Remember the media hype surrounding the fossil fish named Tiktaalik in 2006? This fossilized fish was supposedly the transitional species between fish and four-legged land animals and the prehistoric predecessor of the human population. In other words, this fish allegedly went on to evolve into amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and humans. Why do you ask, would someone interpret fossilized fish bones in such a way? It is because evolutionists are trapped into thinking only one way. They are bound by the assumption that microbes evolved into man over many millennia. Therefore, any fossil found must be interpreted in an evolutionary scenario. There are no other alternatives to be considered - even if they make more sense. You see, once you commit to the ideology of evolution, you are bound to pay homage and praise to it for the production of all living organisms.

This is what happens when you replace the one true God, the Christian God, with stories and imagination. When one chooses not to believe in God, they are liable to believe in anything. Such is the case with Tiktaalik. Here is a fossilized fish, found in the Canadian Arctic which was interpreted to be our ancestor by evolutionary scientists. It was touted as a transitional species between aquatic and land animals due to the bony structures found in its pectoral fins. But without direct observation into this fish's life and activities, one cannot make such assertions. On the surface, it is just a fish, a lobe-finned fish. We still have lobe-finned fish today. Why did some of these fish go through massive changes in order to be able to live, breathe, and eat on land while others stayed lobe-fined fish and defy evolution? It never made sense to make such outlandish claims when all you have to base your theory on are fossilized bones.

It was once said that Tiktaalik "could become an icon of evolution in action". That was in 2006. How about now? As we start the year of 2010, one of the first tasks at hand for evolutionary scientists is to demote Tiktaalik. In a recent article in Nature, scientist state that Tiktaalik can no longer be considered a transitional species between fish and four-legged land animals, much less an ancestor to humans. What happened? Scientists found trackways in lower rock (i.e. believed to be millions of years older than Tiktaalik) which indicate four-legged land animals were already around. Here are some of the quotes from this and similar articles:

“These results force us to reconsider our whole picture of the transition from fish to land animals” said co-discoverer Per Ahlberg in Science Daily.

“The team says the find means that land vertebrates appeared millions of years earlier than previously supposed.... the Zachelmie Quarry tetrapods break the neat and simple timeline.” (BBC News).

“The fish–tetrapod transition was thus seemingly quite well documented.... Now, however, Niedzwiedzki et al lob a grenade into that picture.” – Janvier and Clement, commenting on the find in Nature

“It blows the whole story out of the water, so to speak.” – Jenny Clack (Harvard), PhysOrg

The fact is, Tiktaalik was an imaginary ancestor. It was an interpretation imposed on the fossil and it was incorrect. It is true that one must apply an interpretation on fossils since they do not come with documentation or tags which tell us everything about them. But when you are bound to one ideology, namely that of evolution, you cannot arrive at the truth. I say this because evolution is not true. It is based on a premise which seeks to remove God from His rightful place as Creator. The theory of evolution was never meant to be married or conjoined with God or the Bible. There is no middle ground as some say. Either we are the result of purely naturalistic causes and evolutionary processes, or we are divinely created by a purposeful Creator.

It is interesting to watch year after year, the evidence which is presented in favor of evolution to evaporate over and over again. Tiktaalik is just one such example. One year it is an icon of evolution, and soon after it is discarded to the has-been pile of the once famous. Creation scientists never interpreted Tiktaalik as our ancestor because their starting assumptions are quite different than those who worship Darwin. To Christian scientists, Tiktaalik was and remains a lobe-finned fish. A fish that was created on day five of creation, fully formed and functional - from the beginning.

Don't fall for the lie. Humans are not merely higher primates. We are created in the image and glory of God, who loved us enough to create us in the first place. Even though He knew that we would turn away from Him and follow our own desires and replace Him with just-so stories of how nature created, rather than God.

There is a better interpretation!

 

Source: literalgenesis.org

 

References:

1. Nature: Tetrapod trackways from the early Middle Devonian period of Poland
   http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n7277/full/nature08623.html
   "They force a radical reassessment of the timing, ecology and environmental setting of the fish–tetrapod transition, as well as the completeness of the body fossil record."
2. "Icon of evolution" statement made by paleontologists Per Ahlberg of Sweden’s Uppsala University and Jennifer A. Clack of the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom
3. Shubin et al., “The pectoral fin of Tiktaalik roseae and the origin of the tetrapod limb,” Nature 440, 764-771 (6 April 2006) | doi:10.1038/nature04637
4. iedzwiedzki et al, “Tetrapod trackways from the early Middle Devonian period of Poland,” Nature, 463, 43-48 (7 January 2010) | doi:10.1038/nature08623.
5. Janvier and Clement, “Palaeontology: Muddy tetrapod origins,” Nature 463, 40-41 (7 January 2010) | doi:10.1038/463040a.