It’s difficult to classify creationist argumsnts according to their degree of stupidity — because they’re all stupid. But among the dumbest is one that comes up all the time around here: If We Evolved From Monkeys, Then Why …? There are numerous variations, all equally silly. For example, see Casey: Why Are There Still Walking Lungfish?, and also Klinghoffer: Why Are There Still Insects?, and also ICR: Ancient Algae Disproves Evolution.
Our answer to those creationist questions is always the same: If America was founded by England, why are there still Englishmen? If dogs evolved from wolves, why are there still wolves? If everything evolved from early one-celled organisms, then why are there still bacteria? If the emergence of a new species demands the disappearance of its ancestral stock, then why is there anything on Earth other than humans?
With that introduction, you’re ready for this at the creationist blog of the Discovery Institute: Bechly: Why the Phenomenon of Living Fossils Is Under “Massive Attack”. It was written by Klinghoffer. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections [that look like this]:
If you ever encounter a horseshoe crab on the beach, you are a looking at a creature that would not have appeared out of place hundreds of millions of years ago. Arthropods breathtakingly similar to this, says paleontologist Günter Bechly, go back “almost a half billion years without significant morphological change. And you really have to let this number sink in.”
Ooooooooooooh! Why are there still horseshoe crabs? Then Klinghoffer says:
On a new ID the Future episode, host Sarah Chaffee talks with Dr. Bechly [Hee hee!] about the challenge posed to Darwinian gradualism by animals that manifestly don’t change – aka, “living fossils,” a phenomenon that Darwin himself grappled with. Listen to the podcast or download it here. [Link omitted.]
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! See ICR: “Living Fossils” Prove Creationism. Klinghoffer tells us:
Says Bechly, living fossils stand as “empirical refutations” of traditional evolutionary theory. That is one reason their very existence is coming under a “massive attack” by Darwinian evolutionists … . Some are in denial, while other equivocate. The latter try to explain that “these living fossils do evolve but they evolve toward keeping their particular form, which is optimized.” In other words, they evolve toward not evolving.
[*Groan*] He continues:
It’s another case, according to Bechly, where evolution acts as a “magic wand,” wondrously encompassing all evidence however plainly contradictory of its expectation. Under the theory, things evolve when they evolve and do not evolve when they do not evolve. Can you beat that? No, you can’t beat it. An idea like that that can never be falsified.
Isn’t this grand? For years, we’ve seen the Discoveroids claim that everything, no matter what, is the purposeful handiwork of their intelligent designer — blessed be he! — which makes their “theory” impervious to disproof. Evolution, on the other hand, could be disproved, but at this point, with all the evidence that’s been piled up, it would be difficult. If one wants to seriously challenge evolution, he should take a look at Advice for Creationists, and also Where’s the Proof — Evolution’s “Smoking Gun”?
Here’s the end of Klinghoffer’s post:
On the other hand, groups of creatures that slip into existence and remain in stasis for long periods fits well with the theory of intelligent design. ID predicts discontinuities in the fossil record in keeping with deliberate infusions of information. [Hee hee!] Species might go extinct, as trilobites, for one, did. What they don’t do, not through random, unguided processes, is gradually transform into totally different species.
What did he say? Stasis proves intelligent design. So does extinction. So does everything. With a “theory” like that, the Discoveroids are on the fast track to … to what? You decide, dear reader.
Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.