July 3, 2011 | David F. Coppedge

Chewing on Evolutionary Stories

Fish chew by sending their food on an assembly line to the back of the mouth.  Mammals chew by positioning food for the teeth.  Can evolution explain this difference?  Science Daily was sure of it.  “Evolution has made its marks — large and small — in innumerable patterns of life,” The article said.  “New research from Brown University shows chewing has evolved too.”  When one looks for the evidence that chewing has evolved, though, one only finds blank spaces filled in with the assumption that evolution must have done it.

The article described chewing differences between fish and mammals in some detail, but when it came to the evolutionary explanation, these statements were offered without evidence.  See if they are convincing for a Darwin skeptic:

  • The evolutionary divergence is believed to have occurred with amphibians…
  • The difference in chewing shows that animals have changed the way they chew and digest their food and that evolution must have played a role.
  • … lungfish, which is believed to represent an early stage in the transition of some species from exclusively water- to land-dwelling.
  • Next came the task of figuring out where, when and with what species the divergence in chewing emerged.
  • The thinking is that the transition likely occurred among amphibians.
  • That makes sense, [Nicolai] Konow said, and he plans to look next at amphibian chewing.
  • “They’re still locked to the water for reproduction,” he said.  “But you have some that become all terrestrial.  And that’s the next step on the evolutionary ladder.

Konow and his team did not offer any evidence for transitions between the chewing modes, other than to infer that “evolution must have played a role” in the change, and that “the transition likely occurred among amphibians.”  In passing, though, Konow admitted that “The distinction between fish and mammal chewing is likely there for a reason”.  He did not pause to consider whether reasons belong to teleonomic explanations, such as intelligent design, or whether reasoning is even derivable from evolutionary theory.

How many times have evolutionists promised goods and handed us promissory notes?  More than we would like to chew on.  Don’t lend credibility to them any more till they pay up on past obligations – which will be never, because the collateral is held by IDBT, Inc. (intelligent design bank and trust).

(Visited 56 times, 1 visits today)


  • DSnell says:

    Another evolution-thinking-caused science stopper.

  • surewon says:

    Speaking of chewing – creation activist & board-certified oral surgeon Don Moeller, MD has written an outstanding article in the Technical Journal 17(2) regarding the myth of tooth evolution.
    Add to that a revealing book published way back in 2010 by evolutionist P.S. Ungar entitled, ‘Mammal Teeth’ (Johns Hopkins U Press). On p. 73 we read, “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 eludes consensus. Indeed, there is not even agreement on the fundamentals, such as how we define a tooth.”
    There you have it – “tooth evolution” is a scientific fact.

  • Andray says:

    Once you believe The Myth, anything goes. Every detail will and shall bend and shape to fit inside the paradigm. The only way to get out of this vicious circle of clouded thinking is to make a choice and consider the obvious alternative: special creation. It’s just that people will not change, feeling comfortable within their worldview and obviously very uncomfortable outside.

Leave a Reply