Shark Origins: An Evolutionary Explanation | The Institute for Creation Research

Shark Origins: An Evolutionary Explanation

During a recent visit to Florida’s Clearwater Marine Aquarium, I peered into a tank containing a host of animals, including a sleek and formidable shark, and thought of evolutionist Theodosius Dobzhansky’s dictum “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.”1 Let’s test this statement by taking a closer look at prominent evolutionary research on the shark—teeth to tail.

Teeth. Paleoanthropologist Peter Ungar admitted there is no consensus on even the basics of tooth origin:

The past few years have witnessed a remarkable flurry of research on the origin or origins of vertebrate teeth. While this work is progressing, the details of when, where, why, and how teeth first appeared still elude consensus. Indeed, there is not even agreement on the fundamentals, such as how we define a tooth.2

Jaws. In 2002, evolutionist Philippe Janvier made an interesting point: “Considering these facts, one may wonder whether this theory [modified gill arches] still holds, and whether a more parsimonious explanation could not be that jaws have always been jaws.”3 A decade later, Kenneth Kardong discussed the shroud surrounding a supposed evolutionary origin of jaws: “Such work is at the moment under way using molecular and genetic probes, but these have so far produced unsettled and somewhat contradictory results.”4 Combined with Ungar’s report on teeth, these sources indicate that there is “not even agreement on the fundamentals” of tooth origins, “jaws have always been jaws,” and that studies yield “contradictory results.”

General Classification. Even stepping back and looking at sharks more generally, as either members of phylum Chordata—which includes mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and bony fish—or as craniates, the bony-skulled animals, does not sharpen evolutionary reports. Kardong reported that “disagreement over the origin of chordates has been common.”5

Eyes. And when it comes to other aspects of shark anatomy, specifically their lifeless, black eyes, all scientists offer is speculation. In his book Evolution’s Witness: How Eyes Evolved, Ivan Schwab wrote that they can’t identify a date for when the first eye “appeared.”6

Fins. How about the shark’s fins—the telltale warning sign of approaching doom for those who cross its path? Edwin Colbert and fellow authors called the origin of fins “an unsolved problem.”7

Fish. If we resort to more basic terms and examine sharks simply as fish (Elasmobranchii), even an entire zoology textbook by Cleveland Hickman, Jr. and colleagues leaves us with only a vague commentary: “Fishes are of ancient ancestry, having descended from an unknown free-swimming protochordate ancestor about 550 m.y.a.”8

So, is biology truly nonsensical “except in the light of evolution”?1 According to author John Long, “The mystery remains as to how sharks first evolved.”9 In their own words, evolutionists’ explanations are neither definitive nor conclusive. But creationists have a better explanation coming from the One who was there in the beginning, “the living God, who made the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all things that are in them” (Acts 14:15).


  1. Dobzhansky, T. 1973. Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. The American Biology Teacher. 35: 125-129.
  2. Ungar, P. S. 2010. Mammal Teeth. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 73.
  3. Janvier, P. 2002. Early Vertebrates. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 258.
  4. Kardong, K. V. 2012. Vertebrates: Comparative Anatomy, Function Evolution, 6th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 246.
  5. Ibid, 74.
  6. Schwab, I. R.  2012. Evolution’s Witness: How Eyes Evolved. New York: Oxford University Press, 39.
  7. Colbert, E. H., M. Morales and E. C. Minkoff. 2001. Colbert’s Evolution of the Vertebrates, 5th ed. New York: Wiley-Liss, Inc., 51.
  8. Hickman, C. et al. 2011. Integrated Principles of Zoology, 15th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 520.
  9. Long, J. A. 2010. The Rise of Fishes: 500 Million Years of Evolution, 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 92.

* Mr. Sherwin is Research Associate, Senior Lecturer, and Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Cite this article: Frank Sherwin, D.Sc. (Hon.). 2013. Shark Origins: An Evolutionary Explanation. Acts & Facts. 42 (12).

The Latest
Fossil Chromatin Looks Young
What are the odds that a buried animal would still have intact DNA after 125 million years? Researchers publishing in the journal Communications Biology...

Inside October 2021 Acts & Facts
How is the Lord’s handiwork on display at John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park? Does the universe look old? What can we learn about science and...

Two-Volume Series: Restoring the Truth about Origins
The subject of origins continues to attract interest from the public and the scientific establishment. Understanding our origins informs us of who we are...

Creation Kids: Floods Form Fossils Fast
Christy Hardy and Susan Windsor* You’re never too young to be a creation scientist! Kids, discover fun facts about God’s creation with...

A Battle for Hearts
Since the ICR Discovery Center for Science & Earth History opened in fall of 2019, tens of thousands of people have walked through our doors. They...

Eating Bugs Isn't Always So Simple
The Lord Jesus Christ deserves glory for why He made Earth’s diverse creatures, and He also deserves glory for the complicated details of how...

Does the Universe Look Old?
Since distant galaxies are billions of light-years away, some understandably assume that distant starlight must have taken billions of years to reach...

Hawaii Behind the Scenes
ICR Research Scientist Dr. Brian Thomas and ICR Video Producer Clint Loveness, with help from friends and family, recently shot footage in Maui, Hawaii,...

Mutation, Design, and Faith
Any alteration in a cell’s DNA sequence is a mutation. These changes can come from copying errors, exposure to chemicals or radiation, or from...

Another Function of 'Junk DNA' Discovered
For decades, evolutionists suggested that huge sections of our genome (about half) did not actively code for the production of proteins or polypeptides—and...