[__ Science __ ] Genetics Proves Absurdity of Whale Evolution

[AIG.com]

In recent years evolutionists have increasingly promoted the evolution of whales as one of the most convincing examples of macroevolution.

Continue reading...

 

[Barbarian]

"The idea that, romping in the water, some hippos ventured into the ocean . . . and became whales, is an extraordinary claim, to say the least. The question, of course, is, Is it true?"

It's a creationist straw man. And they wonder why people laugh at them. No, evolutionary theory doesn't say hippos became whales. Nor does the evidence. The evidence shows that whales are genetically most closely related to hippos. Nether one evolved from the other, however. They just share a common ancestor more recently than they do with other ungulates. We know that genetics is a reliable guide to relationship, because we can check that with organisms of known descent.

It's not just genetics, either. As YE creationist Dr. Kurt Wise admits:

Darwin’s fourth expectation — of stratomorphic series — has been confirmed by such examples as the early bird series,33 the tetrapod series,34,35 the whale series,36 (long list of others)...Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact.

At this point in time, the largest challenge from the stratomorphic intermediate record appears to this author to come from the fossil record of the whales. There is a strong stratigraphic series of archaeocete genera claimed by Gingerich60(Ambulocetus, Rhodocetus, and Prozeuglodon[or the similar-aged Basilosaurus]61) followed on the one hand by modern mysticetes,62 and on the other hand by the family Squalodontidae and then modern odontocetes.63 That same series is also a morphological series: Ambulocetuswith the largest hind legs;64-66 Rhodocetus with hindlegs one- third smaller;67Prozeuglodon with 6 inch hindlegs;68 and the remaining whales with virtually no to no hind legs: toothed mysticetes before non-toothed baleen whales;69 the squalodontid odontocetes with telescoped skull but triangular teeth;70 and the modern odontocetes with telescoped skulls and conical teeth. This series of fossils is thus a very powerful stratomorphic series. Because the land mammal-to-whale transition (theorized by macroevolutionary theory and evidenced by the fossil record) is a land-to-sea transition, the relative order of land mammals, archaeocetes, and modern whales is not explainable in the conventional Flood geology method (transgressing Flood waters). Furthermore, whale fossils are only known in Cenozoic (and thus post-Flood) sediments.71 This seems to run counter to the intuitive expectation that the whales should have been found in or even throughout Flood sediments.At present creation theory has no good explanation for the fossil record of whales.

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j09_2/j09_2_216-222.pdf

While Dr. Wise suggests that there may someday be an adequate creationist explanation for the fossil evidence for evolution of whales, but he admits that there isn't one now.

But there's more. It turns out that whale digestive systems are ungulate digestive systems.
Whales are carnivores that feed on small shrimp-like crustaceans. Yet their digestive systems do not resemble those of carnivorous mammals. Surprisingly, their stomachs are most similar to those of cows!
The stomachs of whales are compartmentalized into multiple chambers (or stomachs) like those of ruminants. Biologist and whale expert Pierre-Henry Fontaine explains, “compartments allow them to swallow large quantities of food quickly and without having to chew.”
In cows, these compartments serve to break down the cellulose found in plants in order to digest it. They ruminate their food, which means they digest it a first time, regurgitate it, swallow it again and digest it for good.

In 2015, a team of researchers discovered that the bacteria found in the digestive systems of baleen whales are a sort of hybrid between those of cows and those of predators with a meat-rich diet such as lions or tigers. But if whales don’t eat algae, why do they maintain typical herbivore bacteria?

Mixing these two types of microbial communities allows whales to digest not only the flesh of the small crustaceans they eat, but also their carapaces (shells). The first chamber of the whale’s stomach works the same way as the digestive system of ruminants and breaks down the main component of crustacean carapaces: chitin.

The latter then becomes available as a food, which is not negligible since carapaces represent up to 10% of a whale’s total food intake. If they were unable to digest chitin, whales would lose that food source that would otherwise be defecated.

