"So many questions arise in the study of fossils ( paleontology ) that even many evolutionary paleontologists put little stock in the fossil record . Basing one 's belief in evolution on the shaky ground of paleontology can scarcely be considered scientific.35 `` We are about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded . We now have a quarter of a million species but the situation has n't changed much . The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and , ironically , we have fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin 's time. `` - Dr. David M. Raup , Curator of Geology , Museum of Natural History , Chicago14 ( http : //www.straight-talk.net/evolution/fossil.htm )"
"Gee , gives the impression that Dr. David M. Raup , Curator of Geology , Museum of Natural History , Chicago , puts little stock in the fossil record and rejects evolution , helping support the preceding assertion that surely oneÂ ’ s belief in evolution based on paleontology can scarcely be considered scientific . But thatÂ ’ s not at all what Dr. Raup was stating . While Googling for a fuller quote , I ran across a page that showed how this Â– and many other Â– statements by Dr. Raup were distorted by Creationists . To start with , here is a fuller quote :"
"So many questions arise in the study of fossils ( paleontology ) that even many evolutionary"
"Gee , gives the impression that Dr. David M. Raup , Curator of Geology ,"