Of course not, silly -- the information *AT* the link is evidence. There now, was that so hard to figure out? Hmm, apparently it was.
Unnamed skulls are not evidence.
They wouldn't be "unnamed" if you'd actually follow the link, son.
If you have evidence, post it here. If you cannot bother cutting and pasting it so that we all can see it and discuss it then it is not worth anyone's bother.
It absolutely astounds me how often creationists try this lame excuse. "Oh, dear, I can't be bothered to click a link, my poor finger is so terribly overworked, woe is me, the information must not be worth anything if I have to go through all the trouble of pressing one button to see it -- so I'll write a whole paragraph bitching about it and giving my excuses..."
Are you folks *trying* to become a parody of yourselves?
The evolutionists are always 'linking' because they hope no one will look at the nonsense they are linking to and believe that their claims.
Oh, sure, we're always providing pointers to evidence because we don't *want* people to see it. Riiiiiighhhttt.... After all, we know that no one can ever muster the energy to click on a link, or figure out how to do it, you betcha, our dirty secrets are safe now...
Has *anyone* ever fallen for that one?
Put your evidence here for all to see.
We do. That's why we provide links, HERE, for all to see. If you don't want to look at it, or want to refuse to deal with it, fine, but spare us your silly excuses about how a link to information somehow makes the information itself inferior.
As for actually cutting-and-pasting everything directly into the thread, there are several good reasons for not doing so, including copyright concerns, bandwidth concerns for people with slow modems, reformating errors, broken local links within the text, and so on.
Quick, complete this sentence: "There are none so blind..."