ICR: Not Enough Time for Evolution

Creationists have a very limited répertoire, and as a result, we often see them repeating the same nonsense over and over. So it is today with the creation scientists at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — the fountainhead of young-earth creationist wisdom.

Their latest post is Living Fossils Found off Australia’s Coast. [*Begin Drool Mode*] Ooooooooooooh — living fossils! [*End Drool Mode*]

It was written by Brian Thomas. He’s usually described at the end of his articles as “Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.” This is ICR’s biographical information on him. Here are some excerpts from his brilliant article, with bold font added by us:

The Deep Down Under project explores “relict faunas,” living creatures with eerily similar counterparts among some of the world’s oldest fossils. Deep-sea researchers used a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) to look for life around Osprey Reef off Queensland’s coast. They found some surprises including animals known only from faraway places and long-gone times.

That project has a website: Deep Down Under. Brian says they found some surprises. What were they? He tells us:

Their ROV also captured an image of a chambered nautilus, with its beautifully curved shell, scavenging a fish carcass. Some of the lowest layers of sediments with any kind of fossil — called the Cambrian System, supposedly some 500 million years old — have virtually identical fossil shells.

A chambered nautilus? Wait a minute. Brian recently wrote about them — see ICR: “Living Fossils” Prove Creationism. In that one, Brian said:

According to this secular story, nautiluses avoided evolving upward — they haven’t gained a single new feature. … [T]hese “ancient” fossil creatures look like their modern counterparts — just as if they were created to reproduce according to their kinds. … But what are the odds that these creatures could have persisted unchanged for half-a-billion years?

And we said:

Creationists are always telling us about the impossible odds against evolution, but now they’re turning it around and asking about the odds of something not evolving. They imagine that stasis is an evolution-killer because they believe that the theory of evolution requires the sudden, tsunami-like, simultaneous transformation of one entire species into another. This is a clumsy variation of the age-old clunker: Why are there still monkeys?

Does Brian have anything new to say today? In a way, yes. It’s a subtle variation of what he said before. Let’s read on:

The evolutionarily accepted time span for Cambrian sediments, and thus the timespan encompassing creatures fossilized within these sediments like crinoids and nautiluses, ranges from 485 to 541 million years. How could chambered nautiluses and sea lilies (crinoids) fail to evolve over half a billion years?

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! How could they have avoided it? Brian criticizes the scientific explanation:

Supposedly, placid places in the ocean’s depths can somehow keep creatures from evolving into different kinds over countless spans of time. However, evolutionary geology teaches that sea floors were completely replaced hundreds of millions of years after the Cambrian rocks were laid. So, even according to evolutionary world history, the sea floor of long ago was not the “nice stable environment” seen today.

Yeah, okay. Then he gives us the creationist explanation:

Flood geologists acknowledge these processes happened fast, as part of the Earth-reshaping violence accompanying Noah’s Flood year.

Yes, that’s what they say. Now here’s the fun part, right at the end:

If Noah’s recent Flood deposited Cambrian rocks and fossils, then the creatures they recorded would have had no time to evolve. No wonder they look just the same in today’s mysterious ocean depths.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Okay, sea creatures survived the Flood and they’ve had no time to evolve since then. But what about life on land? If the Flood happened around 4,000 years ago, and the only land-dwelling creatures that survived were a few hundred (or maybe a few thousand) “kinds” on Noah’s Ark, then there wasn’t enough time for them to evolve into the millions of species we see in the world today.

Brian’s post is yet another example of what we call the Creationist Scientific Method:

1. Select a conclusion which you hope is true.
2. Find one piece of evidence that possibly might fit.
3. Ignore all other evidence.
4. That’s it.

Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

12 responses to “ICR: Not Enough Time for Evolution

  1. “Their ROV also captured an image of a chambered nautilus, with its beautifully curved shell, scavenging a fish carcass. Some of the lowest layers of sediments with any kind of fossil — called the Cambrian System, supposedly some 500 million years old — have virtually identical fossil shells.”

    Bull. There are no “beautifully curved shell” chambered nautilus fossils from the Cambrian. What IS there is the ancestor of the nautilus — various species of straight-shelled cephalopods, especially in the next period up from the Cambrian, the Ordovician. They are all over the place in the limestone around Cincinnati. But they all have straight shells — never curved.

