Further Whale Evolution Deception
Proponents of universal common descent evolution have a passel of stories to tell, but they have nasty habits of circular reasoning (assuming evolution to prove evolution), neglecting basic facts, and making a passel of assumptions.
When scientists say that they have evidence, look for examples. Anti-creationists take the material without using critical thinking skills or asking questions, then tell biblical creationists, "Proof of whale evolution! Take that, creationists!" Not hardly! Watch for evolution of the gaps (they hope information will be found) and speculations.
 |
| Freeimages / Kym Parry |
The Genesis record says that God made “great sea creatures” on Day 5 of creation week (Genesis 1:21). Presumably this included whales. Today’s evolutionary biologists long ago tossed out Genesis as a silly creation myth of ancient people who didn’t know science. So they invented silly creation myths of their own, one being that great whales descended from a four-legged land animal. Darwin thought it was a bear. Today’s consensus compares it to a wolf with a long snout. This story, said to be supported by fossils from Pakistan, is touted as one of the prime evidences for “great transformations” over millions of Darwin Years.
You can read the rest by visiting "Shedding Dark on Whale Evolution". Guess what? We have another whale evolution piece for you, below.
The material in the article linked above may be waved off by some as exuberance, but it is based on a worldview rooted in atheistic naturalism. They have no desire for evidence of the Creator tainting their faith in Darwinism. This next one also springs from such a belief system. It is not only chock full of bad reasoning, but is outrageously deceptive.
Papa Darwin wrote that a bear-like creature evolved into a whale, but scientists at that time had a good laugh. Instead of having the courage of his convictions, he removed the idea from later editions of Origin. Ironically, evolutionists today hold to the same notions that amused their predecessors.
Right from the get-go, the alleged whale fossil called Phiomicetus anubis has the earmarks of being another Hesperopithecus haroldcookii. Anubis was the Egyptian god of death, so they thought this imaginary whale would be mighty fearsome, what with swimming as well as walking.
Paleontologists found eleven bones. None were leg bones. Bite marks on dem dry bones indicate they were gnawed on by sharks. (Interesting that dinosaurs died off in a big way according to evolutionary speculations, but sharks and crocodiles remain pretty much the same today, except having devolved into smaller versions.) This story is like so many others: Wishful thinking, working from erroneous presuppositions, and ignoring other possibilities for what was discovered. I reckon that denying God and recent creation cause people to go plumb loco.
I have authored both a paper and an entire book on the failure of the claims that some dog or deer-like quadrupedal animal evolved into a whale. The new find, Phiomicetus anubis, will be another chapter. My conclusion is the dog/deer-to-whale evolution is, at best, poorly documented. Conclusions about whale evolution are openly driven by belief, not evidence, and the latest example is no exception.
. . .
The difference between the largest mammal alive on earth today, whales, and small quadrupedal mammals has been well-documented but ignored. Specifically, the Antarctic blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) is the largest animal on the planet, up to 98 feet long, and weighing up to 400,000 pounds, which is close to the weight of 33 elephants. As whales are mammals, evolutionists (as was true of Darwin) have no better explanation of whale evolution than that it evolved from another mammal. Evolution from a dog is the least untenable compared to all other choices.
To read the entire article, head on over to "Latest 'Walking Whale' Fails". Related: "Deceptive Walking Whale News".