Removing the “Tree” to See the forest.

When you go to a natural history museum or in other media you will see a lot of trees, evolutionary trees that is. They are called cladistic trees or simply cladograms. The cladograms are arranged by homology (similar aspects) and can vary depend on what criteria the person creating the tree wants to feature. Similarities of features are also found in designed objects, due to similar functions or even the same designer. One can make an evolutionary tree out of pictures of vehicles, just start with a pogo stick to unicycle to bicycle then branch to trike to a 4wheeled ATV to dune buggy to car etc... You could get quite dramatic and show evolutionary vehicle dead ends such as a DUCK (part boat part bus.) If you look at the photos from the Kansas University Natural History museum you will see some of these evolutionary cladograms and some drawings of paper cladograms.

The museum claims 99% similarity but that is not the full story. For more information on how chimp and human genomes compare see

These drawing by Jonathan Gabel were found at the KU Natural History museum and were done to illistrate how cladograms are derived. But thet realy show that it is all arbitrary, not based on evolution. These have now been removed.

One looks like evolution of the paper airplane.

My point here is to show you that these “trees” are quite arbitrary and are designed to get you to think what the evolutionists want you to think. To see though all these “trees” to see the forest, remember that God created kinds that reproduce after their own kinds. The evolutionary trees if they are truthful will usually have a lot of dotted lines and you’ll notice that at the branching points there are no pictures or they will say unknown ancestor. There are no transitional forms between kinds because they were created separately. In other words a forest made up of created kinds instead of a single evolutionary tree. Baraminology, or the study of created kinds, is trying to find at what level of the taxonomy that the created kinds fit into. Right now biologists can’t even agree as to what a species is, so kinds might be at different taxonomic levels.

Maybe an orchard would be a better anology than a forest, because it implies that it was designed. but I could not resist the forest pun.

As we research this, we can see that, logically, the kinds all started out very rich in information and as they were separated, some groups within a kind would lose information, because of genetic isolation or through mutation. We can find no known instances where new viable genetic information was added. Information only degenerates and is lost, as per the law of entropy. Today we find different variations of kinds that live in very different and sometimes unimaginably harsh environments. The more viable information the organism has the better chance it has to adapt to different environments. Eventually, isolated and specialized organisms can be lost when the environment changes beyond what their now degenerated genetic information can allow them to adapt to. Many purebred animals today are carrying a genetic load that causes them to have particular genetic problems that are associated with that breed. See for more about purebred dogs.
For more reading on genetic degeneration read: John C. Sanford Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome

Views: 337


You need to be a member of Creation Conversations to add comments!

Join Creation Conversations

About CC

Connecting Christians who believe in Biblical Creation — discussing beliefs, sharing ideas, and recommending evolution-free resources. Please keep all posts relevant to the topics of this community.

Rules of Engagement
Zero Tolerance Policy
Statement of Faith
Creation Terms

Homeschool Curriculum


Creation Conversations 2018

What's new @ CC for 2018? 

Creation networking and much more in store for Creation Conversation Members. You'll not want to miss this new year!

© 2019   Created by Creation Conversations.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service