Well, here's one the evolutionists blew.  Scientists declared the coelacanth (pronounced SEE-la-kanth.) had been extinct  for at least 65 million years.

Then, lo and behold,  a live specimen turned up off the coast of Africa in 1938. Then others began turning up in other places.  Prior to that, the coelacanth was known only from fossils, some believed to be 400 million years old, which would make them considerably older than dinosaurs.

Scientists' explanation:  It quit inhabiting places where fossils were formed.  A fish that can grow to eight feet???  Sound a little "fishy" to me!! 

Every now and then scientists get caught up in one of their claims for which they have no evidence.  They like to date fossils as being really old, and who is going to dispute them, if there is no  evidence to the contrary?

By dating them as really old, scientists can then theorize as to how they evolved, their evolutionary tree, etc.  Problem is when one turns up alive that has never evolved past the state at which scientists found it fossilized, evolutionists are caught with egg on their face.

In the case of the coelacanth,  scientists believed it was the the missing link between fish and mammals. Now, of course, they state that was "wrong".

Their excuse for the coelacanth never evolving past its current state?  It evolved to the point it needed to survive, so it did not need to evolve further.  Huh?  

That’s a rather unsatisfying answer, if you ask me, because it doesn’t explain how these large fish—some weighing as much as 95kg (over 200 lb.) and measuring nearly 2m (over 6 feet) long—should have gone entirely unnoticed by science for more than a century after coelacanth fossils were first identified.

In any case, once scientists realized there were some still living, a search began for more. Another group of coelacanths was found off the islands of the Comoros (between Africa and Madagascar) in the early 1950s, and in 1997, a second coelacanth species was discovered near the Indonesian island of Sulawesi.

The coelacanth has a very unusual body structure, with an extra fin at the tail and long, bony, leg-like pectoral and pelvic fins. It was once thought to be a “missing link” between fish and mammals.

It is the only living animal with a working intracranial joint, which enables the fish to open its mouth extremely wide so that it can swallow its prey whole.

It’s also the only species with a rostral organ, which is sort of like a “nose” that detects the electrical impulses produced by some fish it feeds on.

And although, like all fish, its offspring develop in eggs, the coelacanth is ovoviviparous, meaning its eggs are fertilized and carried inside the mother until they hatch, so the young are born alive.

When you take a fossil imprint from a rock and compare it with a live one like below,

you see here that the 325 million year old rock imprint is not any different from the live fish, which meant no evolution took place.

Then, the author superimposed one over the other.  They were identical.

Here's another primitive creature that scientists make the same claim about.  The alligator, supposedly related to the dinosaur and at least as old, never evolved any further, again because he had evolved as far as he needed to survive.  H-m-m-m!  Two entirely different species--same theory.  

Sounds an awfully lot like circular reasoning or perhaps even denial of the trurth (or both).

If you have ever tried to debate with an evolutionist, one of the things you will quickly discover is that they ARE NEVER WRONG!  They also tend to "look down" on anyone who questions them or EVOLUTION.

But, to be perfectly frank, Evolutionists are really just humanists. Humanism is self-deification, so a humanist holds his plan to be far superior to any other.  Always being right allows the Evolutionist to exalt himself above those he believes are wrong, even if he has to lie to do it.

To have to admit to something he despises would be like going from a king to a peasant.

Are there other evidences of things like these that defy evolution?

Evolution is about things small evolving into something bigger.  Creation is about things that were big before the flood reducing in size.  But some things revert back to what they were before the flood.  I wonder what pound test line they used to catch THAT fish?  Nah!  Just skip the test line and use a rope with a hook!  Looks like some happy guys to me!

:

/strong>

To read more on this subject, go to:https://www.yecheadquarters.org/shame.24.html

 


/p>