Bible contradictions?

[The Grand Nudger]

The point is, the mesonychids evolve almost directly into wolves (with no transitional fossils between) and also happen to be the supposed closest ancestor of dolphins/whales (with no transitional fossils). The blue whale arose within 40 million years, a small time by any evolutionary standard, while the mesonychids remained virtually unchanged in the same time period, as did most other species. I bring up whales because they are an example of uncanny accelerated evolution, and also a digression--organisms arose from the ocean, and then they inexplicably return. The question is why.
Why it's unlikely: http://www.trueauthority.com/cvse/whale.htm


If fossils are so rare, why do we often have dozens or hundreds of a given species... punctuated by blankness? Was there a cataclysmic event in the time of their existence but not one single event while the alleged 100 transitionary species lived? Fossils are records of when the animal died, not when it lived. It's hypocritical for a scientist to date confidently based on deaths when 99% of organisms in history aren't even on record. The Cambrian Explosion is not an explosion of mutations and development. It's when they all died, when their functions intended for survival failed them. Why did they die all around the same time? The Flood is a logical answer.

Whales are also an example of a creature "trying" to survive in an uncannily different environment than the others of it's evolutionary branch. Just how successful do you imagine they would have been otherwise, and just how many other creatures of the same branch occupying the same niche do you imagine might survive in the face of such an advantageous set of adaptations as the whales posess? I think what your trying to argue against now is not evolution, but punctuated equilibrium as opposed to cladogenesis. See, this is the trouble, what you find in your bullet point list has given you a false sense of confidence in the subject, and you don't seem to have considered that this list was devised with the intent to deceive you, and now here you are repeating the strawmen of others. "The question is why", really, that's the question, well, lucky for you I have an answer. There's a hell of alot of food in the ocean, and it seems like a good place to escape ones predators (especially if you're not the kind of creature that might realize that the ocean is full of predators of it's own, or if you're very very large -que The Illustrious Whale)

The flood belongs in the Cambrian....? I don't think you want to place the flood in the Cambrian amigo, because now I want you to present me with a Cambrian human, or a Cambrian mammal, A Cambrian boat etc. Last I checked they didn't find any human remains in the Burgess Shale.The Cambrian explosion is an explosion of life, and that's why they call it the Cambrian explosion, I don't know why you seem to believe otherwise. There is valid criticism of what we call "The Cambrian Explosion" btw, some contend that it is merely the explosion of life that fossilized well (for a variety of reason, and especially considering that "fossilizing well" is playing fast and loose with the word "well"), that there may have been plenty swimming about before that that simply didn't fossilize very well. I don't care what you think the logical explanation for any given thing is, I have no trust in your ability to reach a logical conclusion given your premise. What I want is evidence of your flood, what I want is evidence of your timeframe, etc etc etc.