Whales

“No Johnny, whales aren’t fish... they’re MAMMALS.

Fish MORPH INTO whales. But not while they’re in the water. First, they grow legs and climb onto land as they morph into lizards. Then, the lizards grow hair and begin nursing their young as they morph into mammals. Then, the mammals jump back into the water from which they came, and morph into whales.”

- Teachers everywhere

It’s amazing how absolutely ridiculous evolution becomes when you state precisely what they believe.

Evolutionists like to pretend that 4-legged walking land mammals accidentally morphed into whales. According to their imaginations, the 4 legged land mammals began feeding on animals in shallow waters, and due to natural selection pressures, their nostrils just accidentally moved from near their mouths to the top of / behind their head. They also, out of convenience, naturally sprouted a gigantic tail and flippers.

Now that may sound all well and good to the casual observer, but there are large amounts of faulty logic lurking in this imaginary tale (pun).

First of all, evolutionary belief claims that these yet unproven adaptations happen out of BENEFICIAL mutations. Beneficial, information gaining mutations on a large, morphological scale have never been observed of course, but we'll let that slide for now. In this case, the animal somehow had to go from 4 land walking legs to flippers, fins, and a vertically moving tail. But how can you say that it would be beneficial for a land mammal to have it's legs shortened, and it's tail enlarged? How would it benefit the animal, as it supposedly evolved, to have a larger tail that unbalanced its body, as it's legs got shortened? It wouldn't do too well on land, and it wouldn't do very well in water. How could that be considered beneficial? We do not have fossils that are 99% land mammal, 1% whale, 98% land mammal, 2% whale, and so on. But why would we, seeing as such an animal would be less likely to survive than the original 4 legged land mammal?

Hmm, one wonders why seals aren’t morphing into whales. After all, they are spending a lot of time feeding on fish near land, so why not just spontaneously evolve a powerful tail and a blowhole and be done with it? Oh wait, they use their feet to swim, just like any other 4 legged semi-aquatic mammal. Interesting...

The next round of absurdity is a good example of why teaching evolution involves leaving some facts untaught. Evolutionists say that whales "to this day have vestigial leg bones!" How cute! There are two tiny bones, near the whales reproductive organs, that evolutionists refer to as vestigial legs out of ignorance. In reality, whales use these bones during reproduction, and the bones are indeed attached to muscles. The bones are even shaped differently for males and females. By learning evolution, you fail to learn what the functions of certain body parts actually do! That doesn't sound like science, does it?

On one occasion, we overheard a high school student saying that their science teacher taught them that "whales' and dolphins' tails move up and down, since they used to be walking land mammals!" So let's see... when a 4 legged mammal jumps into the water, do you think it uses it's tail in an up and down movement to swim? We don't think so. Logically, if a quadrupedal mammal goes for a swim, it's going to use it's legs. Can you picture a mammal jumping into the water and letting its back legs sit idle, dragging against the water, while its tail moves up and down for forward propulsion? Has anyone ever seen a land mammal use it’s tail in an up and down motion to swim? At what point does the 4 legged land mammal stop using it's legs? Did it's tail move up and down before the flukes spread out at the back? Whales don't even have a pelvis, since that would prevent the up and down tail movement. Did the animal get rid of it's pelvis before it's tail started moving up and down? No, it couldn't have, because then it wouldn't be able to walk or swim. Did the animal start moving it's tail up and down powerfully enough to swim before it got rid of it's pelvis? No, because that would be highly disadvantageous, and would probably crush the reproductive organs.

Also, how did the nostrils accidentally "mutate" their way to the back of the whales head? Is it beneficial for the nostrils to have moved a couple inches? No, not really... it's pretty much only beneficial once they are all the way back there. Did they one day just magically jump? Nobody has ever witnessed such large mutations as are necessary for these things to be true, and evolutionists are still searching for all of their missing links. The term "missing links" is deceptive in itself, since the word "missing" would imply that it had been sighted before. But if we can consider the evolutionists' transitional forms to be "missing," then the magical, wish granting leprechaun in your back yard is "missing" as well. Since the links (transitional forms) have not yet been found, and don't exist to anyone's knowledge, it's really more accurate to refer to them as "nonexistent evidence."

You have to remember, according to evolutionary belief, all whale traits had to have developed by complete accident. For instance, one day a whale just supposedly randomly "mutated" a sonar system that can detect the precise location of a minnow 230 feet away, and then natural selection kept it around! Also, what about all the whales that have plankton filters? Completely accidental, random mutation? Riiiiiiight. And another curiosity... why don’t whales evolve gills? Evolutionary belief states that fish are whales’ ancestors. The fish jumped up to dry land, morphed into a lizard, which morphed into a 4 legged mammal, then the mammal jumped back into the water, and turned into a whale (just thinking about these beliefs makes the theory of evolution sound absolutely ridiculous). If a whale’s ancestors had gills, why would it be so hard for whales to get them back?

