Hambo, Bats, Butterflies, and Fairy Tales

Before the creationism, we’ll give you a bit of science news. This appeared a week ago at PhysOrg: Butterflies and plants evolved in sync, but moth ‘ears’ predated bats. It’s about a study of butterflies and moths, of which there are about 160,000 known species.

The published paper they’re talking about is Phylogenomics reveals the evolutionary timing and pattern of butterflies and moths, published in PNAS — Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. You can read it online. Among many other findings, PhysOrg says, with some bold font added by us:

A major shocker was the fossil-dated tree’s revelation that nocturnal moths evolved hearing organs nine separate times, four of which occurred around 91 million years ago — about 30 million years before bats dominated the night sky. What could moths have been listening to in a pre-bat world?

“We don’t know,” [lead author] Kawahara said. He and study co-author Jesse Barber, a bat expert and associate professor at Boise State University, hypothesize that “they probably used these hearing organs to detect the sounds made by other predators, like footfall, flight or rustling, and later co-opted them to pick up on bat sonar.”

[…]

While the finding that some of these organs predated bats came as a surprise, Yack [another author] cautioned against jumping to the conclusion that there is no connection between bats and moths’ ability to hear. She pointed out that many species with ears appear just prior to the proposed time when bats developed echolocation, “so something around that time period appears to have been an important selection pressure.”

“The vast majority of ears in today’s Lepidoptera are sensitive to ultrasound, and at least some of them have been shown to function in evading bats,” she said. “Some also evolved after bats first used echolocation. But the evidence does require that we reconsider the currently held assumption that all ears in nocturnal Lepidoptera evolved in response to bat echolocation.

It’s a long article, but that’s enough to get you oriented. Now the fun begins, as we learn The Truth from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else.

He just posted this at the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), his creationist ministry: Textbook Evolutionary Story Was . . . Wrong? It’s longer than his usual blog post, so we’ll have to skip a lot. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Which evolved first — moth ears or bat echolocation? Well, the “textbook” evolutionary story is that bats evolved the ability to make ultrasonic calls, which they used to hunt for moths. And then moths supposedly evolved (several times, apparently) the ability to hear these calls and better evade the hunting mammals. Now, that story has been taught as fact for years. But apparently, a new study says this whole story is backwards!

Backwards? Egad! Once again, the Darwinists are revealed to be fools! Hambo says:

Based on this new study (it assumed evolutionary ideas and relationships in the first place), which was described as a “bit of a bombshell,” evolutionary scientists claim moth ears evolved first, predating bat echolocation by 28 million years. Why did they evolve these ears? Well, they don’t know — but they do know that it wasn’t to evade bats. As one researcher involved in the study shared, “Most of the introductions I’ve written in my papers are wrong.” The evolutionary story is being rewritten once again! (Just as an aside here — God’s Word has remained the same; it doesn’t change. Man’s fallible word, though, changes all the time.)

As powerful as that was, Hambo’s not done yet. He continues pounding away at the hell-bound evolutionists:

The idea that something as complex as echolocation, and ears on both bats and moths that can hear these calls, evolved by random, chance processes is ridiculous anyway. [Yeah!] As the researchers stated in the article, these special moth ears didn’t evolve just once in their story — they evolved “repeatedly” . . . a total of nine times. And echolocation itself is said to have evolved four times throughout the mammal world. The lengths evolutionists will go to so they can avoid the obvious (i.e., God created) is amazing!

He’s still not done. Next he tells us:

It’s no big shock that the evolutionary story is being turned on its head yet again — it happens all the time! Now, some evolutionists say that’s just because this is how science works, as newer research overturns older ideas. But, when it comes to evolution, it is so elastic that it doesn’t matter what researchers discover, they just change the story to match with the new narrative. The evolutionary predictions and beliefs are constantly wrong, and yet evolutionists won’t throw the model out — they just adapt it to match whatever new evidence they’ve found. It’s not science — it’s just storytelling. Evolution is a fairy tale.

Evolution is a fairy tale, and creationism is reality. Got that? Hambo wraps it all up with this:

Moth ears didn’t evolve, and neither did bat echolocation. Both moths and bats were created on day five of creation week. God’s fingerprint is seen in both of these creatures, as Romans 1 says, [scripture quote omitted].

