by Robert Byers
One of the most common criticisms that creationism
is hit with is that the exclusive marsupial fauna of the Australian region
is great evidence against the story of the Ark and animal migration from
That the fact of only marsupial creatures (excepting
rodents, birds, reptiles and insects) and few placental animals living in
Australia makes foolish any creationist claim that all dry land animals
migrated from the Ark 4500 hundred years ago. How could just the marsupial
ones migrate to Australia and no other kinds of mammals like lions,
wolves, rabbits, moles etc?
And this is an important matter that creationists
must address because of the logic and commonality of it being brought up.
And to show any community, scientific or otherwise we can give good
answers to all questions based on our confidence in the Bible as the
accurate account of beginnings.
And these answers can be interesting and even
advance studies in biogeography and biology.
Organized creationism has bravely but only
occasionally addressed this matter. And has to date not had a persuasive
A careful examination of fossil and living creatures
does provide a persuasive and exciting answer that all Christians and
creationists can boldly and simply assert. No longer need we be defensive
but offensive on the marsupial nature of Australia. The Marsupial nature
of Australia is not an anomaly but rather a revelation of the true history
or equation of animal migration and adaptation after leaving the Ark. It
suits creationists fine. And also another question of the fossil record is
The exclusive marsupial history of Australia need
not be an anomaly that of animal migration from the Biblical Ark but
rather indicates a new equation needs to be introduced.
To do that I will first list the way science groups
present and past mammals.
They group them according to shared body structure
attributes that they believe indicate a common origin for each group. It
is the inner skeleton or biological workings that they use to indicate
relationships of mammals. Other then this they have no evidence. It is all
interpretation of what can be observed in living and fossil mammals.
Now here is a selection of the numerous examples of
similar creatures from different ancestors as evolution teaches. What will
be presented is a selection of the great orders that modern evolutionary
biology and paleontology teaches mammals can be divided into. These are
present living creatures or only known by the fossil record. Many of these
orders are now extinct as far as evolution see it. And all lived from the
time of the demise of the Dinosaurs to present. That is from the
Cretaceous-teritary time division as Evolutionary geology sees it. About
60 million years. As Creationism sees it this is the time from after the
creatures coming off the Ark about 4500 years ago to the present. An order
is a division of creatures that shows by its body evidence to have a
common ancestor. In the mammal world in each case this common ancestor was
an original non-descript rodent- like creature. An order is then divided
up by families and then by species.
The ones we know today. These are placental mammals
and in their own orders which will not be listed (except the Marsupialla
order as defined).
All present bears, cats (big or small) dogs (big or
small), horses, camels, elephants, rhinos, hippos, hyena, tapirs,
gazelles, rabbits, moles and all the rest.
- There is an order known only from the fossil
record that covered the whole world except for South America and
Australia. They are called creodonta. The order had bear, dog, cat,
hyena, and wolverine shaped creatures amongst others.
- Another order called Archtocyonia known only from
the fossil record that lived in Asia and North America had bear, dog,
and hyena shaped creatures.
- Another order known only from the fossil record
called Pantodonta that lived in Asia also had bear, tapir, hippo shaped
- Another order mostly known from fossils but some
living forms also called Hyracoidea living in Asia had animals shaped
like horses, tapirs, and rabbits etc.
- An order called Litopterna that lived in South
America known only from the fossil record had animals shaped like
horses, camels, gazelles, rhinos etc.
(6) An order called Pyrotheria that lived in South
America also known only from the fossil record that had creatures shaped
(7) Another order known only from the fossil record
called Notounguta that lived in South America had animals shaped like
horses, rhinos, rabbits, rodents, etc
(8) The order of Marsupialla known from fossil and
living animals had representatives in both South America and Australia. In
South America there were marsupials shaped like bears, dogs, cats, otters,
rabbits, jerboas and kangaroo rats. And in Australia in fossil or living
form there were marsupials shaped like cats, dogs, moles, mice and others.
In the above descriptions of animals will be found
the great theme that is pushed today in Evolutionary biology and
Paleontology. What they call convergent evolution. Which says that under
long time similar natural selection the same forms of animals evolved from
unrelated ancestors. In these cases each from an unrelated non-descript
rodent size animal. Only this they say can explain the similarity of shape
of creatures they insist evolution teaches are unrelated. They must be
unrelated they say because of certain differences between the orders. Such
as a regular mole and a marsupial mole while looking alike have a
different reproduction system.
In the present orders and listed eight orders of
animals selected above one will find constantly bear, dog, cat, horse etc
shaped creatures appearing in orders of animals that are said to be
completely unrelated according to
Evolutionary theory. It is the most striking thing
about the fossil record and the marsupial situation in Australia today.
This was over the whole landmass of the earth. Every
region as in Australia today had creatures exactly like creatures
elsewhere but totally unrelated according to evolutionary theory.
Creationism can make a better explanation of the
reason for such like shaped creatures that lived everywhere throughout
history on this planet but said to be unrelated. And that the reason for
the seeming anomaly of an almost exclusive marsupial fauna in Australia
today can likewise be explained from a creationist model.
The evolutionary idea is wrong and unnecessary as an
explanation. The remarkable similarity of creatures in the fossil record
(yet said to be unrelated orders) is better explained that they are the
same creatures after all. That there has been no convergent evolution on
such a major and repeating scale but rather these similar shaped animals
are the same kind from the same pair off the Ark. After the migration from
the Ark minor or micro- evolution by environmental or area influences
brought relatively minor changes to the geographically separated
descendents. These changes would of affected all the creatures in that
area in the same way. The small differences in bone structures or
reproduction, as in the case of the marsupials, that are used to separate
same shaped animals are not convincing or even prompting evidence of
different original ancestors. Rather only an adaptation to local areas by
the same creatures as elsewhere from the same parents from the Ark. The
different area produced the different results and this affected all the
animals in that area. Those animals in that area are not related by their
adaptation but only had similar adaptation. These animals actual relatives
are those that look similar elsewhere on the Planet.
For example: The above descriptions show five orders
of unrelated animals (evolution says) Present, Creodonta, Arctocyonia,
Pantodonta, and Marsupialla that each had a bear shaped creature. These
orders covered parts of the world at some point in the past. We as
creationists can confidently and simply assert that these are not
different orders of unrelated bear shaped creatures but instead the same
bear kind (from the pair off the Ark) with just different adaptations due
to time and place. Only the present bear still exists.
The evolutionist must say these orders are unrelated
bear-shaped creatures that evolved from natural selection from different
ancestors. A remarkable thing surely. As the list above shows this is a
constant theme in the fossil record.
In like manner all these orders have bear, dog, cat,
tapir, horse, hippo, Rhino, Wolverine, rabbit shaped creatures that we as
Creationists can say and insist are from the same ancestor straight off
the Ark. They are not actually different orders of different animals with
different ancestors but instead the same kind with variation due to area.
Again lets look at the South American fossils. There
they had creatures shaped like horses, camels, rhinos, and elephants.
Evolution says there is no relation between them and our present ones and
just long time evolution created this similarity of form. Remarkable idea.
That horse and elephant shaped creatures appeared in different parts of
the world with no biological relationship between them at all is an
astonishing concept. And that the relationships between creatures is
determined by minor bone structures or reproduction styles is not just
unproven but unreasonable. Yet that is what evolutionary biology and
paleontology teaches in all their literature.
These South American horse and elephant shaped
creatures are in fact the same horse and elephant as our present ones and
have the same lineage back to an original pair coming off the Ark.
Therefore them being said to be a unrelated different order based on some
minor but common characteristics of the area has been the error of present
This brings us now to Australia and the present
seeming marsupial anomaly.
Using the same line of reasoning Creationists can
boldly say the Marsupial creatures of Australia are simply the same
creatures as elsewhere on the earth now or in the past. The wolf and cat
(now extinct) and mole shaped marsupials of Australia are the relatives of
wolfs, cats, and moles elsewhere on the earth now and in the past. And all
are the descendents of the original pairs from off the Ark. Likewise the
other marsupial creatures of Australia are relatives of past creatures
elsewhere on earth but now extinct or not.
The marsupial creatures are not related to each
other because they are marsupial. Thatís irrelevant. That is just an
adaptation due to the environment etc of the area.
Creationism has an equal and even more plausible
explanation for the seeming anomaly of marsupial and exclusivity of
Australia in the present and past (as indicated by the fossil record).
Also an equal and more plausible explanation for similar animal groupings
in the past (shown in the fossil record) on earth who looked similar to
present and past creatures elsewhere but said to be unrelated by modern
science. This second matter is not so well known by the public and even
well read creationists.
Present evolutionary biology and paleontology says
that over great lengths of time natural selection brought about same
shaped creatures at different times in different parts of the world from
totally unrelated non descript rodent like creatures. Bear, dog, cat,
horse, elephant shaped creatures with no biological relation whatsoever
evolved in numerous places around the world from different ancestral tiny
creatures. They call it called convergent evolution. This is a great theme
in evolutionary biology.
Organized creationism can confidently present a
better argument then before for the suitability of present and past animal
distribution based on a model accepting the Biblical flood and its
aftermath animal dispersal.
The fossil record shows same shaped creatures in
different areas of the world with very minor differences. These creatures
while shaped like other creatures in the world have minor similarities to
each other in each particular area that they live in. And so a bear and
cat shaped creature would have a similar ear bone or foot arrangement in
that area. And while evolution will say that the ear bone or foot
arrangement indicates common ancestry creationism can on contrary say
these creatures are just bears and cats the same as elsewhere who due to
some influence in the area adapted some minor ear or foot arrangement. All
bear and cat shaped creatures etc descended from the pairs off the Ark
This line of reasoning leads to the seeming anomaly
of Australia with its exclusive Marsupial fauna.
Australia is not an anomaly but rather a revelation
of the true equation of post flood animal migration and adaptation.
These minor similarities of Marsupialism and bone
structures in the creatures of Australia are irrelevant as to their origin
and ancestral relationship. The origin and relationship of these creatures
is the same as all creatures similarly shaped elsewhere on the earth now
or in the past. Marsupial dogs and cats are the same kinds as regular dogs
and cats, and likewise related to dogs and cats (in the fossil record but
now extinct) also with minor regional body differences that lived in
certain places on earth. And these came from the same pair off the ark
after their kind. Only the marsupial creatures remain too tell the tale.
Only the marsupial mole sameness as the placental mole elsewhere hints at
the post flood common adaptations after the flood.
The marsupial creatures of Australia are the
absolute same ones as elsewhere that filled the earth after the flood. The
same body type is the evidence of ancestry and not minor matters as
reproduction. This has been the error of modern evolutionary biology and
To the organized creationist community I make this
contribution believing that it is true. Yet also believing a previous
problem for us can be turned into an exciting example to creationists,
Christians, and the scientific world how faith in the accuracy of the
Bible and study of what data there is can place creationism in the
forefront and eye to eye with the truth of origins with anybody.
- Mammal Evolution: An Illustrated guide. R, J, G.
Savage Facts on File Publications. 1986.
- Evolution, Mammals and Southern Continents: Allen
Keast Albany State University. 1972.
- Prehistoric Life; The rise of the Vertebrates.
David Norman Macmillan USA . 1996
See Also: Marsupial
Evolution and Post-flood Migration by Chris Ashcraft