The Coelacanth falsifies Evolution

I know many evolutionist will not believe this for several reasons.  One is they are taught to believe something without critical thinking and are heavily indoctrinated.

Here is why I believe they are illogical about this great find back in the early 70’s.

The Coelacanth that was found looked virtually identical to what you see in the fossil record.  Go here to see what I’m talking about.

The problem I have with evolutionist calling the modern day Coelacanth a different species is this.  First off they don’t have a DNA sample to compare the genetic information in the earliest Coelacanth to make that claim.  It’s a fact things can have difference of appearance in areas but be identical in genetics.  Humans are a perfect example.  There are white, black, yellow, etc but the genetic comparison between all of us is identical but with different appearance in skin color, noses, eyes, etc and we are still human.  We are not looked at as different species of humans lol we are all human beings with differences in appearance.

With Coelacanth how can you call something that looks identical without genetic material to see that?  Or are the evolutionist going to call humans different species based on skin color, or nose size, or whatever?  That doesn’t make sense because we are genetically human.  You won’t find a human with 35 chromosomes (at least I don’t believe you will).  You will find those with downs “the presence of an extra copy of genetic material on the 21st chromosome,” is what the problem is with them but they are still human beings and I wouldn’t consider someone with this as a different species that to me would be flat out insulting to someone who is still as a Christian would say “Created in God’s Image” so they have worth and value and shouldn’t be aborted as so many do which is another subject in itself.

So getting back to this Coelacanth.  It can’t be consider a different species based on slight differences on the outside when we as humans are not.  Who makes that determination without genetic evidence?

It’s all ad hoc explanation.  Take this comment on wiki about the gap in the fossil record.

“the Cretaceous genus Macropoma, closely resemble the living species.[citation needed]The most likely reason for the gap is the taxon having become extinct in shallow waters. Deep-water fossils are only rarely lifted to levels where paleontologists can recover them, making most deep-water taxa disappear from the fossil record”

Notice they say “the most likey reason for the gap is the taxon having become extinct in shallow waters”  How #1 do they know this without ever being there?  Comparing to what happens to day could be very different millions of years ago if you logically think about it.  Then they said “Deep-water fossils are only rarely lifted to levels where paleontologists can recover them, making most deep-water taxa disappear from the fossilrecord”  Again logically I disagree because fossils clams are pushed to the top of mountains due to shifting of continents (different worldviews from evolutionist and creations by the way) who’s to say that Coelacanth fossils couldn’t have been pushed to the top like those?  And they are assuming without a foundation that when those fish died and there had to be millions like there are millions in oceans in fish today there should have been some fossils of those fish that could have been preserved as they love to say “could have”, yes it could have left in between fossils that they love to want people like me to not think it thru.

So in short I find it illogical to call something a different species when they are under the assumption that there was a different species in between deeper Coelacanth as opposed to those at the surface.  There simply could have been nothing in between we are not talking about mystery fish here that suddenly disappeared off the face of the earth, no they are still here


3 Responses to “The Coelacanth falsifies Evolution”

  1. egoeimi3 Says:

    LOL anyone see a problem with this comment.

    “You don’t need DNA evidence to tell it is a different species when we have the bones to look at. The differences in the bone structure is enough to tell us they are different.”

    If you are an evolutionist no you wouldn’t. But to someone who thinks very critically yes you do need a genetic sample and break it down to see if it’s an identical species or a diferent species. Looking at bones doesn’t tell you anything, because if the whole fish was there, there could have been some different outside fleshly features like a different skin tecture that bones can’t tell you. The fish could have had a different eye then in the past and could have evolved better or weaker eyes. So it’s quite crazy to say you don’t need genetic samples. Yeah, that’s why apes and humans can be called apes then since they have similary hand bones.

    I like the story line about deep and shallow waters. Can anyone say indoctrination!

    LOL evolution makes predictions that only the strong survive.. LOL that can also be looked at in a creation wolrdview that the designer made sure he covered the bases for animals to adapt LOL. No different then a automaker designing a car to have traction control so it won’t spin out in the snow. Anticipating that the car will adapt to the changing weather is a designer feature so is a designer feature for an animal to adapte and survive lol doesn’t have to be an evolutionary idea.

    There you have it. Different interpetations but evolutionist hate that idea.

  2. wysiwyg666 Says:

    By the way, evolution does NOT say that “only the strong survive”.

    Evolution says that the organisms best adapted to a given environment has an advantage and is more likely to survive.

    Survival of the FITTEST (to an environment) not survival of the STRONGEST.

    For example, after the comet hit the earth and destroyed the dinosaurs, the “meek” inherited the earth. Only the small weak animals that could survive the lack of food, etc. survived. Fittest for the new environment they found themselves in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: