The famous “horse sequence” found in most textbooks has long been claimed to demonstrate the evolution of small multi-toed ancestors to large one-toed horses of today. Although it is still being paraded as a fact in textbooks, the sequence has been largely discredited as proof of evolution. The first animals in the sequence more closely resemble small rodents than horses, and many of the later horses have been found in the same rock layers as their supposed ancestors.
It is quite easy to arrange similar fossils from smallest to largest and then claim that this proves evolution. In the same way one could place the bones of a Chihuahua, beagle, boxer, and Great Dane in sequence and claim that this proves that dogs have evolved. This is essentially what has been done with the horse evolution series. The various breeds of dogs exist not because they have evolved, but because the information needed to breed the different varieties was present from the beginning. The same is true of horses-no evolution has been observed, only variation within a kind.
From A Closer Look at the Evidence by Kleiss, April 9.
