The amazing creatures of the past simply astound and are a joy to learn of their discoveries even though they are shrouded with a very poor evolutionary story. Ichthyosaurs (Greek for “fish lizards”) is an example of this. Labeled as a product of “convergent evolution” which is often used as a rescue mechanism which claims creatures that occupy the same evolutionary niche tend to adopt roughly the same form, these fossils of these “fish lizards” were discovered in a desert.
New Scientist writes…
“According to Mark McMenamin, a palaeontologist at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts, the giant marine ichthyosaurs were caught by an even larger cephalopod. In the absence of any direct fossil evidence that this kraken existed, his hypothesis rests on the idea that cephalopods play with their food, arranging the bones of their prey into intricate and unusual patterns that wouldn’t occur otherwise.”
“Palaeontologists have long been baffled by the oddly arranged skeletons, which settled to the seafloor about 217 million years ago. Ancient currents seem to have aligned the skeletons, but they are preserved in different ways, making it look unlikely that they all died at once. How did so many giants end up in the same place?”
Wow, giant squids the size of blue whales might have also existed! Could this mean the kraken of myth was real? Some skeptics weigh in on this story but there is no denying the ichthyosaur part! How did so many end up in one place? The evidence shows that ichthyosaurs aligned by a massive current produced by a global flood with rapid preservation in order for it to avoid normal decay.
In another story, a fossil tiger skull from China, which is claimed to be 2.5 million years old, the previous oldest one, was claimed to be 1.8 million years old. So what is the difference between this ancient tiger skull and modern tigers of today? Not a whole lot, what is interesting in this story, they (meaning the likes of National Geographic) credit evolution for creating the design and then sticking with it in order to explain the surprise. More like stuff happens. Let’s put it this way, the data is making the predictions in the ‘theory’ which in turn makes it more complex while adding a bad story line to it, the type of complexity that is normally not good in other areas in science.
Firstly it claims it’s a new species, however there is very little difference between the skull with other modern skulls of tigers. In fact, it has more similarities than differences! If you take evolution out of it, the conclusion would not be that this is a new species which was discovered rather the same species which is way more logical conclusion!
Secondly, variants within a kind is predicted in creationism, it’s a fact. The evidence demonstrates this! Since when do you hear creation scientists revamping fossil inferences to fit it into their framework like evolutionists do? Where are the transitional forms from pre-tigers to tigers? Well they say, evolution just got it right the first time. Fossils can only do so much, but they continue to be amazing what great things has God designed which we need to learn more about!