The Empirical/Scientific Argument from Living Fossils is arguably one of the most powerful demonstrations of the Falsehood of Evolution. First, the observation, then the inference from it.
Observation: In the Fossil Record, we find several "Living Fossils", i.e. Fossils of Animals or Plant Species allegedly lived 100s of millions of years ago (400 MN in this case) which nonetheless are absolutely indistinguishable from their modern living cousins.
Only two possible deductions/inferences from this are reasonable:
Reasonable Inference I: Therefore, no significant macro-evolutionary change will ever happen even across 400+ alleged Million Years, in which case Macro-Evolution is moot anyway.
Reasonable Inference II: Or, those 400 MN years never passed, in which case evolution is also moot, as all evolutionists admit particles to people evolution needs 100s of millions of years to occur.
[For e.g. one evolutionary site says: "About 500 million years after the first single-cell living things, the first multicellular organisms appeared."]
Instead of these, Atheists and those a priori committed to metaphysical naturalism resort to sophisms to explain away the below evidence.
Unreasonable Sophism I: Over alleged 400 MN years, no Macro-Evolution whatsoever occurred in Coelacanth Fish. Yet, we are supposed to believe Monkeys evolved into Men in roughly 1/100th of that timeframe.
God did not create Men from Monkeys, as He is Almighty, and didn't need to. But Evolutionists want to make Monkeys out of Men.
For e.g. one Evolutionary Fantasy Site claims: "Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years."
Evolution is an Atheistic Fantasy Story, a Dark Fairy Tale invented by the Demons. Thoughts?
From: https://www.icr.org/living-fossils
Thoughts?
"
Living Fossils Display No Signs of Evolution's Long Ages
Evidence for Creation › Evidence from Science › Evidence from the Life Sciences › Biological Clocks Indicate Recent Creation» Next
Sometimes called “Lazarus taxa,” living fossils are organisms that were thought to be extinct, only to turn up alive in modern populations. Ranging from magnolia flowers to gar fish, and from single-cell algal filaments to lobsters, the living counterpart looks so much like its fossilized predecessors that identification down to the species level is often possible.
One of the most spectacular living fossils is the coelacanth, a lobe-finned fish. Once known only from fossilized remains, this fish was considered by many to be a key transitional form (“missing link”) between fish and amphibians. Its fossils are found in Devonian strata, which are assigned a stunningly vast age of 400 million years. However, a live coelacanth hauled up in a fishing net off Madagascar in 1938 showed the same well-designed form as the fossils. It uses its unique fins to orient itself vertically in the deepest seas of the Indian Ocean, not for “walking” onto land from shallow waters. Where is any evidence of natural selection having made even one significant change in this fish over its supposed 400-million-year existence? A similar question could be asked of a host of living fossils.
The most straightforward explanation for why the living form looks so much like the fossilized one is that instead of eons of evolution having taken place, both were created recently."
Observation: In the Fossil Record, we find several "Living Fossils", i.e. Fossils of Animals or Plant Species allegedly lived 100s of millions of years ago (400 MN in this case) which nonetheless are absolutely indistinguishable from their modern living cousins.
Only two possible deductions/inferences from this are reasonable:
Reasonable Inference I: Therefore, no significant macro-evolutionary change will ever happen even across 400+ alleged Million Years, in which case Macro-Evolution is moot anyway.
Reasonable Inference II: Or, those 400 MN years never passed, in which case evolution is also moot, as all evolutionists admit particles to people evolution needs 100s of millions of years to occur.
[For e.g. one evolutionary site says: "About 500 million years after the first single-cell living things, the first multicellular organisms appeared."]
Instead of these, Atheists and those a priori committed to metaphysical naturalism resort to sophisms to explain away the below evidence.
Unreasonable Sophism I: Over alleged 400 MN years, no Macro-Evolution whatsoever occurred in Coelacanth Fish. Yet, we are supposed to believe Monkeys evolved into Men in roughly 1/100th of that timeframe.
God did not create Men from Monkeys, as He is Almighty, and didn't need to. But Evolutionists want to make Monkeys out of Men.
For e.g. one Evolutionary Fantasy Site claims: "Scientific evidence shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of approximately six million years."
Evolution is an Atheistic Fantasy Story, a Dark Fairy Tale invented by the Demons. Thoughts?
From: https://www.icr.org/living-fossils
Thoughts?
"
Living Fossils Display No Signs of Evolution's Long Ages
Evidence for Creation › Evidence from Science › Evidence from the Life Sciences › Biological Clocks Indicate Recent Creation» Next
Sometimes called “Lazarus taxa,” living fossils are organisms that were thought to be extinct, only to turn up alive in modern populations. Ranging from magnolia flowers to gar fish, and from single-cell algal filaments to lobsters, the living counterpart looks so much like its fossilized predecessors that identification down to the species level is often possible.
One of the most spectacular living fossils is the coelacanth, a lobe-finned fish. Once known only from fossilized remains, this fish was considered by many to be a key transitional form (“missing link”) between fish and amphibians. Its fossils are found in Devonian strata, which are assigned a stunningly vast age of 400 million years. However, a live coelacanth hauled up in a fishing net off Madagascar in 1938 showed the same well-designed form as the fossils. It uses its unique fins to orient itself vertically in the deepest seas of the Indian Ocean, not for “walking” onto land from shallow waters. Where is any evidence of natural selection having made even one significant change in this fish over its supposed 400-million-year existence? A similar question could be asked of a host of living fossils.
The most straightforward explanation for why the living form looks so much like the fossilized one is that instead of eons of evolution having taken place, both were created recently."
-
1
- Show all
