Can you actually read or did you purposely ignore the second paragraph of my post? Does "LOL" stand for "Lots of laughs" or "Lack of Language". Gee... what does the first sentence of my second paragraph say? Let's take a look at my post shall we? It says:
"Now you know what... if a scientist actually proposed a theory that was different from Evolution but explained what we see in the fossil record and what we see today that is perfectly fine."
I clearly state that opposition to Evolution is something I am ok with, as long as it was a "better scientific explanation". Yet... you seem to think I said the opposite. What a funny person you are. We could start our own Vaudeville show where I say something and you think it is the opposite.
Now whatever orifice you pulled that "To not allow any opposition to TOE?" idea from I don't want to know. Just put it back there, ok?
Why not just ignore my posts? You obviously are just here to bash those who believe in God. Have fun.
The fossil 'record' is an 'interpretation of evidence', not evidence itself. Do you not know the difference?,/p>
There are so many out-of-order fossils that 'reworking' has to be regularly invoked to explain them. Apparently, fossil can be 'reworked' either up or down!
http://dml.cmnh.org/2001Oct/msg00394.html
That and 'overthrusting' to explain pre-Cambrian limestones on top of Cretaceous shale.
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/12fos10.htm#Lewis%20Overthrust
Now how's that for explaining anomalous evidence? Just make it say whatever you want it to!
The 'fossil record' is so mixed up that various theories have to be invoked to 'fix' it where it doesn't agree with the TOE.