Page 126 - The Errors the American National Academy of Sciences

t the end of the chapter on "Common Structures" in the NAS book
Science and Creationism, it is stated that "The mammalian ear and
jaw are instances in which paleontology and comparative
anatomy combine to show common ancestry through transitional
stages." (Science and Creationism, p. 15). In essence, the NAS's claim in this
chapter is that while the mammalian lower jaw consists of a single bone,
the reptile jaw consists of three. Evolutionists maintain that that the
greater number of bones in reptiles' ears are homologous to the bones in
those of mammals, and put this forward as evidence that mammals
evolved from reptiles. One proof of this transition, according to evolution-
ists and the NAS, is the so-called transitional form Therapsida, a group of
mammal-like reptiles with a double jaw joint.
The above account is a classic evolutionist claim. If evolutionists see
the slightest similarity between two species, they are not slow to interpret
that similarity in terms of evolution. However, in doing so they ignore all
the facts that make their interpretation impossible.
The alleged evolution of reptiles into mammals is a matter that con-
tains several major difficulties for evolutionists. The fact that two mam-
mal bones resemble certain bones in reptiles does not resolve the issue.
Many questions remain unanswered. For example, how did jaw bones
"migrate" to such an irreducibly complex organ as the ear, as a result of
mutations? How did these mutations manage to shrink the two jaw bones,
cause them to have them the ideal shape and dimensions, and form mus-
cles around them? How did random changes build a perfect balance in the
middle ear? And, finally, how did the animal manage to hear and eat while
all this was going on? All of these questions remain unanswered.
Evolutionists are unable to answer them, because any one of them is suffi-
cient to undermine the myth of the evolution of reptiles into mammals.
Fossils of creatures belonging to the order Therapsida cannot sub-
stantiate the evolutionists' claims. First and foremost, therapsid fossils do
not appear in the fossil record in the sequence expected by Darwinism.

124