Zoology vs. Evolutionism

In 2003 evolutionist A.G. Fisher admitted, "Both the origin of life and the origin of the major groups of animals remains unknown."1 A well-known zoology text2 by three evolutionists reveal the limits of what is really known about the origin of animals—

Unraveling the origin of the multicellular animals (metazoans) has presented many problems for zoologists (p. 240).

... one of the most intriguing questions is the place of mesozoans in the evolutionary picture (p. 242).

The origin of the cnidarians and ctenophores [comb jellies] is obscure (p. 275).

Any ancestral or other related group that would shed a clue to the phyletic [evolutionary] relationships of the Acanthocephala is probably long since extinct
(p. 317).

No truly satisfactory explanation has yet been given for the origins of metamerism [segmentation] and the coelom [a fluid-filled cavity], although the subject has stimulated much speculation and debate over the years (p. 365).

What can we infer about the common ancestor of the annelids [earthworms]? This has been the subject of a long and continuing debate (p. 365).

Controversy on phylogeny [evolution] within the Chelicerata [arthropods] also exists ... (p. 379).

The relationship of the crustaceans to other arthropods has long been a puzzle
(p. 399).

The phylogentic [evolutionary] position of the lophophorates [invertebrates] has been the subject of much controversy and debate (p. 447).

Despite the excellent fossil record, the origin and early evolution of the echinoderms [sea stars] are still obscure (p. 450).

Hemichordate phylogentic [evolution] has long been puzzling (p. 476).

... zoologists have debated the question of vertebrate origins. It has been very difficult to reconstruct lines of descent because the earliest protochordates were in all probability soft-bodied creatures that stood little chance of being preserved as fossils even under the most ideal conditions (p. 485).

However, the exact phylogentic [evolutionary] position of the chordates within the animal kingdom is unclear (p. 480).

The fishes are of ancient ancestry, having descended from an unknown free-swimming protochordate [a tunicate or lancelet] ancestor (p. 499).

Let me suggest that biology majors tape this article to the inside cover of your text so you may see where science leaves off and macroevolution begins.

 

_____________________________

1. Fisher, A., 2003 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia, fossil section.
2. Hickman, Roberts, and Larson, Zoology, W.C. Brown, 1997.

Cite this article: Frank Sherwin, M.A. 2004. Zoology vs. Evolutionism. Acts & Facts. 33 (8).

The Latest
CREATION PODCAST
Is Genesis History? | Climate Research Update
Physicist Dr. Jake Hebert discusses weaknesses in secular explanations for an Ice Age, how a biblical event best explains it, and why Christians don’t...

NEWS
New Findings Challenge Secular Dating Models
Two recent news stories, one from the Carnegie Institute for Science1 and another from an issue of Nuclear Technology,2 shed light on an icon of “deep...

NEWS
Are the Galápagos Islands a Laboratory of Evolution?
A recent Livescience article1 is entitled “The Galápagos Islands: Laboratory of Evolution.” It addresses, among other things, “unique...

TESTIMONIALS
Reaching a New Generation
I’m Jeff Tomkins, the Director of Life Sciences at ICR. Unlike many researchers working in the field of creation science, I was not raised with...

NEWS
ICR Kids’ Book: God Made Gorillas, God Made You
In the last few years, ICR has released numerous resources to help parents teach their children creation truth. Our Guide to… series is perfect...