# Is there more proof of Jesus than Evolution? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 17, 2006, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-more-proof-of-jesus-than-evolution/369054 "2006-08-17T05:30:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 73
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2006, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-more-proof-of-jesus-than-evolution/369054/73 "2006-08-19T06:09:41Z")
[QUOTE=srmclauren] Is it true that the “geologic column” only exists in textbooks? [/quote] No. There are many places on the earth where the column is “complete” but this isn’t particularly necessary anyway, because we have ways of conclusively piecing it all together even if no place had every possible layer. > [@](#): > > Is it consistant all over the earth? Yes, if by consistent you mean that it all appears to fit into the same pattern of evidence and tell the same story of past history. > [@](#): > > Do we date the fossils by the layer in which they are found, or the layer in which they are found by the types of fossils it contains? Does it seem like this is going around in circles? It must have come from the East\> This is a common creationist myth. Yes, we CAN and sometimes DO use one to easily date the other as needed, but this is only because these relationships have ALREADY been proven to be so certain and constant that we can safely make such assumptions for the sake of expediency. Dating can always be tested directly, and generally is anyway. It just isn’t particularly pressing because, as I noted, the relationship is very reliable and consistent. Given that the only people who think this is questionable are generally against the entire premise of science and the idea of dating things anyway, it’s not much of a concern. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-more-proof-of-jesus-than-evolution/369054)._