Posted by: Rob Lester | August 24, 2011

Mammal diversity may explain dinosaurs’ disappearance

The findings of a genetic diversity study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, don’t match up with traditional scientific explanations for why there are so many mammals, birds and fish. The study was led by evolutionary biologist Michael Alfaro of the UCLA. Mammals and birds were found to be more genetically diverse whereas crocodilians and the lizard-like tuatara were less so. Answers in Genesis observed, “For the evolutionists, that’s a big surprise—in fact, the opposite of what one might initially suspect based on the evolutionary version of life’s history. After all, reptiles have had (supposedly) hundreds of millions of years to evolve and diversify, while mammals are said to be relative newcomers.” Alfaro even confessed that this was “an evolutionary enigma.” He went on to explain: “The timing of the rate increases does not correspond to the appearance of key characteristics that have been invoked to explain the evolutionary success of these groups…Our results suggest that something more recent is the cause of the biodiversity.” Exactly! Perhaps something like a global flood a few thousand years ago? Low genetic diversity may explain why the dinosaurs went extinct soon after leaving the ark. That’s a much better scientific explanation than invoking some renegade asteroid crashing into the earth and killing ONLY the dinosaurs while leaving most other life intact like some kind of cosmic smart-bomb. Alfaro also admitted, “It’s a real mystery to biologists how there can be any tuataras given their low rate of speciation,” he added. “They must have something working for them that has allowed them to persist.” Like divine design? Once again, evolutionary biologists are shocked to find the opposite of what they assumed and creationists find exactly what they expect. Who’s the willfully ignorant one here? Sadly, this is just one more example of evolutionary bias and agenda-driven pseudoscience. AIG comments, “If evolution were based on falsifiable hypotheses, this study would cast serious doubt on the evolution model. The longer a species has been around, the more diverse it should have become, based on average mutation rates and the like. But when scientists find that that isn’t the case, evolution is re-interpreted—and “new explanations” are sought—to make the facts fit evolutionary theory.” Creationists would never be permitted to get away with this kind of dishonesty.


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: