Kangaroos and the Fossil Record

by Gedanken 35 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Gedanken

  Creationists like to attack evolution by attacking the "fossil record" as being incomplete; i.e., if something existed, for example, transitional states, then we should see evidence of them in the fossil record.

  So, their argument is that if something existed, then we should see it in the fossil record.

  Let's take a look at the case of Kangaroos. We must assume, if we accept the notion of a global flood, that Noah collected two kangaroos for his menagerie in the Ark. This, then, supposes that kangaroos were natives of the Middle East at that time, along with representatives of all other species we see today.

  This raises a number of questions, including:

  (i) By Creationists own arguments then we should see plentiful evidence of kangaroos and other marsupials in the fossil records of Asia, the Middle East, Europe etc. In reality, marsupial fossils are extremely rare in Europe and Asia and are not kangaroo-like at all.

  (ii) How did marsupials get back to Australia and why didn't placentals accompany them?

  (iii) Australis's fossils do show a rich variety of marsupials including a flesh eating marsupial lion.

  Of course, Creationists love to engage in special pleading - here we have an example (one of many) in which their arguments against the fossil record also argue against their dearly held beliefs as well - so let's see how the Creationists respond - with reasoned argumentation or special pleading and invocation of divine transportation of animals....

  Gedanken

  Edited by - Gedanken on 27 October 2002 12:48:34
• 

  Jesus Christ

  That is excellent reasoning there Geda!!! I've tried to tell people that evolution is how I made everything and maybe this will help me prove my point.

  Thanks for the help and don't be suprised if you see me using this arguement sometime in the future!
• 

  Nathan Natas

  Very good argument, Gedanken.

  We can look at many animals that do not exist anywhere near the Middle East and ask similar questions. Polar Bears, Penguins, Awks, Komodo Dragons, Sea Snakes (oops - they did the backstroke for a year), Platypus, etc.,etc.etc.

  OK, so maybe the Platypus is the bastard love child of a duck and a beaver after all...

  ...So this Kangaroo walks into a Kingdom Hall...
• 

  SixofNine

  Hey Jesus, any truth to the rumour that what you really said was "he who is finless crawled out of the foam"?

  Edited by - SixofNine on 27 October 2002 13:56:25
• 

  pomegranate

  Here is how a professor of zoology at Oxford University, puts it :

  "In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation."*Mark Ridley, "Who Doubts Evolution?" in New Scientist, June 25, 1981, p. 831.
• 

  Gedanken

  pomegranate,

  You'll note that I wasn't using the fossil record as evidence for evolution versus special creation. I was applying the same arguments that Creationists use to deny evolution, i.e., by attacking the fossil record, to demonstrate that those arguments also, and equally, argue against a global flood.

  In fact, it is Creationists who insist that the fossil record is used by evolutionists to prove evolution.

  But since you quoted Mark Ridley - a noted evolutionist - let me ask you this, pomegranate, have you read the article or did you merely reproduce a quotation you found somewhere?

  You see, I have the actual article on my desk right now.

  Please do answer before I post what Professor Ridley's article said.

  Gedanken

  Edited by - Gedanken for typos on 27 October 2002 14:24:37

  Edited by - Gedanken on 27 October 2002 14:56:46
• 

  jack2

  Ged, very good point. Also, what about food for such animals in the Ark? In many cases, species of animals are very restricted in terms of diet. Noah would not only have needed to collect exotic creatures, but he would have had to supply them accoring to their unique dietary needs.

  There's good info on this subject at talkorigins.com. Also, I am looking forward to seeing that Ridley article, and not just one quote from it, posted here.
• 

  Gedanken

  jack2,

  Thanks for your comments and observations. Yes, it is a very interesting article. It will be equally interesting to see if pomegranate is quoting from the actual article or merely reproducing a quotation he (or she) found somewhere - incidentally, the latter is the standard practice of the Watchtower Society; if it is wrong for the Society to quote people out of context to bolster its predictions of the end, then is it equally wrong for them to quote evolutionists out of context to support Creation? If it is, then surely it must be just as bad for non JW creationists to do the same thing. Or am I missing something?

  Anyway, I'll post what Ridley said after pomegranate has answered. There is no doubt that the quotation itself is accurate by the way. Actually, I'd try to post the entire article but I don't know how to do that, assuming that my digital camera is good enough to get the resolution correct.

  In the meantime here's a book by Mark Ridley - it's interesting to read the table of contents.

  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0865424950/qid=1035748059/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-6751750-7356746?v=glance

  Gedanken
• 

  jack2

  Looks like an interesting book Ged. I'll be following this thread too.

  AlanF has written much material about the WTS's practice of taking quotes out of context, a practice especially prevalent in their "Creation" book. I was thinking the exact same thing when I saw that one quote above. That's why I'd like to see more if at all possible. Thanks.
• 

  Robdar

  Gedanken,

  Good post.

  There was never a world wide flood, only continental drift. When the continents broke apart and started drifting, the animals that were there drifted with them. The o'possums on australia, adapted into kangaroos. I am sure this is a simplistic explanation but this is the information we tell to the visitors at the zoo where I work. I have changed my wording from "evolved" to "adapted" because I have had so many Christians jump on me for using the term "evolved".

  If you get a chance, go to your local Imax Theatre and view "Australia"

  Edited by - robdar on 27 October 2002 15:37:9