Circular Reasoning

In Geology

Evolutionists have been dating the fossils by the assumed evolutionary timetable they have imposed on the rock sequences and then dating the rocks by the index fossils found in them. Although this line of thought is completely unsound, both geology and paleontology use it extensively.


R. H. Rastall, writing in the 1956 Encyclopedia Britannica, said, “It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”1


Dr. David M. Raup, curator of Geology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, wrote in 1983, “The charge that the construction of the geologic scale involves circularity has a certain amount of validity.”2


Evolutionist Tom Kemp, curator of the University Museum of Oxford University, noted, “A circular argument arises: Interpret the fossil record in terms of a particular theory of evolution, inspect the interpretation, and note that it confirms the theory. Well, it would, wouldn’t it?”3


In Biology

The use of homologous (similar) features in biology as evidence for evolution also involves circular reasoning. Homologous features are defined as structures that are similar because they were inherited from a common ancestor. The bone structures of the wing of a bat, the flipper of a porpoise, and the front leg of a horse are considered examples of homology in vertebrate limbs. Similarities of this kind are often claimed to be some of the best evidence for common ancestry. However, before scientists can tell if features are homologous, they have to know whether they came from a common ancestor. Evolutionists are actually saying, “We know features are derived from a common ancestor because they’re derived from a common ancestor.” The eye of the octopus and the human eye are very similar, but they are not considered homologous. Why? Because evolutionists have already decided that humans and the octopus do not share common ancestors.

“. . . Geologists are

here arguing in

a circle.”


R.H. Rastall

  1. R. H. Rastall as quoted in Taylor, Paul S. The Illustrated Origins Answer Book (Mesa, Arizona: Films For Christ Association, 1989), p. 101.
  2. David M. Raup as quoted in Snelling, Andrew, ed. The Revised Quote Book. (Australia: Creation Science Foundation, 1990), p. 25.
  3. Taylor, p. 101.


Design, graphics and artwork copyright © 2016 Tim Beasley • All rights reserved.