Thursday, April 06, 2006

Tiktaalik the Fishapod



Evolutionary scientists are dancing in the streets. After searching for “the missing link” for 146 years since the publication of Darwin’s The Origin of Species, they have finally found it. The fossils of a 375 million-year-old fish that they say is a long-sought "missing link" in the evolution of fishes from water to a life walking on four limbs on land was discovered in the Canadian Arctic, 600 miles from the North Pole.

Dr. Neil H. Shubin, leader of the research team, announced the finding in the standard language of scientific discoveries: It's a really amazing remarkable intermediate fossil — it's like, holy cow. I think he may have meant holy Pezosiren portelli, the legged sea cow. These evolutionary scientists tend to be excitable fellows.

The fossil skeletons have the fins and scales of a giant fish up to nine feet long, but other anatomical traits of a transitional creature, a fish that is still a fish but exhibiting changes that anticipate the emergence of land animals — a predecessor thus of amphibians, reptiles and dinosaurs, mammals and eventually humans.


The fish has been named Tiktaalik which means "large shallow water fish." Tiktaalik, Dr. Shubin said, is "both fish and tetrapod, which we sometimes call a fishapod."

The New York Times gushed that the fossils are widely seen by scientists as a powerful rebuttal to religious creationists, who hold a literal biblical view on the origins and development of life. (John Wilford, 5/5/06)

Doug Tennapel objects: Wait a minute, you're telling me that scientists have been preaching Godless evolution all this time without a legit fish-to-tetrapod missing link?! Well what were you using all this time on the fossil tree, science fiction? Luckily, no gap is so great between species that can make some scientists lose their faith in a dogmatic fundamentalist allegience to Materialist Darwinism.

It seems to me that some widely seen scientists still believe that their competition are the religious creationists, somehow missing the entry into the heavy-weight division of the Intelligent Designer who has been manhandling their champion in the manner of Joe Louis Barrow over Max Schmeling in 1938. (As an aside, it is interesting that, in 1940, The Brown Bomber actively campaigned for Wendell Willkie for the presidency over FDR because he believed that Willkie and the Republicans would do more for civil rights.)

But, returning to Tiktaalik, and the more important socio-political aspects of the discovery. Hugh Hewitt was the first to ask: “So, are we all descended from a Canadian fish?

Well, as much as I respect Hugh, I am not willing to go that far. However, Tiktaalik does have a remarkable likeness to John Kerry, so it may be that the fishapod is the ancestor of French Canadians, and American liberals. I don’t know but it could be that survival of the fittest thing. I can just about see the phylogenetic tree from fishapod to walking sea cow, to monkeys, apes and liberal (or French) hominids.

As Darwin said, "Probably all of the organic liberals which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed."


I can believe it.

11 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Totally agree! These liberal "scientists" think they've got it all figured out, don't they? They will have a lot to answer for at the end of times, fish or no fish.

1:22 PM  
Blogger Bill Lama said...

Indeed they will have a lot to answer for, fishapod or no fishapod.

Thanks Tex, I love your irony.
Bill

3:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, thanks Tex for that comment! We know irony when we see it! Bill, you need to get the moonbats out of here!

5:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Billy Bob, I certainly hope you are walking with your crutches. You are now on fossils and relating them to politics. WOW!!!! What a stretch! Everyone knows John Kerry evolved from the Pterodactyls. If you look closely, they have the same profile. Check it out.

Jill

6:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As I understand it, evolutionists believe that there was (a) a Big
Bang, (2) then an expanding universe of stars and planets, (3) then a lifeless planet Earth, (4) atmosphere, (5) oceans and continents, (6) vegetation on land and life in the oceans, followed by (7) animals and birds and finally, (8) human life.

Now read Genesis 1-26. Kind of
amazing that when other civilizations were postulating such things as the world riding on the back of a turtle, this Jewish writer got it essentially correct. If you had no modern tools, and no body of wisdom on which to draw your conclusions, what are the odds that you could guess correctly the order of life on earth starting with "light" (the
Big Bang), and ending with humans as did this ancient writer of
scripture? A million to one? Greater?

As my brother likes to put it, "Genesis is evolution in poetry." Maybe God was
an "evolutionist," too.

Greg

6:53 PM  
Blogger Bill Lama said...

Greg,
Well said. I think I'd really like your brother.

The latest thing in cosmology is that the materialists do not want to accept the Big Bang as the creation, because it leads directly to a creator. So they make up theories (stories) of a continually cycling universe, from bang to crunch to bang to crunch to... in both directions of time.

And they dream up an infinity of parallel universes, each with slightly different laws of physics, so that the precisely tuned universe that we have been blessed with is just an accident, ie there are an infinite number of other universes where stars and earths and humans would not exist.

I'm blown away by the idiocy of it all. And they teach this nonsence to our kids (both the cosmology and the radical evolution).

6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great site lots of usefull infomation here.
»

7:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Super color scheme, I like it! Good job. Go on.
»

7:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm impressed with your site, very nice graphics!
»

7:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In relation to the Big Bang, the explosion originally came from one speck of matter and one speck of energy, but where did the matter and the energy come from if not a Creator? Also, the explosion would have destroyed everything, not formed it. Anyway, the dust from the "bang" couldn't have formed anything because heat expands, and the dust would have been to congregate into one area in which a universe could be formed. Even if it could, there wouldn't be enough to go around. After all,they were only specks. There also couldn't have been any life because, for one thing, there wouldn't have been enough energy to generate life without being expended in a matter of seconds, and for another thing, there wouldn't have been enough blood or oxygen for all the organisms that would need it. Over all, the Big Bang theory is a dud. It's easy to shoot down and only points to a Creator who's name is God.

Regarding the Tiktaalik, the appendages couldn't be legs. They wouldn't support the fish's weight. Either way, why would they have to be legs? They could have been used as mating clasps or propellers. I am positve that the Tiktaalik was not a missing lik but was created by God.

4:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Missing link? OMG?
That is a cross breed between a clarias batrachu (a fish that walked) the coelacanth, & a Periophthalmodon schlosseri (AKA/Mudskipper)!
We still have them today! Dr. Raj Baldev stated "most the species are the result of cross breeding".

http://www.internationalreporter.com/news/read.php?id=1107

If the mudskipper went extinct that would have been the missing link!
They were fish that walked on land & water, breathe air & had gills.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=qy2RTzwMLs8&feature=related

4:09 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home