In its 8 May, 2008, Nature magazine carried a report titled “Genome analysis of the platypus reveals unique signatures of evolution.” The report stated that scientists have deciphered the genetic code of the platypus, which has various mammal, bird and reptile characteristics. “It is hoped that genetic analysis of the platypus will help explain how mammals, including human beings, in some way evolved millions of years in the past,” it said.
However, there are no objective grounds for this claim regarding the supposed evolution of mammals on the basis of the genome of the life form in question. Scientists who accept evolution as a dogmatic truth right from the outset assume that the platypus shares an evolutionary history with mammals and interpret the structural and sequential features in their genomes accordingly. In fact, the platypus constitutes a huge dilemma for the theory of evolution and provides no evidence whatsoever for the supposed evolution of mammals.
1. Evolutionists’ dilemma regarding the platypus
The scientific name for the platypus, which lives in lakes and rivers in Australia and Tanzania is Ornithorhynchus anatinus. Males reach up to 50 cm in length, and females around 20% less. As the report says, the platypus is classified as a mammal because it has fur and suckles its young. This animal, which is able to use its tail like a rudder, also possesses a bird-like beak and reptilian venom. These animals, which generally live underwater, carry their poison in their hind legs. The platypus is also covered in fur like a mammal and suckles its young, although it reproduces by laying eggs and produces venom, both reptilian characteristics. It has a beak, just like birds, but also spends most of its time in water, as do amphibians. As all these features make clear, the platypus is a “mosaic” life form which possesses characteristics belonging to very different living groups. Although evolutionists at one time sought to portray these animals as an intermediate form, this idea has been abandoned by leading palaeontologists. Stephen Jay Gould openly states that “mosaic creatures” such as the platypus cannot be regarded as intermediate forms. (S. J. Gould & N. Eldredge, Paleobiology, Vol 3, 1977, p. 147) In any case, evolutionists have no evidence, and no fossil remains, as to how these mosaic features might have evolved from one group to another.
Darwinism maintains that all the striking and very different mosaic characteristics must have evolved at the same time and in a flawless manner from different life forms. However, they have absolutely no scientific findings or any evidence at all with which to account for this proposition. The different features of the platypus are unique to it and are incapable of explanation by Darwinism. Attempts to depict a life form that represents such an insoluble dilemma for the theory of evolution as being evidence for evolution is enormously significant in terms of revealing the dimensions that evolutionist deceptions can assume.
2. The idea of mammalian evolution is based on no evidence whatsoever
In its report, It is hoped that genetic analysis of the platypus will help explain how mammals, including human beings, in some way evolved millions of years in the past. The fact is, however, that the idea of mammalian evolution is a myth, devoid of any scientific evidence and kept alive solely for reasons of dogma.
Evolutionist reference sources are silent when it comes to the origins of mammals. That is why the evolutionist palaeontologist Roger Lewin has had to admit that “the passage to the first mammal is still a mystery.” (Roger Lewin, "Bones of Mammals, Ancestors Fleshed Out", Science, Vol. 212, 26 June 1981, p. 1492)
George Gaylord Simpson, one of the most eminent evolutionist authorities of the 20th century, refers to this state of affairs that comes as such as surprise in terms of the theory of evolution as follows:
The most puzzling event in the history of life on earth is the change from the Mesozoic, the Age of Reptiles, to the Age of Mammals. It is as if the curtain were rung down suddenly on the stage where all the leading roles were taken by reptiles, especially dinosaurs, in great numbers and bewildering variety, and rose again immediately to reveal the same setting but an entirely new cast, a cast in which the dinosaurs do not appear at all, other reptiles are supernumeraries, and all the leading parts are played by mammals of sorts barely hinted at in the preceding acts. (George Gaylord Simpson, Life Before Man, New York: Time-Life Books, 1972, p. 42.)
These statements by an evolutionist are in fact confessions. The point that evolutionists are reluctant to state openly, but which is still an absolute reality, is that there is not one example of an intermediate fossil from a period before mammals or other life forms.
As we have seen, the platypus’s mosaic features represent no evidence for the theory of evolution, and there is no basis in the fossil record for the idea of mammalian evolution. Evolutionists are trying to pull the wool over the public’s eyes regarding the intermediate forms they have been unable to find by dotting the research into the platypus genome with evolutionary expectations. Our advice to the Nature magazine is that they accept the fact that such distortions can lead nowhere and that they abandon depicting the evolutionary presumptions they have adopted as a dogma as if they represented scientific evidence for Darwinism.