Share Evolutionists claim that mammals evolved from reptiles but the anatomical and physical differences between the two are unbridgeable. Mammals are warm-blooded )they regulate and maintain their own body temperature(, give birth, suckle their young and their bodies have fur or hair. Reptiles on the other hand are cold-blooded )cannot regulate body temperature on their own and their body temperature alters according to the environment(, reproduce by hatching eggs, do not suckle their offspring and their bodies have scales.
The hypothetical claim of such widely differing species developing from one into the other needs some serious explaining. For instance, how can the cold-blooded metabolism of a reptile change over time into a warm-blooded one, which produces and regulates its own body heat? How is it that creatures laying eggs can develop a complex life-supporting placenta and begin to give birth to their young? Or how can it be that the hard, scaly skin of a reptile can become a furred one? Most importantly, how can the transitory forms sustain their species and survive this imaginary gradual transition?
The chances of survival of a creature that is half-warm half cold-blooded, laying eggs as well as producing a placenta, having scales as well as fur is negligible. Nevertheless, evolutionists believe that such creatures existed in the past and continue to stubbornly defend the claim that mammals evolved, even though they cannot find any scientific evidence for it. The only thing they can do is to tell tales, paint impressive pictures from the imagination and neatly line up the excavated fossils, thereby trying to prove this imaginary transition.
The theory of evolution proposes that some imaginary creatures came out of the sea and transformed into reptiles, then birds were formed by the evolution of reptiles. According to the same scenario, reptiles are the ancestors not only of birds but also of mammals.
However, there are major structural differences between reptiles and mammals -- reptiles are cold-blooded, have scales on their bodies and reproduce by laying eggs; on the other hand, mammals are warm-blooded, have fur or hair on their bodies, and reproduce by giving birth to their offspring alive.
An example of the structural discrepancies between reptiles and mammals is their jaw structure. The mandibles of mammals consist of only one mandibular bone and the teeth are placed on this bone. In reptiles, there are three little bones on both sides of the mandible. Another basic difference is that all mammals have three bones in their middle ear )hammer, anvil and stirrup(. In all reptiles, there is a single bone in the middle ear.
Evolutionists claim that the reptilian jaw and middle ear evolved gradually into the mammalian jaw and ear. Yet, the question of how this change occurred remains unanswered. In particular, the question of how an ear with a single bone evolved into an ear with three bones and how the process of hearing kept on functioning in the meantime can never be explained. Not surprisingly, not a single fossil to link reptiles and mammals is to be found. This is why evolutionist paleontologist Roger Levin was forced to say that: “the transition to the first mammals, which probably happened in just one or, at most two lineages, is still an enigma.”
George Gaylord Simpson, one of the biggest authorities on evolution and among the founders of the neo-Darwinist theory makes the following comment on this fact that is quite perplexing for evolutionists:
"The most puzzling event in the history of life on earth is the change from the Mesozoic, the Age of Reptile, to the Age of Mammals. It is as if the curtain were rung down suddenly on the stage where all the leading roles were taken by reptiles, especially dinosaurs, in great numbers and bewildering variety, and rose again immediately to reveal the same setting but an entirely new cast, a cast in which the dinosaurs do not appear at all, other reptiles are supernumeraries, and all the leading parts are played by mammals of sorts barely hinted at in the preceding acts."
Furthermore, when mammals suddenly made their appearance, they were already very different from each other. Such dissimilar animals as bats, horses, mice and whales are all mammals and they all emerged during the same geological period. Establishing an evolutionary relationship among them is impossible even within the broadest boundaries of the imagination.
Evolutionist zoologist R. Eric Lombard makes this point in an article that appeared inEvolutionmagazine:
"Those searching for specific information useful in constructing phylogenies of mammalian taxa will be disappointed."
All these facts demonstrate that living beings appeared on earth suddenly and fully formed, without any evolutionary process. This is concrete evidence of the fact that they were created. However, evolutionists try to interpret the fact that living species came into existence in a particular order as an indication of evolution. Yet, the sequence by which living things emerged is the “order of creation”, since it is not possible to speak of an ''evolutionary process". With a superior and flawless creation, oceans and then lands were filled with living things and finally man was created.
Contrary to the “ape man” story imposed on the masses thanks to the intense media propaganda, man also emerged on earth suddenly and fully formed.
Share
No comments:
Post a Comment