ICR: Ancient Algae Disproves Evolution

Today we have an excellent article from the creation scientists at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — the fountainhead of young-earth creationist wisdom. It’s titled Dinosaur Algae Alive and Well Today, written by Brian Thomas. He’s described at the end of his articles as “Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

Botanists recently discovered Lychnothamnus barbatus, a large form of green algae known from European and Asian freshwater lakes, in North America. Before this discovery, the only hints of this particular water plant in the Americas came from their fossils mixed with dinosaurs in Argentina.

PhysOrg mentioned that about six weeks ago — see Dinosaur-era plant found alive in North America for first time. They quote its discoverer, Richard McCourt, PhD:

Lychnothamnus barbatus’ survival isn’t, per se, ecologically earth-shaking, but it changes our view of what the algal flora of North America is composed of and inspires us to keep hunting for more new finds.

But ICR thinks it is earth-shaking. Brian says:

If this type of algae’s fossils were deposited tens of millions of years ago, then how has it avoided evolutionary tinkering ever since? How could it remain unchanged for over “65 million years?”

Gasp — what a profound question! As all creationists know, evolution is supposed to be an irresistible force that transforms everything, so no allegedly ancestral species should survive. That bedrock principle underlies the familiar creationist taunt to evolutionists: If we evolved from monkeys, then Why Are There Still Monkeys?

We have three quickie responses to the monkey question: If America was founded by England, why are there still Englishmen? If dogs evolved from wolves, why are there still wolves? If the emergence of a new species demands the disappearance of its ancestral stock, then why is there anything on Earth other than humans?

After dropping his bombshell on the evolutionists, Brian tells us:

First, the [algae] gets buried and fossilized with dinosaurs in Argentina. Much later, botanists begin formally describing the same exact algae in Europe in the 1800s. It also grows in freshwater spots across Asia and toward Australia. Last, the same algae pop up in North America in the 21st century — with no hints of evolutionary alterations.

Gasp! How is that possible? Brian continues:

Secular botanists [Hee hee!] might offer the standard argument that once Lychnothamnus evolved, it never experienced an environment that challenged it enough to force its form to change. But how could the dramatic extinction event strong enough to morph dinosaurs into birds and rats into monkeys make no changes whatsoever to a gentle freshwater algae species?

Great question! Brian is relentless. He knows he’s got us on the ropes. Let’s read on:

The total lack of evolutionary change from Cretaceous to modern Lychnothamnus requires that either evolution never happened, the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event never happened, or neither happened.

Golly, he’s right! Our professors lied to us!

Finally, at the end of his article, Brian explains how to understand the continued existence of this allegedly ancient algae:

A recent deposition of dinosaur (and modern-looking stonewort) layers from Noah’s Flood plus the Genesis 1 declaration of God creating plants and animals according to distinct, interbreeding kinds perfectly accounts for the persistence of this same stonewort kind from fossils to today’s fresh waters.

Yes. Oh yes! That’s the answer! Darwinism is doomed!

Copyright © 2017. 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

9 responses to “ICR: Ancient Algae Disproves Evolution

  1. Michael Fugate

    If this type of algae’s fossils were deposited tens of millions of years ago, then how has it avoided evolutionary tinkering ever since?
    It hasn’t.
    How could it remain unchanged for over “65 million years?”
    It couldn’t.

    One would expect that genetic change between algae alive today and its conspecifics(?) 65 million years ago would equal that of two species which last shared common ancestry 32.5 million years ago. Morphological stasis does not indicate genetic stasis. Hard for some one to comprehend if they believe our understanding of biological relationships hasn’t changed for several thousand years in spite of our advances in scientific investigation.

  2. “Gentle?” Did he just describe algae as, “gentle?”

    Man, at least secular botanists actually know how plants work.

  3. Skeptical Servant

    The ICR have been known to spread misinformation asking crap like this saying that how can there be new algae if the ancient kind still exists and besides no alternatives to evolution have been found and creationism is still not science and I have to ask curmudgeon how can you stand reading this pseudoscience all the time without rage quitting I probably would.

  4. Quitting the field hands victory to the creationists by default, because they can then claim that you gave up because you realized you couldn’t answer their arguments.

  5. More worrying is why creationists haven`t evolved. Nearly two millennia and they are still locked into a world of delusion. Guess that disproves evolution. 🙂

  6. Charles Deetz ;)

    At the time the Bible was written, did anyone understand what algae was, let alone a plant.

  7. I love the expression “dinosaur algae”. It must be something like “streptococcus creationists”.

  8. I don’t think that there is any mention of algae in the Bible.
    Are algae universally recognized as living things?
    I don’t think that there is biological taxon of algae – some algae are eukaryotes, some are prokaryotes.
    The word “algae” is plural – the singular is “alga”.

  9. Ross Cameron, comparing the modern creationist in a culture built by science with a creationist in a Late Bronze/Iron Age agricultural society is a bit unfair, especially given that we really were thiiiis close to getting rid of literal creationism at one point.