That was one of Hambo’s best rants ever, wouldn’t you agree?

Copyright © 2019. 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

10 responses to “Hambo, Bats, Butterflies, and Fairy Tales

  1. Hambone says to his trolling followers “Moth ears didn’t evolve, and neither did bat echolocation. Both moths and bats were created on day five of creation week. God’s fingerprint is seen in both of these creatures, as Romans 1 says, [scripture quote omitted].”
    Translation; your bat face cuphea in the garden was created on the same day as bats and moths. Go figure.

  2. This is absolutely typical of evolution, to develop in a new direction some structure that was already useful in some other way to cope with a change in the environment. Does Ham believe that nobody will realise that hearing is useful to any prey species that flies at night? Does he really think that even his idiot legions will not understand that sharpening hearing to detect the bat’s ultrasound is possible? Can he be so lost to ordinary common sense that he thinks people will not see that the bat’s sonar and the moth’s detection of it can develop together, a perfect example of an evolutionary arms race, the one improving the other.

    Yes, Ham does think that, and believe it, and common sense is so lacking among his drooling minions as to accept it. The infuriating thing, the truly horrible and disgusting thing about it, is that he’s right to believe that he can sell this to them. He can. He does.

  3. “….. cautioned against jumping to the conclusion …..”
    This is the essential difference between scientists and creacrappers. Scientists enjoy it when they stumble upon unanswered questions: there is a puzzle to solve and try to keep all options open. Creacrappers at the other hand don’t jump, but make a salto mortale to their eternal, never-changing, 100% certain conclusion: goddiddid.

    “God’s Word has remained the same; it doesn’t change.”
    As always when Ol’Hambo by accident hits the nail with his hammer we can see him make his favourite salto mortale. God’s Word as interpreted by him is dead wrong and will remain so forever and ever.

    ” it is so elastic that it doesn’t matter what researchers discover”
    BWAHAHAHAHA!
    Ol’Hambo, find me a Cambrian cat. Show me a dog that gives birth to a cat. They are favourite creacrap clunkers, remember?

    “they just adapt it to match whatever new evidence they’ve found.”
    Unlike Ol’Hambo, who’s an expert at adapting the evidence to fit it his personal interpretation of his favourite Holy Book by using his “Biblical lens”.

    “That was one of Hambo’s best rants ever, wouldn’t you agree?”
    I totally do, because creacrap (whether from YECers or IDiots) turns everything upside down, so that “best” actually means “worst”. Splendid! So now I will ask as usual: will the IDiots from Seattle and notably Klunkcerduncker be able to top this?

  4. “…God’s Word has remained the same; it doesn’t change….”
    Right! Stone age, fairy tales written by bronze age believers, about how gawd loves women haters, bigots, people who will kill for him, intolerant of the other. Thanks but I’ll take science as it updates itself!

  5. @L. Long
    What is respresnted as the word of God has changed over time.
    Before about 1500, everyone agreed that the Bible described a geocentric universe. Today, so we are told, the Bible describes the Earth as a planet of the Sun.
    Today’s Young Earth Creationists tell us about novel ideas of microevolution and and an ice age, unheard of earlier.

  6. Why is Ham so sure that bats were created day 5, and not with the other mammals on day 6?

  7. Michael Fugate

    Were flightless forms created on day 6 or did they lose flight due to human sin?

  8. Were caterpillars and butterflies created on the same day?
    On what day were malaria parasites created?

  9. Caterpillars and butterflies give us absolute proof that the “days” of Gen. 1 are literal days, certainly not millions of years. Moths and other flying insects must have been, as the Ayatollah says, created on Thursday, but their caterpillars, grubs etc., being creeping things, were created on Friday. But since these are stages in the same lifetime, they cannot have been separated by millions of years.

  10. @L. Long: “Stone age, fairy tales written by bronze age believers, about how gawd loves women haters, bigots, people who will kill for him, intolerant of the other.”
    The word of god, as we have it today, was not written by bronze age goat herders, but by iron age urban believers. Their fairy tales, as they have come down to us, certainly illustrate the shortcomings of the moral standards they attributed to their gods, but your case is not strengthened by straw-manning.