Peregocetus pacificus, 43 million year old walking whale?

Have they finally found the missing link? Does the whole evolutionary theory ride on the back of this ''Whale"?

Above are Schematic drawings of the articulated skeleton of MUSM 3580 showing the main preserved bones, in a hypothetical swimming and terrestrial posture. Stippled lines indicate reconstructed parts and missing sections of the vertebral column Nobu Tamura, Wikimedia Commons, 2008. This creature was Peregocetus pacificus, 4 m (13 ft) long, found in Playa Media Luna on Peru’s southern coast, and ‘dated’ to middle Eocene, 42.6 million years (Ma).

What was found?

Nothing like putting the meaning ‘whale’ into a name to push the idea that it was some sort of whale ancestor. Never mind that almost no one looking at such a creature would ever call it a whale. Like many claims of missing links, we should ask: what was the actual evidence? E.g. the original claims of Pakicetus (‘Whale from Pakistan’) as an aquatic whale ancestor were based on skull fragments only. But finding a more complete skeleton showed that it was a fast-running land mammal.

Peregocetus was represented by a fair number of bones, as shown above. This includes the lower jaw, shoulder and hip girdle, a front and rear leg and feet, and much of the spinal column, especially in the tail (caudal) region.

But it was missing a lot of crucial information as well: the skull for example, so we have no idea what its ear was like, and this is crucial for identifying putative whale ancestors. And while its tail vertebrae showed widening (“expanded transverse processes”), so it could have helped with propulsion in water, it was more like “those of beavers and otters”. There was no evidence for tail flukes as in real whales.

No, there are no four-legged whales. This should go without saying, by the normal meanings of words. But sadly not, with the dogma of land-mammal–to–whale evolution. This new find, Peregocetus, was certainly four-legged, and could stand and walk on land, but it was equally certainly not a whale but one of the billions of extinct life forms. Furthermore, it is ‘dated’ as millions of years younger than some much more ‘whale-like’ creatures, opposite to the claimed evolutionary sequence. And there is too little time for mutations and selection to have evolved Peregocetus into something like a Basilosaurus.

Overwhelming evidence?

In recent times, despite there being little consensus on how evolution occurred, evolutionists have tried to convince the public of the validity of their position by snowballing and recurrently using the term "overwhelming evidence”. Prominent atheist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins claimed in an interview with journalist Bill Moyers that there is "massive evidence" for the theory of evolution.

The error comes in the interpretation of so called massive evidence. Evolutionists have a huge emotional and philosophical investment in evolution. Remember that if the evolutionist would admit that evolution is false, or that creationism is true, that would mean that there is a creator, and the creator has rules, and in the mind of the evolutionist, unreasonable expectations on their lives.

Critics of biblical creation can sometimes present impressive scientific-sounding detail. However, even when you think this is clear-cut case for which there is no possible answer, it is essential to hear the other side. Find out what that is, do your research. As the Bible says in Proverbs 18:17, The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

There is much other evidence, as well as laws of science, invalidating evolution. This book has only just touched the edge. Although it is cloaked in the guise of science, the theory of evolution is nothing but a deceit. A deceit defended only for the benefit of materialistic philosophy; a deceit based not on science but on brainwashing, propaganda, and fraud.

Evolution is merely a belief. A false faith. There is not a single piece of evidence to verify evolution. Not a single transitional form has been found. No half-fish, half-reptile or half-reptile/half-bird. Neither has it been proved that protein, or even a single amino acid molecule composing a protein, could have formed in primordial soup, nor in simulations. On the contrary, evolutionists have demonstrated by lack of evidence and failed experiments that no evolutionary process has ever occurred nor could ever have occurred at any time on earth.