Evolution, simply stated, is “change over time.” When we apply this to living organisms, we see two levels: microevolution and macroevolution. The difference between these can be simply stated. Microevolution involves changes below the species level, while macroevolution involves changes above the species level. For instance, transforming a sea creature into a land animal would be an example of macroevolution. Conversely, a bacterium developing resistance to antibiotics illustrates microevolution. The organism remains a bacterium. Microevolution does not confirm macroevolution.
We observe microevolution. Besides bacteria, we see human-directed evolution in dogs, cows, and roses. In each case, they are still dogs, cows, and roses, but with different traits. When Charles Darwin published On The Origin of Species in 1859, he speculated that if his theory was correct, the “number of intermediate varieties” of living things should show up in an “enormous” number of fossils. He acknowledged that, in his time, “Geology assuredly does not reveal any such graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and greatest objection which can be urged against my theory.” However, he predicted that over time, those missing-link fossils would be discovered.
Paleontologists, scientists who study fossils, were some of Darwin’s strongest critics at the time. How is the situation today? The bottom line is that the missing links are still missing. The Field Museum of Natural History has one of the largest fossil collections in the world. In 1979, paleontologist David Raup, in the museum’s bulletin, stated, “We now have a quarter of a million fossil species, but the situation hasn’t changed much” since Darwin’s time. Famed paleontologist Niles Eldridge of the American Museum of Natural History wrote in 1985, “We paleontologists have said that the history of life supports (the Darwinian theory of gradual change), knowing all the while it does not.”
Now, more than 165 years after Darwin, the missing links are still missing, while the average person believes the fossil record proves Darwinian evolution because that is what we have been told. Microevolution does not confirm macroevolution, nor does the fossil record.
— Roland Earnst © 2026
References: “Conflicts Between Darwin and Palaeontology,” Field Museum of Natural History bulletin, January 1979, p. 25; Time Frames: The Evolution of Punctuated Equilibria, Princeton University Press, 1985, pp. 144-45, and God’s Undertaker by John C. Lennox, Lion Hudson, 2009, pp. 113-14.