Two things being related does not imply direct descent

Hmm, that almost sounds like the title of some creationist/ID argument against evolution!  However, for those creationists/IDers out there, it is not.  Don’t be too disappointed, but really, what did you expect from me?

I came across a creationist blog here on WordPress by a fellow/lady of the name thebibleistheotherside.  In the following post, thebibleistheotherside discusses how whale fossils are deceptive, don’t show the relationships evolutionists believe they show, etc. 

Thebibleistheotherside states in the post that:

DNA samples were taken, and the result suggested the hippo (which eats plants) evolved into a meat-eating whale.

Thebibleistheotherside clearly says here that hippos, not a relative or ancestor of hippos, evolved into whales.  This implies that whales directly descended from hippos.

Of course, this is not what evolutionary biologists believe or teach.  Rather, genetic studies have shown that whales and hippos are closely related–the whales evolved from an ancestor to hippos.  I pointed this out to thebibleistheotherside in the comments on the post.

Yet thebibleistheotherside continues to equate the two.  He/she even goes on to quote Phil Gingerich of the University of Michigan, who clearly demonstrates on his own website that he does, of course, believe hippos and whales are related, but not that whales descended directly from hippos.

Thebibleistheotherside either clearly does not understand the difference between the two, or is being purposely deceptive to create a straw-man argument.

I don’t know which I’d prefer; on the one hand, it might be somewhat comforting for this person to be purposely deceptive, because it would show that their brain is working properly.  On the other hand, I can’t stand to witness Christians being purposely deceptive, as it gives all Christians a bad reputation.

Either way, it is disturbing indeed.


7 Responses to “Two things being related does not imply direct descent”

  1. Now you blogging about me…lol…

    I talk about hippo DNA being similar to that of a whale as well which was found by Japanese Biologists who support the hippo to whale connection. Why didn’t you mention that? Are you claiming the archaic hippos came on to the fossil record before archaic whales? Or let’s put it to where you understand, did ancestors of hippos appear in the fossil record before whales?

    Here is a question for ya, why would a land animal who is highly adapted, with plenty of food, and drinking water, would randomly go into the water and evolve into a whale?

  2. Thebibleistheotherside–

    You are either clueless as to what you are talking about or you are purposely dodging the issue. On your site, you say that evolutionists claim that whales came from hippos. I replied that this is not what they say at all. You are now acting as if this IS the same thing you are saying, when it clearly is not.

    I don’t know how many times I, and others, can say it. I already gave you the link to Gingerich’s own site explaining the connections between the two. I really recommend reading it.

  3. I’d go with ‘clueless’. People claiming that ‘evolution says [modern animal] evolved from [other modern animal]’ is one of my major pet peeves. It’s blatantly wrong, yet people keep saying it.

  4. Hey, whale-evolution! Now there’s a topic that’s close to my heart. I say, dump the fossils. They were useful clues for the really interesting research regarding these two related species: Genetics!

    The proof of their common ancestry is given without a doubt in work done for the past decade or so on accumulating convergent evidence for SINEs and LINEs shared by Hippos and several species of whale. If this is a coincedence, then any other 100% correlated pair of events are coincedential as well. I’d go for Nikaido et al, Okada and Miyamoto for further reference. I even got the pdf’s safely lodged on my laptop if anyone’s interested. It’s not a hard read for anyone with high school biology training.

    Why is it always Japs doing the cool research? (This is jealousy, not racism)

  5. This is a really interesting blog post,I have added your blog to my bookmarks I really like it,keep up the good work!

  6. lonepirate Says:

    and the missing link. The Pakicetus. A boar-like dog. Right before the Ambulocetans natans. Which kinda looks like a crocodile dog. And as time goes on… and on… the modern whale emerged.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: