In the sedimentary Golden Gate Highlands National Park rocks of South Africa in 1976 during road construction uncovered a paleontologist’s goldmine−a dinosaur nesting site.
The discovery eventually launched an international exploration the area the South African hills that started in 2006. This week, the results of the explorations were published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). Robert Reisz of the University of Toronto was the lead author.
Since 2005, ten nests have been discovered at several levels at this site, each with up to 34 round eggs in tightly clustered and carefully arranged clutches. The distribution of the nests in the sediments indicate that these early dinosaurs returned repeatedly (nesting site fidelity) to this site, and likely assembled in groups (colonial nesting) to lay their eggs.
Seven eggs are demonstrated in the image with one of the eggs scrapped open to reveal the underlying embryonic form of the dinosaur skeleton.
“Thus, fossil and sedimentological evidence from this nesting site provides empirical data on reproductive strategies in early dinosaurs”, the report concluded. The reproductive strategies discovered include: 1) repeated returns to the nesting site and 2) grouping of the eggs.
Entitled “Oldest known dinosaurian nesting site and reproductive biology of the Early Jurassic sauropodomorph Massospondylus”, the report was a featured story by the Smithsonian Institute, BBC News, Science Daily, Forbes, and The Huffington Post.
Amazingly, the report then claims that the evidence from the nests “provides additional insights into the initial stages of the evolutionary history of dinosaurs”. While the claim is intriguing, evidence from dinosaur nests cannot be used to validate a presupposed history of evolution.
Evidence for evolution requires transitional links between species, not evidence from nests within a species−typical evolution red-flag spin. In fact the report never even attempt to mention how these nests could even hope to provide evidence of transitional links between dinosaur species.
In The Origin of Species, Charles Darwin cut to the chase what investigators should be looking for: “We should always look for forms intermediate between each species” Reisz PNAS report just presumes that evolution magically happened, never even mentioning transitional intermediate links.
Simply finding and reporting on fossils is not evidence for evolution. By using the words “dinosaur”, “fossil” and “evolution” together, the evolution industry is attempting to hoodwink support for evolution−a common trick.
More than 150 years ago, Darwin recognized that the fossil record was not kind to even his theory of evolution -
Why then is not every geological formation [fossil record] and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against my theory.
Isolated evidence from the nests of a single dinosaur species alone cannot provide “additional insights into the initial stages of the evolutionary history of dinosaurs”. What evolution needs are the missing transitional links.
In an attempt to work-around the vacuum of transitional links that Darwin said should be found to exist once the Earth had been fully explored, committed evolutionary paleontologists have resorted to these hoodwinking tricks.
The absence of transitional links to support Darwin’s “slight, successive” gradual evolution changes is undeniable. Niles Eldredge, paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History concluded -
Paleontologists have been insisting that their record is consistent with slow, steady, gradual evolution where I think that privately, they’ve known for over a hundred years that such is not the case.
“It has been the paleontologist, my own breed,” Eldredge opined, “who has been most responsible for letting ideas dominate reality.”
This week’s hyped report by Reisz is yet another vain attempt to give an illusion that the fossil record supports evolution. Fortunately, the report did not make the major media markets.
Evolution was once a theory in crisis, now evolution is in crisis without a theory−a conclusion based on the fossil record evidence.