I recently came across a magazine Acts and Facts, (which is basically creationist science magazine), in which the author criticizes mainstream scientists for being biased in favor of evolution in their use of words to describe anatomical parts and for making declarative statements without solid evidence.
The article is about evolution of whales, and the evidence presented to support an evolutionary claim that whales evolved from land mammals. Whale hip bones are disconnected from the rest of the skeleton, are small ( âvestigialâ) and are supported by muscles only, standalone. Evolution science states that these bones are were used to be part of pelvis and used for locomotion, and are now becoming obsolete (like human tail bone).
Creationists argue that the hip bones do have a function in whales, and that is in sexual reproduction. Because they do have a function now, it does not mean that this particular body part had another function. That, they claim, is a biased declaration to support evolution. The process in question is co-option, or change in fuction of a body part ( in whales, the change in hip bones being used from locomotion to reproduction). This process has not been observed, the creationists say, so this statement is a biased declaration.
Furthermore, the creationists say that any claims that are beyond the realm of human detection are mystical claims, and so the assertion that the whale bones in question are hip bones or pelvis is a mystical claim. The argument is that the whale bones are part of its design and not a vestigial remnant of evolutionary process, and calling these bones âhip bonesâ or âpelvisâ is biased thinking.
Do evolutionists make mystical claims?