At least 40 baleen whales and other species of marine mammals fossilized in a dry desert of Chile have been explained with a "toxic bloom" theory. Does it explain all the findings?
Scientists presume to speak with confidence about the origin of the universe and billions of years, but have been clueless about some everyday things close to home in the present.
"Convergent evolution" is the term given to similar designs that shouldn't be related. Recent widespread examples threaten to make the term lose any coherence it might have had
Biomimetics (the imitation of nature) continues to promise cool gadgets and useful materials that will someday yield prized gifts under the tree. Some of them might even save your life.
If Darwin’s theory were true, would you expect to find fossils that haven’t changed for a billion years? Would you expect that kind of stasis for organisms that lived in vastly different conditions than today? Would you expect, furthermore, to find an explosion of diverse forms of life suddenly, without ancestors? Rather than mourn their fate, evolutionists flaunt these falsifying fossils as trophies of their theory.
When most fossils consist of small shelly creatures, finding a whale is indeed big news. Two whale fossil discoveries on opposite sides of the world are spectacular and puzzling. Do they support the theory that whales evolved from land mammals?