence that can be properly classified as changes through reasonable scientific methods is limited to genetic changes that occur in a class or a group of animals or a class or a group of plants. "
Harold Coffin, a vertebrate zoologist, said: "Obviously, there have been many adaptations, but did this adaptation really make a large group of organisms evolve into another group? The evidence from science does not support such a change. "
Dusinski, a professor of zoology, wrote: "The biological world is not made up of many related creatures, and any two of them are connected by a series of gradual creatures. On the contrary, all kinds of creatures are more or less unique, and the creatures in between can be said to be absolutely rare or at least extremely rare. "
Paleontologist george gaylord simpson wrote: "In fact, most biological species and genera suddenly appeared in rocks. They are very different from earlier biota in many ways, and this discontinuity is almost common in higher-level animals and plants. "
Geneticist stebbins wrote: "At present, there is no transitional type between plants and animals. There are deep trenches between various types of creatures. " The process of biological evolution, page 147. "In fact," the new evolutionary timetable says, "the fossil record can't even provide a clear transition chain between different species."
Stephen Jay Gould, a paleontologist, wrote: "There are few examples of slow and regular metamorphism recorded in fossils, from the hillside strata to the foot of the mountain-no examples of horses and no examples of people. On the contrary, most fossil species have two common characteristics: first, they have not changed significantly throughout their lives; Secondly, they suddenly appear in the records, replacing their ancestors or saving with them. In short, most varieties have experienced stagnation and sudden substitution in history. "
Jonathan Wells, a biologist, wrote after examining the evidence provided by the fossil record: "At the level of boundaries, phylum and class, it is obviously not the fact that creatures have the same ancestor and gradually evolved. Judging from the evidence presented by fossil records and molecular structure, evolution is untenable. "
W. R. Thompson, who wrote the preface for Darwin's Centennial Edition of the Origin of Species, said in the preface: "It is indeed a very regrettable thing to believe everything with far-fetched arguments. The success of the Origin of Species has brought long-term and sad consequences, that is, biologists have fallen into unfounded speculation and cannot extricate themselves. The success of Darwinism led to the decline of scientific loyalty. People engaged in scientific research have actually defended a certain theory, and they can't explain it clearly by scientific methods, let alone prove it by scientific and rigorous research. They even tried to maintain the credibility of this theory in the eyes of the public by suppressing criticism and ignoring difficulties. This situation is abnormal and bad in science. "
Washburne, a professor of anthropology, said: "Everything about evolution is very speculative." As Dunn and Dusinski (Dunn &; Dobzhansky) admitted in the book Genetics, Race and Society: "Scientists, like others, often succumb to the temptation to prove some unique views or emphasize some prejudices."