Vegetarian Shark Is Proof of Genesis

Some of you are probably still clinging to Darwinism, insisting that the bible is irrelevant to the world today. Well, get prepared for a shock. We have some evidence — real evidence! — that is certain to change your mind. It’s from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else.

At the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), Hambo’s creationist ministry, he posted A Shark That Eats Its Veggies? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

A news item [from Fox News: ‘Vegetarian’ shark discovery: First omnivorous species of sea predator stuns scientists] caught our eye this week. It was reporting on a study [from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Seagrass digestion by a notorious ‘carnivore’] which found that the bonnethead shark (a smaller relative of Hammerhead sharks) actually eats and digests seagrass.

Ooooooooooooh! Wait — what are we drooling about? What does it mean? Hambo says:

Now, scientists have noticed these sharks eating seagrass for several years but, perhaps influenced by their evolutionary worldview [the fools!], had assumed they were just eating the seagrass to get at crabs, shrimp, or small fish living in and around the seagrass.

The scientists were wrong! Hambo tells us:

But when researchers fed some captive bonnethead sharks a mostly seagrass diet, they noticed that the sharks did just fine. … Samantha Leigh, the study’s lead author made a couple of fascinating quotes in her Fox news interview.

[Samantha Leigh says:] “We have always thought of sharks as strict carnivores, but the bonnethead is throwing a wrench into that idea by digesting a fair amount of the seagrass that they consume. Given that bonnetheads have a digestive system that resembles that of closely-related species that we know to be strict carnivores, we need to re-think what it means to have a ‘carnivorous gut’.”

Wow! But what does this mean? Hambo explains:

When you start from a biblical viewpoint [the only way to start!], this study is not surprising at all. God created animals as well as humans to be vegetarian right from the beginning (Genesis 1:29–30). Evolutionists frequently bring up “strict carnivores” like sharks as supposed evidence against certain animals ever being vegetarian, thinking they are disproving what Scripture says. [The fools!] But time and time again, animals thought to be only carnivores are found to be vegetarian or omnivorous.

Amazing! He continues:

This just further illustrates what the Bible says, that in the pre-Fall world there were no animals eating one another, no bloodshed, and no death. At the Fall, death, bloodshed, disease, and suffering entered all of creation, which now groans because of sin (Romans 8:20–22).

Once again, the bible is shown to be correct! And now we come to the end:

So a mostly vegetarian shark shouldn’t (and doesn’t) surprise us — it just gives us one more small glimpse into what life must have looked like when God called everything “very good” (Genesis 1:31).

Now that’s persuasive! Don’t you agree, dear reader?

Copyright © 2018. 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

20 responses to “Vegetarian Shark Is Proof of Genesis

  1. Wow! One vegetarian shark and the bible’s true! Doesn’t take much for Ol’Hambo. And, if his dog or cat eats some grass, does that also make the bible true? I wonder, is Hambo vegetarian or vegan?

  2. When you start from a biblical viewpoint [the only way to start!], this study is not surprising at all. God created animals as well as humans to be vegetarian right from the beginning (Genesis 1:29–30)

    So why did some of them become carnivorous, or at least omnivorous, after the Fall?

    And like the Precambrian rabbit, the herbivorous tiger is conspicuously absent from the fossil record. For that matter, no one has ever found a human skull with flat bovine-like teeth, either.

  3. How sad. How pathetically underwhelming.

    But imagine the joy unconfined in Ham’s realm. The delight that this nugget of information has brought to him and his apostles. Surely the church bells all over America are ringing out to celebrate this news. Normal TV programming will be interrupted to report the discovery of yet more animals, people even, who have vegetarian diets.

    Ham would do well to make the most of this astounding news. If this is the stuff of revelation, of confirming his version of the “truth”… well, it marks the beginning of a new, scrounging, digging-in-the-dust, low for bible believers.

  4. Theodore Lawry

    That awful evolutionary perspective suggests that the shark was consuming seagrass as a side affect of eating fish, and its digestive system adapted to take advantage of the additional food. Survival of the fittest, don’t you know. Creationists may say that is merely a “Just So” story, but it is also researchable. For example, were recent mutations, specific to bonnethead sharks, involved in its ability to digest seagrass? This is why scientists continue to use evolution as a guide for studying the world, tackling evolutionary questions leads to the advancement of knowledge.

