PBS aired a documentary retelling the story of the discovery of a living fossil, a fish known as the Coelacanth (sounds like seal-a-canth).
Watching this program I could not help but notice a continuous contradiction by which two extremes were supposed to be tied together.
On the one hand the program provided the actual evidence, which is that Coelacanth fossils, which science dates at 410 million years ago (and vanishing from the fossil record 65 million years ago) are virtually, if not exactly, the same fish as the living specimens which we find swimming our oceans today. On the other hand however, we were presented with scientific philosophy, which explained that we humans are descendents of the Coelacanth.
We could take this program and edit it into two and make it seem as both were presenting evidence that would contradict the other. One edition would assert that the empirical evidence shows that this fish has not changed in since 410 to 65 million years ago and that therefore, the Coelacanth could not be our ancestors. While the other edition would assert that it is.
That is the real oddity; how does the evidence of a fish that has not changed prove that a fish changed into a human? Call it scientific mythology if you wish. What the program offered as an explanation is that due to environmental pressures some schools of Coelacanth had to adapt while in other oceans some remained the same.
Firstly, notice that this is typical Darwinian style story telling; no evidence whatsoever but simply, well, maybe this happened and maybe that, and it happened just so. Now, as to what sort of pressures would cause one school of fish to remain unchanged fish while another school of fish would become producers of documentaries no answers were forthcoming. Except, apparently, that we aught to rely on the infallible dogmas of the religion of science. I do not deny that there is no place for such ideas, for instance the rack of magazines by the checkout at the supermarket would be a good place (along with I had Bigfoot’s baby and Duck hunter accidentally shoots angel).
The Coelacanth is happily swimming around living its life at sea but to some storyteller-scientist the Coelacanth is the hopeless monster.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At one point when the comments section was alive and well the following discussion took place. Oleg Dei (of the pseudo-Science Club of Long Island) wrote:
Rereading this article I could not help but bursting into loud laughter! That is the real oddity; how does the evidence of a fish that has not changed prove that a fish changed into a human? A fish never changed into a human. People we have an individual who is trying to disprove evolution who knows nothing about the subject. In the ultimate sign of ignorance this pathetic individual is trying to tell us that science teaches that humans evolved from fish. This person has been watching too many cartoons more specifically Aquaman. He believes that science is religion, that Big Space Daddy is listening to him, ghosts impregnate women and casper is in his shorts! What a perfect case for therapy no make that abortion!
Oleg seems to be unaware that evolutionists will claim whatever is convenient at any given time. As I prove in my videos Living fossil coelacanth: to evolve or not to evolve?, evolutionist scientists did claim not only that we evolved from fish in general but from coelacanth in particular.
Oleg then wrote another comment:
How utterly childish? What happened to the dinosaurs? Evolution is the mechanism that explains how the fauna of life changed. And I ask you again, where is the evidence for your fictional Big Space Daddy in the sky? I have already proved that Christ was a fraud, they found his bones, his sorry carcass was eaten by maggots and Christianity is the biggest hoax in mankind!
Anonymous replied to Oleg thusly:
He is asking how “That is the real oddity; how does the evidence of a fish that has not changed prove that a fish changed into a human?”. All life is supposed to have emerged from the seas. Therefore human ancestors are supposed to have come from the oceans. The Coelecanth is a fish which did not change or evolve into more successful or adapted fish since the Coelecanth can only exist at a certain ocean depth and dies if brought up higher. Now how does the fact that the Coelecanth still exists prove evolution of man? Or are you suggesting that man’s predecessors were not adapted to life in the sea? Were they swimming apes with scuba gear or just very big lungs? It does not, even if you take the theory of evolution as fact.
As for the bones of Jesus, sorry bud, they haven’t found them. Someone will have to manufacture them first, James Cameron tried once. [indeed, see The Lost Tomb of Jesus]
Anonymous, perhaps a different person but I know not, wrote:
I’m not sure where you stand on this topic but I for one am not necessarily opposed to evolution as a mechanism. But I never understood the argument that coelacanth hasn’t changed because it was suited to its environment. The reason why is because evolution has two primary components: Arbitrary mutations and adaptation (natural selection). So if chance is the only player in town the coelacanth should have undergone those arbitrary mutations whether environmental pressures were there or not. All that remains is extinction or survival. Unless you want to evoke epigenetic theory but that often presupposes mind and direction of cells we regard as unconscious. That would evoke “woo-woo” and even God-the very thing an atheist seeks to avoid.
Another Anonymous actually took time out of their life to write:
Evolution is easily proven in the great disparity in human intelligence. As an example: Take yourself, a certified moron who hides behind silly names and doesn’t have the courage or decency to use his real name.
Yes, you read it correctly, a person who posts as “Anonymous” complains about lacking the courage and decency, mind you, to use real names—although I know not to whom that was being addressed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page. You can also use the “Share / Save” button below this post.