Page 712 - Atlas of Creation Volume 2

pials. Evolutionary biologists believe that these two different species have completely

separate evolutionary histories. 248 (Since the continent of Australia and the islands
around it split off from Gondwanaland (the supercontinent that is supposed to
be the originator of Africa, Antarctica, Australia, and South America) the
link between placental and marsupial mammals is considered to have been
broken, and at that time there were no wolves). But the interesting thing is that the skeletal structure of

the Tasmanian wolf is nearly identical to that of the North American wolf. Their skulls in particular, as shown
on the next page, bear an extraordinary degree of resemblance to each other.
Extraordinary resemblances and similar organs like these, which evolutionary biologists
cannot accept as examples of "homology," show that homology does not constitute
any evidence for the thesis of evolution from a common ancestor. What is even
more interesting is that the exact opposite situation is to be observed in other

living things. In other words, there are living things, some of whose organs
have completely different structures, even though they are considered to be
close relatives by evolutionists. For example, most crustaceans have eye structures
of the "refracting lens" type. In only two species of crustacean—the lobster and the shrimp—is the com-

pletely different "reflecting" type of eye seen. (See the chapter on Irreducible Complexity.)

The Genetic and Embryological Impasse of Homology

The discovery which really overthrew homology is that organs accepted as
"homologous" are almost all controlled by very different genetic codes. As we
know, the theory of evolution proposes that living things developed through
small, chance changes in their genes, in other words, mutations. For this rea-
son, the genetic structures of living things which are seen as close evolution-
The wings of a flying reptile, a ary relatives should resemble each other. And, in particular, similar organs
bird, and a bat. These wings,
should be controlled by similar genetic structures. However, in point of fact,
between which no evolution-
ary relationship can be estab- genetic researchers have made discoveries which conflict totally with this evo-
lished, possess similar lutionary thesis.
structures. Similar organs are usually governed by very different genetic (DNA)
codes. Furthermore, similar genetic codes in the DNA of different creatures are

often associated with completely different organs. The chapter titled "The
Failure of Homology" in Michael Denton's book, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis,
gives several examples of this, and sums the subject up in this way:

Homologous structures are often specified by non-homologous genetic systems and
the concept of homology can seldom be extended back into embryology. 249

This genetic question has also been raised by the well-known evolutionary
biologist Gavin de Beer. In his book Homology: An Unsolved Problem, published
in 1971, de Beer put forward a very wide-ranging analysis of this subject. He
sums up why homology is a problem for the theory of evolution as follows:

What mechanism can it be that results in the production of homologous organs, the
same 'patterns', in spite of their not being controlled by the same genes? I asked this
question in 1938, and it has not been answered. 250

Although some 30 years have passed since de Beer wrote those words, they
Starting with kangaroos, all
mammals in the continent of have still received no answer.
Australia belong to the A third proof which undermines the homology claim is the question of em-
"pouched" or marsupial sub- bryological development, which we mentioned at the start. In order for the
class. According to evolution- evolutionary thesis regarding homology to be taken seriously, the periods of
ists, they have no evolutionary
relationship with placental similar structures' embryological development—in other words, the stages of
mammals in the other regions development in the egg or the mother's womb—would need to be parallel,
of the world.

710 Atlas of Creation Vol. 2