The mammalian evolution scenario has been dealt a severe blow by a recent fossil finding. It is reported in the February 24, 2006, issue of the daily New York Times under the heading ?Beaver or Otter, It lived in Dinosaurs? Time.?
The mammalian evolution scenario has been dealt a severe blow by a recent fossil finding. It is reported in the February 24, 2006, issue of the daily New York Times under the heading “Beaver or Otter, It lived in Dinosaurs’ Time.”
According to the report prepared by science writer John Noble Wilford, the fossil, belonging to an extinct species, was unearthed in China and is estimated at 164 million years old. The creature, given the name Castorocauda lutrasimilis, was about 20 inches (appr. 50cm) long, ate fish and was a swimming species. In terms of external appearance, C. lutrasimilis had broad and scaly tail like a beaver’s, but was more like an otter in terms of its sharp teeth.
The features of the fossil that have surprised evolutionist scientists lie in its lifestyle and age, which clearly contradict the taleof mammalian evolution.
The mammalian evolution claim: a product of the imagination
The theory of evolution maintains that reptiles are the forerunners of mammals. However, there are considerable differences between reptiles and mammals. Mammals are warm-blooded animals (that are able to produce and maintain their own body heat) that give birth to and suckle their young, and have bodies that are covered in fur. Reptiles, on the other hand, are cold-blooded (that are unable to produce heat and whose body temperature varies according to that outside), reproduce by laying eggs, do not suckle their young, and have bodies covered in scales.
Evolutionists have no answer to give to the question of how these differences were overcome, or to put it another way, how features unique to reptiles came to change into features belonging to another living group. The changes claimed to have taken place are completely imaginary. Evolutionists have not a single piece of evidence they can point to in this context. Not a single intermediate form fossil that might link reptiles to mammals has ever been found. That is why the evolutionist palaeontologist Roger Lewin has had to say, "The transition to the first mammal, ...is still an enigma." (emphasis added)(Roger Lewin, "Bones of Mammals, Ancestors Fleshed Out", Science, Vol. 212, 26 June 1981, p. 1492)
Mammals appear with all their unique structures fully formed in the fossil record. George Gaylord Simpson, one of the 20th century’s best known evolutionists and one of the founders of neo-Darwinism, describes this fact that has come as such a shock for the theory of evolution:
The most puzzling event in the history of life on earth is the change from the Mesozoic, the Age of Reptiles, to the Age of Mammals. It is as if the curtain were rung down suddenly on the stage where all the leading roles were taken by reptiles, especially dinosaurs, in great numbers and bewildering variety, and rose again immediately to reveal the same setting but an entirely new cast, a cast in which the dinosaurs do not appear at all, other reptiles are supernumeraries, and all the leading parts are played by mammals of sorts barely hinted at in the preceding acts. (George Gaylord Simpson, Life Before Man, New York: Time-Life Books, 1972, p. 42)
As can be seen from these admissions by Lewin and Simpson, the idea of mammalian evolution consists of blindly supported speculation. The latest C. lutrasimilis discovery also exhibits a striking conflict with this scenario, which in any case lacks any foundation other than imagination.
The C. lutrasimilis obstacle to evolutionist imagination
According to the classic evolutionist myth, the supposed evolutionary spread of mammals began when the dinosaur line came to an end, some 65 million years ago. The supposed evolution of marine mammals is claimed to have begun some 55-60 million years ago. To put it another way, marine mammals are hypothesized to have evolved from land-dwelling ones. However, evolutionists have nowhere to put C. lutrasimilis in this scenario, because the fossil is 164 million years old. This is some 100 million years older than the alleged evolution of mammals claimed to have taken place in the sea. Moreover, Castorocauda lutrasimilis is a complete mammal. It has fur and webbed toes that enabled it to swim.
As a structure whose supposed evolutionary origin is shrouded in darkness, fur represents a major difficulty for evolutionists. C. lutrasimilis has now carried the oldest known example of fur in the fossil record back millions of years. This is a dilemma from which evolutionists have no way of escape.
Indeed, the New York Times article carried the following comment on this dilemma:
Thomas Martin, an authority on early mammals at Senckenberg Research Institute in Frankfurt, said the find pushed back "the mammalian conquest of the waters by more than 100 million years" and "impressively contradicts" the conventional view [of the supposed evolution].
Conclusion:
The C. lutrasimilis fossil makes it clear that the theory of evolution is a dogmatic belief kept alive despite the scientific facts rather than being based on them. There are no signs of any evolutionary development in the mammalian characteristics possessed by the fossil, which also exceeds the time frame of the imaginary scenario of mammalian evolution. That being the case, the fact that the scenario of mammalian evolution is a dream and that the fact revealed by the fossil record is that of creation has once again been confirmed with C. lutrasimilis. Mammals are not random entities that came into being by chance, but proof that they were created by God with sublime knowledge and might.
