http://scienceislam.com/scientists_quran.php
According to the theory of evolution, every living species has emerged
from a predecessor. One species which existed previously turned into
something else over time and all species have come into being in this
way. According to the theory, this transformation proceeds gradually
over millions of years.

If this were the case, then innumerable intermediate species should
have lived during the immense period of time when these
transformations were supposedly occurring. For instance, there should
have lived in the past some half-fish/half-reptile creatures which had
acquired some reptilian traits in addition to the fish traits they
already had. Or there should have existed some reptile/bird creatures,
which had acquired some avian traits in addition to the reptilian
traits they already possessed. Evolutionists refer to these imaginary
creatures, which they believe to have lived in the past, as
"transitional forms".

If such animals had really existed, there would have been millions,
even billions, of them. More importantly, the remains of these
creatures should be present in the fossil record. The number of these
transitional forms should have been even greater than that of present
animal species, and their remains should be found all over the world.
In The Origin of Species, Darwin accepted this fact and explained:

If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking
most closely all of the species of the same group together must
assuredly have existed... Consequently evidence of their former
existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.23

Even Darwin himself was aware of the absence of such transitional
forms. He hoped that they would be found in the future. Despite his
optimism, he realised that these missing intermediate forms were the
biggest stumbling-block for his theory. That is why he wrote the
following in the chapter of the The Origin of Species entitled
"Difficulties of the Theory":

…Why, if species have descended from other species by fine
gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?
Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as
we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable
transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded
in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… But in the
intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we
not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty
for a long time quite confounded me.24

The only explanation Darwin could come up with to counter this
objection was the argument that the fossil record uncovered so far was
inadequate. He asserted that when the fossil record had been studied
in detail, the missing links would be found.

Believing in Darwin's prophecy, evolutionist paleontologists have been
digging up fossils and searching for missing links all over the world
since the middle of the 19th century. Despite their best efforts, no
transitional forms have yet been uncovered. All the fossils unearthed
in excavations have shown that, contrary to the beliefs of
evolutionists, life appeared on earth all of a sudden and fully-
formed. Trying to prove their theory, evolutionists have instead
unwittingly caused it to collapse.

A famous British paleontologist, Derek V. Ager, admits this fact even
though he is an evolutionist:

The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail,
whether at the level of orders or of species, we find-over and over
again-not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at
the expense of another.25

Another evolutionist paleontologist Mark Czarnecki comments as
follows:

A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record;
the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth's geological
formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin's
hypothetical intermediate variants - instead species appear and
disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist
argument that each species was created by God.26

These gaps in the fossil record cannot be explained by saying that
sufficient fossils have not yet been found, but that they one day will
be. Another American scholar, Robert Wesson, states in his 1991 book
Beyond Natural Selection, that "the gaps in the fossil record are real
and meaningful". He elaborates this claim in this way:

The gaps in the record are real, however. The absence of a record of
any important branching is quite phenomenal. Species are usually
static, or nearly so, for long periods, species seldom and genera
never show evolution into new species or genera but replacement of one
by another, and change is more or less abrupt.27
Life Emerged on Earth Suddenly and in Complex Forms

When terrestrial strata and the fossil record are examined, it is to
be seen that all living organisms appeared simultaneously. The oldest
stratum of the earth in which fossils of living creatures have been
found is that of the Cambrian, which has an estimated age of 500-550
million years.

The living creatures found in the strata belonging to the Cambrian
period emerged all of a sudden in the fossil record-there are no pre-
existing ancestors. The fossils found in Cambrian rocks belonged to
snails, trilobites, sponges, earthworms, jellyfish, sea hedgehogs, and
other complex invertebrates. This wide mosaic of living organisms made
up of such a great number of complex creatures emerged so suddenly
that this miraculous event is referred to as the "Cambrian Explosion"
in geological literature.

Most of the creatures in this layer have complex systems have complex
systems and advanced structures, such as eyes, gills, and circulatory
systems, exactly the same as those in modern specimens. For instance,
the double-lensed, combed eye structure of trilobites is a wonder of
creation. David Raup, a professor of geology in Harvard, Rochester,
and Chicago Universities, says: "the trilobites 450 million years ago
used an optimal design which would require a well trained and
imaginative optical engineer to develop today".28

These complex invertebrates emerged suddenly and completely without
having any link or any transitional form between them and the
unicellular organisms, which were the only life forms on earth prior
to them.
Richard Monastersky, a science journalist at Science News, one of the
popular publications of evolutionist literature, states the following
about the "Cambrian Explosion", which is a deathtrap for evolutionary
theory:

A half-billion years ago, the remarkably complex forms of animals we
see today suddenly appeared. This moment, right at the start of
Earth's Cambrian Period, some 550 million years ago, marks the
evolutionary explosion that filled the seas with the earth's first
complex creatures. ...the large animal phyla of today were present
already in the early Cambrian ...and they were as distinct from each
other as they are today.29

