Is this a convincing find?

Question

A man caught a fish off the coast of Indonesia recently. It was believed to have been alive during the time of the dinosaurs. Scientists thought it was extinct. Since they were dead wrong about the existence of a simple species of fish, how much do scientists know, really? What do you evolutionists say about this fish? Can you explain why it hasn't evolved since prehistoric times?

Answer 1

This isn't the first time in history someone's caught a coelacanth, so scientists have known for decades now that this fish was NOT extinct, after all. Since you were dead wrong about your premise, how much do YOU know, really?
Besides, the scientific process is not a static one. It also involves discovering & discarding errors along the way.

Answer 2

Why do you ask this in R&S instead of in Biology?

Perhaps because in the Biology section they actually know what this is?

The fish caught is called a coelacanth. It is exceedingly rare, but not extinct. They were thought to be extinct, until one was caught in 1938 (not exactly recent news!), and since then several specimens been caught in the Comoros, Sulawesi (Indonesia), Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, Madagascar, and Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park in South Africa. (See second source.) They just caught another one in Sulawesi. It is still rare (which is why it still makes the news), but this is not earth-shaking.

> "how much do scientists know, really?"

A *lot*! They don't know everything (and never claim to) ... but they know a lot. The discovery of the coelacanth in 1938 was not a source of dismay for scientists (as the creationists claim) but was greeted with HUGE excitement by the scientific community. It was a chance to examine a specimen that had previously been known only from fossils ... in other words, they learned a lot about how to interpret fossils.

But this idea that whenever they discover something new, that this implies that scientists don't know anything at all ... is just knee-jerk *anti-science* rubbish. By that logic, then scientists would be living in constant fear of discovering anything new ... and if you knew *anything* about scientists, you would know that new discoveries are like oxygen to a scientist.

> "Can you explain why it hasn't evolved since prehistoric times?"

Easily! Because things don't *have* to evolve (change). Sometimes they are quite successful just the way they are. if the environment doesn't change, and no mutation happens that gives some new advantage, then an organism can live relatively unchanged for millions of years. This is not new ... there are *lots* of known examples (like sharks, or crocodiles, or echidnas (the longest-running mammal species), and others), but these don't "disprove" evolution one bit.

And secondly, all we know is that the organism hasn't changed much *structurally* ... because we can compare its skeleton to ancient fossils. But we can't compare all the other stuff that goes into an organism ... like its metabolism, or sensory aparatus, or behavior ... we can't even tell what color it was. All of these things could very well have been evolving all this time, but there's no way to tell from the fossil record, that's all.

I'm afraid you are being hypnotized by very old news (1938).

Answer 3

This actually questions more their age theory than anything else. But they will point to the fact that this apparent transitional form has almost arm like fins! And then state how they are amazed that this specie has existed for millions of years!? They can not get past the statement that the earth has to be 4.7 billion years, because if it isn't, just about all their theories would be busted! This is along the same lines that dinosaurs had to have been extinct millions of year ago yet they are painted on caves, pottery and parchment from civilizations jut a few thousand years ago!? Interesting!!

I am not stating that I know the age of the earth, I have no idea, but there is evidence for an old earth and evidence for a young earth. I can just admit we have no absolute about either! But the more species that are "extinct" from millions of years ago that keep popping up make me question their theories more and more!

I just read some of the statements above and two things jumped out at me....

The environment has not changed! What?? The environment changes every year...this animal is dated by science as being milliions of years old! How could it be stagnant it absolutely should have evolved over that much time...unless....your theory is wrong!

Science keeps changing/morphing/evolving....I love this part. Do you know the Bible has not changed! The Old Testament is dated to abouit 100-200 B.C. and has not been updated, in regards to the meaning, some of the words have been adapted to fit the common terminology, however the meaning behind the orignal text has not changed one bit! The New Testament has been around for 1,500 years with out any changes and you know what? Anytime something appears to be an error based on "science" turns out to be true based on "science" adapting/morphing and learning their mistakes! That is a fact!

Some of you out there that rest you eternal lives on science and its continually ability to adapt better wake up and see the WORD OF GOD is true and has never changed over thousands of years and is still accurate with no need to adapt and is full of TRUTH.

Answer 4

Science is the process of collecting data and creating the best model that explains that data AND makes future predications. But science is also a continually evolving process. Today's model might be the best we can do but it will almost certainly be changed, improved or discarded for something better tomorrow. That's just the way it works.

This fish find might have upset certain parts of the model but that's a good thing. We regroup and improve the model so that it is better than before.

Answer 5

Scientist don't claim to know everything, thus the reason behind them still studying everything. They Change ideas and theories on things constantly with the discovery of new findings. This doesn't mean they don't know anything, it just means there are always things to learn. So how do we know it hasn't evolved since no one has caught one till now? Too, evolution happens when something NEEDS to evolve to deal with atmospheric changes and other such things, maybe it hasn't needed to change.

Answer 6

Organisms that are more-or-less perfectly suited to their environment hardly evolve at all.

Scientists do not know everything. Unlike some, they generally do not CLAIM to know everything. They can be just as mistaken as anyone else.

The ocean is the largest, most complex and chaotic living environment on the planet. It is also one inimical to human life. It is difficult to explore. There are countless mysteries in it. Every time science manages to explore the depths for awhile, brand new (and often startling) discoveries are made.

Answer 7

What confident me that it truly is the authentic faith is an identical undertaking that makes human beings think of we are delusional, wacky and a cult. i've got been a witness for over 30 years and my kinfolk nevertheless thinks i'm loopy. they're catholic, and our alterations in perception are like nighttime and day. we've the braveness to stand up for righteous concepts and not persist with maximum individuals nor bypass with the circulate of customary thinking. we've a objective in existence, a rationalization for residing, a desire, that maximum individuals of people in the international have not, some through fact they undeniable do no longer care. We also have a international brotherhood that would not see colour, nationality, nor language. if truth be told all of us communicate one language: the organic language. After 30+ years, i'm nevertheless confident that it truly is the suited place to be. "for this reason Jesus suggested to the twelve: “you do no longer prefer to bypass additionally, do you?” Simon Peter spoke back him: “Lord, whom shall we bypass away to? you have sayings of eternal existence." John 6:sixty seven,sixty 8 Paisley Moon

Answer 8

The Coelacanth? Scientists make assumptions based on available evidence- those assumptions are therefore valid hypotheses although occasionally theories are proved wrong by the emergence of new evidence. That's what science is all about.

Answer 9

"Can you explain why it hasn't evolved since prehistoric times?"

Because its environment hasn't changed.

That was easy, if you understand evolution. I'm shocked that anyone would think that was a challenging question for science to answer.

Answer 10

it didn't evolve because it met perfection for it's enviroments, crocs and turtles haven't evolved because they don't need to. And science doesn't claim to have all of the answers or the right ones, it changes and morphs over time until it does find an absolute, you can change ideas, not beliefs. That's why I love science.