The fossil record is one of the most common evidences given for evolution, but there are several facts about the fossil record that don't fit well with Darwin's theory of evolution. Darwin's theory relies on minute changes in organisms which slowly accumulate, gradually changing the organism until it eventually becomes a "new species". I think this is a little ridiculous because it just doesn't make sense. Let's use a dinosaur as an example. If a dinosaur breeds continually and, just out of the blue, makes a reptile such as the iguana. Does that make it a new species? NO IT DOESN'T! Just because something breeds and breeds until its offspring look different at some random point in time doesn't make it a new species. It's just the same thing only altered a bit. I'm getting off subject though... the problem with fossils is some paleontologists don't take care of them like they should. For example, when mining, if that's the term you'd use, they hack at them causing them to break and be sold for less than they're worth. Some take the fossils from the museums in their home countries and sell them in another country. But as for the fossil record, it's full of gaps. I'm going to say most likely because of Darwin's theory of evolution.
