Creation vs. Evolution: Transitional Fossils? Countering Evidence for Common Descent!
58#creation #evolution #fossils #science #apologetics #debate #christianity
Defenders of common descent (the idea that all life goes back to a common ancestor) look to transitional fossils (extinct organisms that comprise intermediate features or traits between two different species) evidence for their viewpoint. But does the existence of interesting mosaic creatures provide the common descent model with discriminatory (evidence that only the evolutionary model can explain) data?
The reality of mosaic organisms (both extant and extinct) does not provide the evolutionary model with a differentiating line of evidence that only it can explain. The design hypothesis also predicts unique creatures with mosaic features. The Bible tells us that we as humans are created in the image of God. This allows us to make a prediction. If we are truly made in the image of God, there should be something about us that reflects the divine. Therefore, we should be able to get an idea into how God designed the biological world based on the way we as humans design and build things.
It turns out that humans not only design in homologous and nested hierarchical patterns, but we also manufacture interesting "transitional-like" vehicles. One major example is the crossover SUV. This interesting vehicle blends the features of both vans and SUVs. Crossover vehicles essentially resist classification. They are neither a van nor an SUV, they are a vehicle intermediate between the two. You could go to a car lot and find all the different types of vehicles organized in a way that reflects their specific characteristics, features, and function. You would find SUVs in one area, vans in another, and crossover vehicles in their own separate location. This reality is mostly based on function, since crossover vehicles serve a purpose. People oftentimes choose a crossover vehicle for comfort and for space. They are a light, fast, and safe vehicle. They are also quite fuel efficient. These functional features are an excellent blend of that which makes vans great and that which makes SUVs likeable.
Humans are in the infancy of recognizing good design. It is not a coincidence that human engineers are designing modes of transportation in a way that reflects many of the amazing aspects of the biological world. Biology is designed for functional purposes in a similar manner to how humans manufacture vehicles for functional reasons. These designs come from a mind. This is the major commonality between the compelling designs of the biological world and the impressive designs of man-made modes of transportation. Both come from a mind. The biological world comes from the mind of God. And the man-made world (cars, tools, etc.) come from the mind of humans. This observation did not have to be true. And yet it is. This is a confirmation of the design model.
Let us look at one more compelling example of how the way humans design matches Biblical creation expectations. The military have invented what is called a military amphibious assault vehicle. This imposing invention blends the features of both a military vehicle built for the sea (a boat) and a military vehicle designed for the land (a tank). This interesting piece of machinery would not work well in the sea, nor would it work good if it were strictly for the land. It is designed perfectly for the transitional environment between sea and land. But the military amphibious assault vehicle is not the result of evolutionary processes. It is not a true intermediate between army vessels and land tanks. An apologist of evolution could theoretically line up the military ship, the amphibious assault vehicle (in the middle), and the land-based tank in a row and argue one evolved from the other. This would be false. Each vehicle was designed for functional purposes.
In summary, the existence of creatures that supporters of evolutionary theory call transitional forms are not discriminatory evidence for their position. As a matter of fact, there are far too few of these interesting mosaics for common descent to be true. Yes, we do find some creatures with a unique blending of features (mammal-like reptiles, tiktaalik, archaeopteryx). But these are the exception to the rule. And yet, the design model expects these types of incredibly designed organisms. We also observe significant overlap between these creatures and the species they are purported to be intermediate to. For example, true tetrapod foottracks were discovered in Poland 20 million years (according to the false evolutionary timeframe) prior to where tiktaalik was found. This is not surprising to a Biblical creationist. We would expect overlap and co-existence. Tiktaalik co-existed with both fish and amphibians. This mosaic creature is simply an example of an extinct creature that lived in the pre-Flood world. What evolutionists claim are transitional fossils are actually pre and post-Flood diversity.