    Also note that when Ken Ham talks about something with real evolutionary implications, then his posts are actually interesting!

  5. “When you start from a biblical viewpoint ”

    There are a biblical verses that say “the bonnethead shark was vegan before the Fall and stayed omnivorous thereafter”, really? It would be an undeniable sign of divine knowledge as the bonnethead shark is an American shark.

    It is so strange that Ham never predicts scientific discoveries before they are discovered by scientists: after-the-fact predictions do not weight a lot. Ham’s amazing skill to read between the lines (and never the lines) should be used more efficiently.

  6. So does hambone think the other hundreds of species of shark were somehow contaminated by Adam’s sin, while the bonehead (named for hambone?) is the uniquely sinless one? Inquiring minds want to know.

  7. There are plenty of fossils of an animal preserved in the act of eating another, or having eaten another, and there are coprolites which show the remains of animals.
    The argument from design is based on the reliability of our detecting design. We detect design of carnivory and defense against predators.

  8. Ken needs to take the message to sharks everywhere: Renounce your sinful diets; look to the bonnethead, thou sluggard! Go back to what you were eating in the pre-Fall days!

    Ken is such a charismatic, persuasive fellow, I’d be surprised if he couldn’t get the sharks to take up eating kale and crushed avocado.

  9. @EricL thinks he’s clever: “So why did some of them become carnivorous, or at least omnivorous, after the Fall?”
    Because Adam and Eve sinned and hence you’re a sinner, of course.

    “And like the Precambrian rabbit, the herbivorous tiger is conspicuously absent from the fossil record.”
    Of course they are lacking. The Earth is just 6000 years old. There never has been a Cambrian. And Ol’Hambo’s god destroyed the Garden of Eden, so from a Biblical viewpoint it’s not surprising either if we don’t find herbivorous tigers and sharks. Nothing surprises Ol’Hambo.

  10. Ken Ham and AiG without the concept of Original Sin is like “Jaws” without the shark.

  11. @TomS and anyone else who’s wondering:

    After I studied the Bible, my coprolites showed evidence of what I’d been digesting.

    Apologists may have degrees in theology, but I have a degree in scatology.

  12. But the panda! Proof that all Carnivora were really created as vegans! Of Pandas and People!

  13. Perhaps we should encourage Hambo to lead an exhibition to Africa in search of the vegan lion.

    That should keep him occupied for a long, long time.

  14. If all living creatures were herbivores, would live forever, and would procreate, problems would eventually arise. I assume procreation was part of the original plan, although not creating Eve at the same time as Adam makes one wonder.

  15. I’ve found the ultimate christmas gift for Ol’Hambo:

    [*Voice from above*] Learn to link:

    Origin Story: A Big History of Everything

  16. @ retiredsciguy: “Perhaps we should encourage Hambo to lead an exhibition to Africa in search of the vegan lion.”
    This reminds me of the missionary who one day met a lion which obviously had the ability to catch and eat him, and showed signs of wishing to exercise its ability. So he bowed his head and prayed to the Lord, “Lord, please make this lion a Christian.” Raising his head he saw the lion put its front paws together, bow its head and growl, “Thank you Lord for this gift of food.”

  17. Obviously there is only one shark kind, so the fact that one so-called species of shark eats and digests seagrass shows that all sharks can. That they are not known to, can only be due to Darwinists suppressing the evidence, until now, when one of them has accidentally let this information slip, and will of course now be punished by the orthodoxy.
    It had also not until now been clear to me that the representative of the bear kind that Noah took onto his ark must have been the mainly vegetarian giant panda.

  18. Many herbiverous animals will also consume some insects. those which are on the edible plants.

  19. @Eddie Janssen: “I assume procreation was part of the original plan, although not creating Eve at the same time as Adam makes one wonder.”
    It depends on which Genesis myth one prefers. In Gen 1, when Elohim created man, “male and female created he them”. He could have set up an initial breeding population of ten thousand or so, thus avoiding the genetic bottleneck that the idiot JHWH created in the second Genesis myth.