The Lazarus Rat 1 Corinthians 8:2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. According to evolutionists, the early family of mammals called Diatomyidae, has been extinct for eleven million years. Of course, as creationists, we do not accept this dating. This Diatomyidae family included rat-like creatures with long skulls, a furry tail and rounded ears. Then, in 1996, a wildlife-survey team bought some strange looking animals in a meat market in Laos. This led to the discovery of living Laotian rock rats. These animals were placed into a family that includes porcupines and guinea pigs. Others argued that it belonged to a new family. The debate sparked a more detailed look at its DNA and bone structure by researchers in five countries. The results ruled out any possibility that the rats were related to guinea pigs. But the rock rat’s characteristic long skull, furred tail and round ears seem to settle the matter. The Diatomyidae are not extinct and the Laotian rock rat is indeed a member of this family. This discovery of thought-to-be extinct families happens frequently enough that such families are called Lazarus taxon or, more popularly, “living fossils.†So, when evolutionists proclaim that this or that creature or family has been extinct for millions of years, it takes only one living specimen to disprove it. Furthermore, many creatures do not appear in the recent fossil record and this puts the entire interpretation into question. See, no answer for this. Just like the many other infallible proofs that dispel evolution. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in creation. This animal is only one example of what was thought to be an ancestor of the modern rodent. They still exist to make a mockery of man's foolish attempt to explain away God. See, no answer for this. Just like the many other infallible proofs that dispel evolution. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in creation. This animal is only one example of what was thought to be an ancestor of the modern rodent. They still exist to make a mockery of man's foolish attempt to explain away God. For those of you who would like to read and learn more http://www.creationmoments.net/ I think you will be enlightened. Evolution is not fact-based. Darwin's theory? Not proven to be true. Evolutionists have to continually change their theory when science is put to the test, again I say go to this site.http://www.creationmoments.net/radio/transcript.php?t=1489 http://www.creationmoments.net/articles/article.php?a=111&c=8
Religion & Spirituality - 10 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
"Of course, as creationists, we do not accept this dating." Then someone among you should provide credible, and peer reviewed evidence as to why you don't. Yet none of you have. Gee, I wonder why?
2 :
How does discovering a previously-thought-extinct animal disprove evolution? Yes, science is sometimes wrong. But it has the grace and duty to recognize and correct itself when it is. This is exactly why I trust science more than religion.
3 :
I have never heard of this before. I am also not a biologist, but I would guess that the animal's environment hasn't changed much in these millions of years and that's why it still exists. If you want to know the answer to this question, ask in the science section or try to find articles/books about this animal. Just because someone is an atheist, or accepts that evolution happened, does not make them an expert in any type of science.
4 :
I don't know what point you're trying to make. A modern day kin to a thought-to-be-extinct species was found. Whoop-dee doo. Does this somehow disprove evolution to you? I don't think you understand evolution if you think this calls into question any of it's tenets.
5 :
As an histricomorphous rodent, Diatomidae can hardly be called "the early family of mammals." It isn't even an early form of rodent, but actually it belongs to one of the more recent suborders of the Class Rodentia. Eleven million years is recent in terms of evolution. The Laotian rock rat, as a species, is not that old, but it appears to be in a rodent family that goes back that far and was assumed to be extinct. Most taxonomists believe we have yet to "discover" most animal species (that includes insects), so you should expect to hear many more similar stories such as this one. But keep in mind, all of these discoveries continue to pile up more and more evidence of evolution. Why do you deny the true age of the earth when EVERYTHING observed on it shows "young earth creationism" to be pure BS? Edit: Billy, are you serious? Agassiz, Bacon, Faraday, Joule, Linnaeus, Newton, Pasteur, da Vinci.....??!!! This is your list of a growing minority of scientists doubting evolution? What kind of crackpot are you?
