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