Since whales and ungulates share a common ancestor, are the former able to ruminate? - Baleines en direct

Whales are carnivores that feed on small shrimp-like crustaceans. Yet their digestive systems do not resemble those of carnivorous mammals. Surprisingly,

baleinesendirect.org

So it's clear, from genetic, fossil record, and anatomy, that whales are evolved from ungulates. The genetic evidence shows that hippos and whales share a common ancestor.

 

[Truthfrees]

In recent years evolutionists have increasingly promoted the evolution of whales as one of the most convincing examples of macroevolution.

Continue reading...

According to evolutionary theory, however, the ultimate initiator of the changes must be not only mutations but very specific mutations, beneficial ones. It will be shown that, according to evolutionists’ own descriptions, beneficial mutations do not create what is absolutely necessary for the process of whale evolution: entirely new physiological features, ones that would require DNA that never before existed.

In recent years evolutionists have increasingly promoted the evolution of whales as one of the most convincing examples of macroevolution.

Continue reading...

Continue reading...

amen - great article

 

[Barbarian]

According to evolutionary theory, however, the ultimate initiator of the changes must be not only mutations but very specific mutations, beneficial ones.

We have a very large list of beneficial mutations, observed to have evolved in populations, so that's no problem for anyone.

It will be shown that, according to evolutionists’ own descriptions, beneficial mutations do not create what is absolutely necessary for the process of whale evolution: entirely new physiological features, ones that would require DNA that never before existed.

No, that's wrong, too. Demonstrably so...

Peto's Paradox says that increasingly massive organisms should have higher cancer rates. But whales and elephants don't. Each of them has most of the same tumor-suppressing genes we do, but whales have different, slightly modified versions of these, which are more effective. Elephants have extra copies of the genes. Both mutations resulted in animals very large and quite different than their ancestors.

In ocean-going mammals, hind legs became a liability, meaning slower swimming. (if you'd like to learn how whales evolved to use their tails rather than hind legs, we can talk about that) And not surprisingly, that major change was driven by mutations of genes:

PNAS

Developmental basis for hind-limb loss in dolphins and origin of the cetacean bodyplan​

J. G. M. Thewissen, M. J. Cohn, L. S. Stevens, S. Bajpai, J. Heyning, and W. E. Horton Jr
May 30, 2006 103 (22) 8414-8418
Among mammals, modern cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises) are unusual in the absence of hind limbs. However, cetacean embryos do initiate hind-limb bud development. In dolphins, the bud arrests and degenerates around the fifth gestational week. Initial limb outgrowth in amniotes is maintained by two signaling centers, the apical ectodermal ridge (AER) and the zone of polarizing activity (ZPA). Our data indicate that the cetacean hind-limb bud forms an AER and that this structure expresses Fgf8 initially, but that neither the AER nor Fgf8 expression is maintained. Moreover, Sonic hedgehog (Shh), which mediates the signaling activity of the ZPA, is absent from the dolphin hind-limb bud. We find that failure to establish a ZPA is associated with the absence of Hand2, an upstream regulator of Shh. Interpreting our results in the context of both the cetacean fossil record and the known functions of Shh suggests that reduction of Shh expression may have occurred ≈41 million years ago and led to the loss of distal limb elements. The total loss of Shh expression may account for the further loss of hind-limb elements that occurred near the origin of the modern suborders of cetaceans ≈34 million years ago. Integration of paleontological and developmental data suggests that hind-limb size was reduced by gradually operating microevolutionary changes. Long after locomotor function was totally lost, modulation of developmental control genes eliminated most of the hind-limb skeleton. Hence, macroevolutionary changes in gene expression did not drive the initial reduction in hind-limb size.

 

[Barbarian]

To simplify, the evidence shows that a huge change in whales occurred by "gradually operating microevolutionary changes."

Precisely what AIG thinks cannot happen.