Curiously a significant portion of that fossil record of marine life is inconsistent with catastrophic endings. Rather they show a gradual transition from generation to generation of mature ecologies growing on the deposits of previous generations. For instance brachiopods growing with their stalks attached to the shells of previous brachiopods, critters that spend a year in a larval stage before settling onto the bottom and building their first stalk\shell, critters that have growth rings in there shells showing lifetimes measured in decades on top of shells that took decades to form ... and that is but one of many such examples.
The above is what Portillo needs to address. Creationists always ignore what they can't explain.
Marine fossils make up the majority of the fossil record because of the environment in which they form. The primary geological process operating in the ocean is one of deposition, while above surface it is erosion.
That alone should be reason enough why marine fossils would be more common than land-dwelling fossils, but also consider that during the history of the earth: the ocean has made up as little as 70% of it's surface area, comprised greater than 90% of the habitable space on the planet, that 94* (today) to 100% of life on the planet has been aquatic, and that an average of less than 5% of all life are vertebrates.
Of that, how many have been land-dwellers? Slightly more than what is represented in the fossil record? Likely, I'd say.
*With the possible exception of the Permian-Triassic and other extinction events.
Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
