by Bill Nugent
Article #123

Evolutionists claim that whales evolved from a doglike creature that dwelt on land. They have put forward an alleged transitional form called “Ambulocetus” based on a few bones and fragments found in Pakistan. An article titled A Whale of a Tale? in Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal 8(1):2-3, 1994 exposes the falsity and hollowness of this claim.

Rather than deal with the examination of the fossils in the Pakistani find and comment on the incompleteness of the skeleton and the broad assumptions and speculations made by the evolutionists, in this article I will explore the two theories of genetic mechanism put forward by evolutionists to try to account for how a land animal could evolve into a whale.

Imagine for a moment the vast design changes that would have to take place to evolve just one feature of whales such as the ability of a whale to breathe through a blowhole on the back of its head. Think of the amount of design changes encoded in the DNA that would be needed to remodel the skull and reroute the trachea. Imagine this occurring by a blind, random incremental process and you have an idea of the leap of faith that the evolutionists expect us to take.

According to the standard theory of evolution taught in American public schools and colleges large numbers of small genetic changes (genetic mutations) occurred incrementally over a long period of time. This is the micromutation theory of genetic change. It claims that forelimbs gradually changed into flippers. The nasal passage gradually, over the course of many generations, became a blowhole on the top rear of the head to facilitate breathing when swimming.

Such a major redesign of the animal’s head would require a multitude of favorable mutations. Genetic mutations are rare. Favorable genetic mutations are extremely rare. The overwhelming majority of genetic mutations are disadvantageous or neutral (neither good or bad).

It is not just changes to the DNA that are needed but more specifically the addition of new genes with new information to remodel the skull of the proto-whale. It is the matter of adding new genetic information to the DNA that presents the evolutionists with perhaps their biggest problem.

Prominent scientist and author Dr. Lee Spetner has stated that no genetic mutation ever studied adds information to the DNA. The DNA molecule is composed of huge coiled chains of nucleotide base pairs. Mutations almost never add base pairs to the DNA. When mutations do add base pairs it is typically a case where a gene is duplicated in the copying process. Such a duplication is not new information but simply a duplicate of old genetic information. Mutations almost always scramble or delete genetic information. Even genetic splicing doesn’t solve the dilemma since it merely transfers preexisting genetic base pairs from one organism to another.

Geneticist Richard B. Goldschmidt rode to the rescue with hismacromutation “hopeful monster” theory. The essence of this theory is that mutations occurred in bunches and caused evolution to be not a gradual process but rather a series of dramatic leaps. A lizard lays an egg and out hatches a bird. A semi-aquatic doglike creature gives birth to an offspring that breathes through the top of its head!

In reality Goldschmidt didn’t even begin to solve the central conundrum facing the evolutionist. If micromutations are rare and nearly always detrimental, macromutations are rarer still and nearly always fatal or extremely detrimental! You also run squarely up against Spetner’s objection which is that no genetic mutation — even a macromutation — adds new chemical base pairs to the DNA. A macromutation is simply a major scrambling of preexisting genetic information.

It is impossible to fathom the utter remoteness of the possibility that a major mutation of the genes would result in a superbly designed blowhole on the back of the head of a semi-aquatic animal. Evolutionists are forced to conclude that this infinitesimally remote possibility occurred not once but thousands of times in other animals in the evolution of wings, beaks, feathers, flippers, skunk spray, snake venom,  fangs, retractable claws, canine teeth, tusks, pupae, cocoons, vertebrae, gills, etc., etc.

Evolutionists have great faith in their materialistic theory. They have bet their souls that there is no creator or judge and that death results in the abolition of consciousness. I’m thankful that with the advancement of the science of genetics and computer driven probability analyses many people are rejecting evolution and are turning to the God of the Bible. They, like me, have come to realize that evolution is just a whale of a tale.


(C) 2016 William P. Nugent, permission granted to email or republish for Christian outreach.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *