Evolution conflict and division

Some articles addressing out of place fossils as it were.

Amo2 said:

Some articles addressing out of place fossils as it were.

Are there out-of-sequence fossils that are problematic for evolution? · Creation.com

Creation or evolution? It makes a big difference! Over 10,000 trustworthy articles. Evidence for biblical creation.

creation.com

Out of Place Marine Fossil Disrupts Evolutionary Index | The Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org

Out of Place Fossils (December 28) | Creation 101

The geological column in our textbooks has been used by evolutionists to represent creatures evolving over millions of years. Did you realize, however, that there are many “inconvenient” fossils? Here are just a few: Evolutionists have to explain from where birds came. So, they assume...

creation101.org

Fossils Show Stasis and No Transitional Forms | The Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - 25. Out-of-Sequence Fossils

Click to expand...

And this is simply misinformation. For example, the first article states:

“Dinosaurs are supposed to have evolved into birds. But Confuciusornis was a true beaked bird that pre-dates the ‘feathered’ dinosaurs that it allegedly came from. It also has been found in the stomach of a dinosaur.”

But in fact, Confuciusornis dates to roughly 125–120 million years ago, while feathered dinosaurs date back earlier, such as Sinosauropteryx from about 130–125 million years ago, Caudipteryx from 125–124 million years ago, and Anchiornis from about 160 million years ago in the Late Jurassic.

Or from your second link, a statement is made:
"However, the presence of this unique fossil can no longer be used to reliably identify a rock as Cambrian. In addition to the Ordovician anomalocaridid discovered in Morocco, a lone fossil of an obvious anomalocaridid (although it was not identified as such) was described from Devonian strata in Germany."

Likewise this is just misinformation. There isn't anything out of place about an anomalocaridid in the Devonian. It's not as though you're finding a devonian tetrapod in the Cambrian before it's ancestors. Rather the opposite is being described in which a group of animals lived beyond just the Cambrian. Which is a common occurrence in the fossil record. There isn't anything unusual about this, despite the articles claims.