These Critters were not our Ancestors

This seems like a good time to jaw with you about the osteostracans, yet another creature that believers in fish-to-fool evolution put forth as an ancestor. Actually, these extinct jawless aquatic vertebrates are only known from fossils and artists' conceptions.

A jawless bony fish, known only from fossils, is claimed to be our evolutionary ancestor. Research makes this foolish notion even sillier.
Cephalaspis species of  osteostracans image credit:
Wikimedia Commons / Stanton F. Fink (CC BY-SA 3.0)
"But Cowboy Bob, they have to be our evolutionary ancestors. People have lines and graphs on charts to prove it!"

Yes, that happens frequently. In fact, when I'm not writing posts and articles, I'm working on a cladogram that shows how we evolved from pine trees. Seriously though, such charts are based on massive presuppositions and a heapin' helpin' of personal preferences.

Osteostracans  (note the osteo part, which pertains to bones, and we hear in words like osteoporosis, and the Osteostraci class means bony shells) were a "simple" jawless fish. In evolutionary vernacular, "simple" organisms are what they place at the bottom of the illusionary tree of life. Upon further examination, allegedly simple things are actually very complex. Osteostracans are "more complex" than evolutionists previously thought. Recent research inadvertently supports biblical creation and design!

There is nothing simple about these sophisticated creatures—their morphology (form or appearance) is described as “remarkable,” and they have a “sophisticated nervous system.” With their secular worldview, however, evolutionists say this creature was the predecessor of humans. A recent article describing the ecological diversity of Osteostraci states no fewer than five times that these aquatic animals were our ancient ancestors (as if repetition can turn something into a scientific fact).

To chew on the full article, swim on over to "Osteostracans Aren't Ancestors".

Comments