Evolutionists assume that the sea invertebrates that appear in the Cambrian
stratum somehow evolved into fish in tens of million years. However, just
as Cambrian invertebrates have no ancestors, there are no transitional
links indicating that an evolution occurred between these invertebrates
and fish. It should be noted that invertebrates and fish have enormous
structural differences. Invertebrates have their hard tissues outside
their bodies, whereas fish are vertebrates that have theirs on the inside.
Such an enormous "evolution" would have taken billions of steps to be
completed and there should be billions of transitional forms displaying
Evolutionists have been digging fossil strata for about 140 years looking
for these hypothetical forms. They have found millions of invertebrate
fossils and millions of fish fossils; yet nobody has ever found even one
that is midway between them.
An evolutionist paleontologist, Gerald T. Todd admits this fact in an
article titled "Evolution of the Lung and the Origin of Bony Fishes":
All three subdivisions of the bony fishes first appear
in the fossil record at approximately the same time. They are already
widely divergent morphologically, and they are heavily armoured. How did
they originate? What allowed them to diverge so widely? How did they all
come to have heavy armour? And why is there no trace of earlier, intermediate
The evolutionary scenario goes one step further and
argues that fish, who evolved from invertebrates then transformed into
amphibians. But this scenario also lacks evidence. There is not even a
single fossil verifying that a half-fish/half-amphibian creature has ever
existed. This fact is confirmed by a well-known evolutionist authority,
Robert L. Carroll, who is the author of Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution,
though reluctantly as: "We have no intermediate fossils between rhipidistian
fish (his favourite 'ancestors' of tetrapods) and early amphibians."25
Two evolutionist paleontologists, Colbert and Morales, comment on the
three basic classes of amphibians-frogs, salamanders, and caecilians:
Coelacanth fossil.Evolutionists claimed that it was the transitional
form representing the transition from water to land .Living examples
of this fish have been caught many times since 1938, providing a
good example of the extent of the speculations that evolutionists
There is no evidence of any Paleozoic amphibians
combining the characteristics that would be expected in a single common
ancestor. The oldest known frogs, salamanders, and caecilians are
very similar to their living descendants.26
Until about fifty years ago, evolutionists thought that such a creature
indeed existed. This fish, called a Coelacanth, which was estimated to
be 410 million years of age, was put forward as a transitional form with
a primitive lung, a developed brain, a digestive and a circulatory system
ready to function on land, and even a primitive walking mechanism. These
anatomical interpretations were accepted as undisputed truth among scientific
circles until the end of the 1930's. The Coelacanth was presented as a
genuine transitional form that proved the evolutionary transition from
water to land.
However on December 22, 1938, a very interesting discovery
was made in the Indian Ocean. A living member of the Coelacanth family,
previously presented as a transitional form that had become extinct seventy
million years ago, was caught! The discovery of a "living" prototype of
Coelacanth undoubtedly gave evolutionists a severe shock. The evolutionist
paleontologist J.L.B. Smith said that he could not have been more surprised
if he had come across a living dinosaur.27 In the
years to come, 200 Coelacanths were caught many times in different parts
of the world.
Living coelacanths revealed how far the evolutionists
could go in making up their imaginary scenarios. In contrary to claims,
coelacanths had neither a primitive lung nor a large brain. The organ
that evolutionist researchers proposed as a primitive lung turned out
to be nothing but a lipid pouch.28 Furthermore,
the Coelacanth, which was introduced as "a reptile candidate getting prepared
to pass from sea to land", was in reality a fish that lived in the depths
of the oceans and never approached to within less than 180 metres of the
TURTLES WERE ALWAYS TURTLES
Turtle fossil aged 100 million years:
No difference from its modern counterpart.
(The Dawn of Life,Orbis Pub.,London 1972)
Just as the evolutionary theory
cannot explain basic groups of living things such as fish and reptiles
neither can it explain the origin of the species within these groups.
For example turtles, a reptilian species, appear in the fossil record
all of a sudden with their unique shells.To quote from an evolutionary
source:"by the middle of the Triassic Period (about 175,000,000
years ago) its (turtle's) members were already numerous and in possession
of the basic turtle characteristics.The links between turtles and
cotylosaurs from which turtles probably sprang are almost entirely
lacking ." (Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1971, v.22,p.418)
There is no difference between the fossils of ancient turtles and
the living members of this species today. Simply put, turtles have
not "evolved"; they have always been turtles since they
were created that way.
24 Gerald T. Todd, "Evolution
of the Lung and the Origin of Bony Fishes: A Casual Relationship", American
Zoologist, Vol 26, No. 4, 1980, p. 757.
25 R. L. Carroll, Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution, New York: W. H. Freeman
and Co. 1988, p. 4.
26 Edwin H. Colbert, M. Morales, Evolution of the Vertebrates, New York: John
Wiley and Sons, 1991, p. 99.
27 Jean-Jacques Hublin, The Hamlyn Encyclopędia of Prehistoric Animals, New
York: The Hamlyn Publishing Group Ltd., 1984, p. 120.
28 Jacques Millot, "The Coelacanth", Scientific American, Vol 193, December
1955, p. 39.
29 Bilim ve Teknik Magazine, November 1998, No: 372, p. 21.