    In other words, they have evolved. ICR’s Brian Thomas knows not of what he writes.

  2. About Brian Thomas’s application of the Creationist Scientific Method:
    (1. Select a conclusion which you hope is true.
    2. Find one piece of evidence that possibly might fit.
    )

    He didn’t even do that much. His “one piece of evidence” isn’t even a piece of evidence. There were NO curved nautili in the Cambrian. Or we should say if there were, they have yet to be discovered.

  3. If there was that super-fast super-micro-evolution of new species out of the few baramins taken on the Ark, how come there wasn’t any change in the baramins of sea creatures which were not taken on the Ark?

  4. michaelfugate

    Let’s see Nautilus pompilius first appears in the fossil record 2MYA. The genus Nautilus appears about 35MYA.
    The website refers to organisms thought to have been extinct in the Mesozoic 65MYA (obviously not N. pompilius).
    The Cambrian ended 490MYA.

    Math not a strong point of ICR. Or is it reading skills?

  5. Since I did my PhD thesis on the structure of muscle from another “living fossil”, Limulus polyphemus, the Atlantic horseshoe crab, I’m rather fond of such creatures. Oh, and has any of the ID clowns got an hypothesis about why the alleged Noah flood didn’t wipe out all sea creatures by drastically changing the salinity of the oceans? Even Limulus doesn’t do too well in nearly fresh water, as I learned when some helpful person topped up the tank mine were in with fresh water!

  6. “what are the odds that these creatures could have persisted unchanged for half-a-billion years?”
    High, if the circumstances are such that changes are disadvantageous.

    MichaelF asks: “Or is it reading skills?”
    This combined with illwill.

  7. Crinoids likewise have undergone significant evolution since the ordovician, with precursors in the cambrian. This includes winnowing during mass extinctions and subsequent radiations. Today’s versions definitely have a long evolutionary history, but are hardly unchanged over that time.

  8. Supposedly, placid places in the ocean’s depths can somehow keep creatures from evolving into different kinds over countless spans of time. However, evolutionary geology teaches that sea floors were completely replaced hundreds of millions of years after the Cambrian rocks were laid. So, even according to evolutionary world history, the sea floor of long ago was not the “nice stable environment” seen today.

    The sea floors were completely replaced over the course of “hundreds of millions of years after the Cambrian rocks were laid.” [sic] (Laid? You mean like eggs? Or . . . but let’s not go there.)

    Mr. Thomas’s wording suggests that evolution-minded oceanographers and geologists think the sea floors just lay there for hundreds of millions of years until, bang, they changed. Except for the hundreds of millions of years, that’s pretty much what creationists believe, but not actual scientists or even competently educated laymen.

  9. “If Noah’s recent Flood deposited Cambrian rocks and fossils, then the creatures they recorded would have had no time to evolve.” Rather a desperate argument.
    Meanwhile:
    http://thenaturalhistorian.com/2016/02/05/ken-hams-biblical-evolution-i-have-a-book-that-says-otherwise/

  10. michaelfugate

    Yet at the same time there were only a limited number of “kinds” on the Ark and all modern species are the result of a hyper-evolution happening so quickly that your head would spin watching the changes. Can you imagine a single feliform carnivore on the Ark and in 4000 years speciating into cats, hyaenas, civets, mongooses, etc.? And that is just the extant groups. So which is it too fast or too slow?

  11. @Ashley Haworth-roberts: Thanks for the link to the excellent article about Ham’s “Biblical Evolution”. Of course, Ham’s whole concept is preposterous; but it’s beautifully ironic to prove it so with Ham’s “own “Book”.

  12. Ammonites, and nautilus like creatures are TREMENDOUS index fossils.
    Because they live in the water column, when they perish, their skeletons get buried in soft sediment. They can be be found in deep water strata, deltaic near shore sediments and marine shelf strata. Because of this, age dating of
    the stratigraphic column can be achieved, as extinctions limit them to time equivalent beds. These creatures have lived in the worlds oceans for hundreds of millions of years. The niche they occupy hasn’t changed much during that time.
    When creationoids attack nautilius they’re attacking their worst enemy.
    Which is, a worldwide occurring index fossil that is diagnostic in age dating geologic strata. Be afraid Westie. Be very afraid.