It should be noted that gaps do not disprove evolution unless it can be shown that the development of the (theoretical) descendant could not evolve from the last known (proposed) ancestor. These linkages are usually shown as dotted lines of the proposed hierarchy, based on the best morphological evidence available.
Actually, these gaps would not disprove evolution unless it could be shown that at the end of such a gap there was special creation of the next form.
A gap is simply an unknown, with the dotted lines representing a "best guess" of what went where. And based on our information to date, they may not be correct. Another critter may be found which actually was the ancestor of the guys at the end of the dotted line. That would not disprove evolution in the least, it would just add a missing piece of information and ultimately make the details supporting the theory of evolution stronger and more complete.
No, to disprove evolution you need something that absolutely can't be explained by the current theory--some undisputed fact that just doesn't fit, and can't be made to fit.
For example, special creation of the various "kinds" about 6,000 years ago would do it, if there was any evidence supporting that belief. At present there is no such evidence.
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
™ Version 4.2
