Page 181 - The Errors the American National Academy of Sciences

The NAS's Error in Portraying Molecular Biology as
Evidence of Evolution

(supporting artiodactyl monophyly [common descent]) and, if cor-
rect, would make a cow or a hippopotamus more closely related to a
dolphin or a whale than to a pig or a camel. 61
Furthermore, these scientists acknowledge that this matter is still

subject to debate saying:
But the issue is still controversial, because the exact means by which
molecular sequence data should be analyzed remains debated. 62
Analyses of other molecules have similarly produced contradic-
tory findings. The zoologist John Gatesy states that analyses of sea

mammals' blood coagulation protein have presented an evolutionary
link between whales and hippopotamuses, but that this conflicts with
the paleontological findings. 63
As we have seen, the scientists who actually did the research
openly state that the molecular comparisons performed in order to

discover the origin of the whale conflict with morphological and pa-
leontological findings. The NAS, on the other hand, adopts the oppo-
site point of view, despite that fact that the truth of the matter is well
known. It is evident that this is not a question of lack of knowledge,
because the NAS claims to be one of the world's foremost scientific in-
stitutions. It appears that the NAS is deliberately making groundless
claims to convince people with no knowledge of the subject, who

have no means of checking the veracity of what they read, or feel no
need to, that evolution is true.
We have already examined the invalidity of the evolutionist the-
ses on the subject of the origin of whales in our article "A Whale
Fantasy From National Geographic." (www.harunyahya.com/70na-

tional_geographic_sci29.html) As we have explained there in some
detail, the thesis that whales evolved from terrestrial mammals is a
tale devoid of any scientific foundation. There are considerable mor-

179