Deeper investigation into the Cambrian Explosion shows what a great
dilemma it creates for the theory of evolution. Recent findings
indicate that almost all phyla, the most basic animal divisions,
emerged abruptly in the Cambrian period. An article published in
Science magazine in 2001 says: "The beginning of the Cambrian period,
some 545 million years ago, saw the sudden appearance in the fossil
record of almost all the main types of animals (phyla) that still
dominate the biota today".30 The same article notes that for such
complex and distinct living groups to be explained according to the
theory of evolution, very rich fossil beds showing a gradual
developmental process should have been found, but this has not yet
proved possible:

This differential evolution and dispersal, too, must have required a
previous history of the group for which there is no fossil record.31

How the earth came to overflow with such a great number of animal
species all of a sudden, and how these distinct types of species with
no common ancestors could have emerged, is a question that remains
unanswered by evolutionists. The Oxford University zoologist Richard
Dawkins, one of the foremost advocates of evolutionist thought in the
world, comments on this reality that undermines the very foundation of
all the arguments he has been defending:

For example the Cambrian strata of rocks... are the oldest ones in
which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many
of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time
they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any
evolutionary history.32
As Dawkins is forced to acknowledge, the Cambrian Explosion is strong
evidence for creation, because creation is the only way to explain the
fully-formed emergence of life on earth. Douglas Futuyma, a prominent
evolutionist biologist admits this fact: "Organisms either appeared on
the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must
have developed from preüexisting species by some process of
modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must
indeed have been created by some omnipotent intelligence." 33 Darwin
himself recognised the possibility of this when he wrote: "If numerous
species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started
into life all at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of
descent with slow modification through natural selection." 34 The
Cambrian Period is nothing more or less than Darwin's "fatal stroke".
This is why the Swiss evolutionist paleoanthropologist Stefan
Bengtson, who confesses the lack of transitional links while
describing the Cambrian Age, makes the following comment: "Baffling
(and embarrasing) to Darwin, this event still dazzles us".35

Obviously, the fossil record indicates that living things did not
evolve from primitive to the advanced forms, but instead emerged all
of a sudden and in a perfect state. In short, living beings did not
come into existence by evolution, they were created.

Molecular Comparisons Deepen Evolution's
Cambrian Impasse

Another fact that puts evolutionists into a deep quandary about the
Cambrian Explosion is the comparisons between different living taxa.
The results of these comparisons reveal that animal taxa considered to
be "close relatives" by evolutionists until quite recently, are
genetically very different, which puts the "intermediate form"
hypothesis, that only exists theoretically, into an even greater
quandary. An article published in the Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences in 2000 reports that DNA analyses have displaced
taxa that used to be considered "intermediate forms" in the past:

DNA sequence analysis dictates new interpretation of phylogenic
trees. Taxa that were once thought to represent successive grades of
complexity at the base of the metazoan tree are being displaced to
much higher positions inside the tree. This leaves no evolutionary
"intermediates" and forces us to rethink the genesis of bilaterian
complexity....36

In the same article, evolutionist writers note that some taxa which
were considered "intermediate" between groups such as sponges,
cnidarians and ctenophores can no longer be considered as such because
of new genetic findings, and that they have "lost hope" of
constructing such evolutionary family trees:

The new molecular based phylogeny has several important
implications. Foremost among them is the disappearance of
"intermediate" taxa between sponges, cnidarians, ctenophores, and the
last common ancestor of bilaterians or "Urbilateria." ...A corollary
is that we have a major gap in the stem leading to the Urbilataria. We
have lost the hope, so common in older evolutionary reasoning, of
reconstructing the morphology of the "coelomate ancestor" through a
scenario involving successive grades of increasing complexity based on
the anatomy of extant "primitive" lineages. 37

23 Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the First
Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 179.
24 Ibid, pp. 172, 280.
25 Derek V. Ager, "The Nature of the Fossil Record", Proceedings of
the British Geological Association, Vol 87, 1976, p. 133.
26 Mark Czarnecki, "The Revival of the Creationist Crusade",
MacLean's, January 19, 1981, p. 56.
27 R. Wesson, Beyond Natural Selection, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA,
1991, p. 45.
28 David Raup, "Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology", Bulletin,
Field Museum of Natural History, Vol 50, January 1979, p. 24.
29 Richard Monastersky, "Mysteries of the Orient", Discover, April
1993, p. 40.
30 Richard Fortey, "The Cambrian Explosion Exploded?", Science, vol
293, No 5529, 20 July 2001, p. 438-439.
31 Ibid.
32 Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, London: W. W. Norton 1986,
p. 229.
33 Douglas J. Futuyma, Science on Trial, New York: Pantheon Books,
1983, p. 197.
34 Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the First
Edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 302.
35 Stefan Bengston, Nature, Vol. 345, 1990, p. 765.
36 The New Animal Phylogeny: Reliability And Implications, Proc. of
Nat. Aca. of Sci., 25 April 2000, vol 97, No 9, p. 4453-4456.
37 Ibid.
http://www.evolutiondeceit.com/chapter5.php