To the evolutionists' credit, they attempt to justify all of this unprovable faith by locating similar looking fossils and lining them up by shape. This is a trick they often use. The funny thing is they prefer to use illustrations, because then they can "fudge" things a bit. If a supposed "ancestor" happens to be 40 times larger then its imaginary predecessor or successor, just draw it the same size as the next and forget to tell the reader!

You too can prove that things evolve into each-other. For example, take a smooth, rounded rock, a baseball, and a volleyball. Congratulations! You now have proof, using Darwin logic, that rocks evolved into volleyballs.

Evolutionists also like to use genetic similarities as they attempt to provide support for their religion. They say "human and chimp DNA are kind of similar! That means monkeys morph into people!" So, according to them, if two things are similar, that means they morph into each-other. For example, a red house and a yellow house are made with 98% similar materials. The red house is a little nicer than the yellow house. Therefore, using Darwin logic, yellow houses morph into red houses, and nobody designed either one. Also, inanimate matter (such as rocks or hydrogen) morphs into houses over time, accidentally. Makes sense! Let's teach that to kids in school.

Also see:

Whale Evolution?

The Overselling of Whale Evolution

Walking Whales

Birds

Evolutionists also like to pretend that lizards morph into birds over time. Really? How long till all the lizards today start morphing into birds again? How come no lizards today are currently growing wings?

This is perhaps one of the more easily refutable that evolutionists have thought up. We have heard evolutionists say some pretty disprovable things about how lizards supposedly grew feathers. For example:

"The lizard probably grew feathers initially as an insulating adaptation."

Wow! He must have forgotten that lizards are COLD BLOODED. They do not produce heat, and therefore you can insulate them all you want and it's not going to help it stay warm.

There are also evolutionists that suggest the following:

"Lizards could have evolved wings as beneficial adaptations in running up inclines. This is referred to as 'wing-assisted incline running.' "

Did you catch that? Lizards got wings by holding their arms out and running up a hill. So, if lizards could do it, why can't people? If you run up hills everyday and hold your arms out like a make-believe airplane, maybe your kids will have wings! Think of how much money they'd save on car insurance by flying everywhere instead of driving.

Evolutionists always point to Archaeopteryx as their best shot at a transitional form between lizards and birds. Archaeopteryx, of course, was a bird. It flew like a bird, had the brain of a bird, the optical superiority of a bird, the light bone structure of a bird, and the inner ear of a modern bird. Wow! Sounds pretty convincing. Let’s teach schoolchildren that it morphed into existence from a lizard.

Then of course, the dire situation for the theory of evolution was summed up in November 1999, when the cover of National Geographic proclaimed "Missing Link Found!" They published a huge article with beautiful pictures of a lizard fossil that had bird wings. Finally, they found one of their missing links! But a few months later, it was found the someone in China just glued a birds wings onto a composite lizard skeleton. Looks like the "missing link" has not been found yet! And again, since the missing link does not exist to anyone's knowledge, it would be more fitting to call it "non-existent evidence."

And of course, there's the less technical, more obvious absurdities of lizard to bird evolution. Again, for evolution to supposedly happen, the mutations have to be BENEFICIAL. To go from lizard to bird, the legs have to shrink, and the arms have to get very long and grow feathers, while the bone structure becomes hollow with internal crossbeam support structures to prevent the hollow bones from breaking. Then it had to accidentally morph primary, secondary, and tertiary feathers, with barbs coming off the main stem and microscopic barbules holding the barbs together- all accidentally. What would a lizard look like with weakened legs, and long, lanky arms? Would that lizard be able to survive if it can't run very well and can't fly yet? The respiratory systems are completely different. Lizards draw oxygen into sacs, and then air is expelled out the same way it came in. Birds inhale air that passes through their lungs entirely in one direction, going out a different path than it came in, while blood vessels pump blood in the opposite direction for ultra efficient oxygen absorption, which is only beneficial at higher altitudes. How do these things come into existence via mindless, random processes?

Also see:

Bird Evolution?

Dino-Bird Evolution Falls Flat

Creationists Hit Sore Spot

Alleged Dinosaurian Ancestry of Birds

Don’t the beliefs proposed in the theory of evolution seem like gigantic leaps of faith? And if so, why are we teaching beliefs in schools?

_________________________

** Videos **

Expelled the Movie with Ben Stein (Watch the Trailer)

The Case for a Creator with Lee Strobel - Part 1 of 6

The Case for a Creator with Lee Strobel - Part 2

The Case for a Creator with Lee Strobel - Part 3