6 :
They are still NOT the same species, merely a member of the same Genus... one case is the deep sea fish discovered off the coast of Africa, thought to be extinct for millions of years, though similar aesthetically, it was significantly smaller than its ancestor, as well as missing several unique attributes.
7 :
You people get more and more desperate every day.
8 :
Those who believe in Evolution are behind the times. Despite strong pressure to accept evolutionism, many intelligent and experienced scientists either openly or secretly dismiss Evolution as highly unlikely or impossible. Scientists who utterly reject Evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities… Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science. The ascendancy of Evolution in science, in both Britain and America, has been waning for several decades as its grip has weakened in successive areas: geology; paleontology; embryology; comparative anatomy. Now even geneticists are beginning to have doubts. It is only in mainstream molecular biology and zoology that Darwinism retains serious enthusiastic supporters. As growing numbers of scientists begin to drift away from neo-Darwinist ideas, the revision of Darwinism at the public level is long overdue, and is a process that has already started. One hundred and fifty Ph.D. scientists and 300 other scientists with masters degrees in science or engineering are members of the Korea Association of Creation Research. The President of KACR is the distinguished scientist and Professor Young-Gil Kim of the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology. Ph.D. in Materials Science, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute / highly distinguished / inventor of various important high-tech alloys. (Note: The following list is very incomplete. Inclusion of any person on this list is in no way an endorsement, nor does it necessarily indicate anything about their religious beliefs.) Gerald E. Aardsma (physicist and radiocarbon dating) Louis Agassiz (helped develop the study of glacial geology and of ichthyology) Alexander Arndt (analytical chemist) Steven A. Austin (geologist and coal formation expert) Charles Babbage (helped develop science of computers / developed actuarial tables and the calculating machine) Francis Bacon (developed the Scientific Method) Thomas G. Barnes (physicist) Robert Boyle (helped develop sciences of chemistry and gas dynamics) Wernher von Braun (pioneer of rocketry and space exploration) David Brewster (helped develop science of optical mineralogy) Arthur V. Chadwick (geologist) Melvin Alonzo Cook (physical chemist, Nobel Prize nominee) Georges Cuvier (helped develop sciences of comparative anatomy and vertebrate paleontology) Humphry Davy (helped develop science of thermokinetics) Donald B. DeYoung (physicist, specializing in solid-state, nuclear science and astronomy) Henri Fabre (helped develop science of insect entomology) Michael Faraday (helped develop science of electromagnetics / developed the Field Theory / invented the electric generator) Danny R. Faulkner (astronomer) Ambrose Fleming (helped develop science of electronics / invented thermionic valve) Robert V. Gentry (physicist and chemist) Duane T. Gish (biochemist) John Grebe (chemist) Joseph Henry (invented the electric motor and the galvanometer / discovered self-induction) William Herschel (helped develop science of galactic astronomy / discovered double stars / developed the Global Star Catalog) George F. Howe (botanist) D. Russell Humphreys (award-winning physicist) James P. Joule (developed reversible thermodynamics) Johann Kepler (helped develop science of physical astronomy / developed the Ephemeris Tables) John W. Klotz (geneticist and biologist) Leonid Korochkin (geneticist) Lane P. Lester (geneticist and biologist) Carolus Linnaeus (helped develop sciences of taxonomy and systematic biology / developed the Classification System) Joseph Lister (helped develop science of antiseptic surgery) Frank L. Marsh (biologist) Matthew Maury (helped develop science of oceanography/hydrography) James Clerk Maxwell (helped develop the science of electrodynamics) Gregor Mendel (founded the modern science of genetics) Samuel F. B. Morse (invented the telegraph) Isaac Newton (helped develop science of dynamics and the discipline of calculus / father of the Law of Gravity / invented the reflecting telescope) Gary E. Parker (biologist and paleontologist) [more info] Blaise Pascal (helped develop science of hydrostatics / invented the barometer) Louis Pasteur (helped develop science of bacteriology / discovered the Law of Biogenesis / invented fermentation control / developed vaccinations and immunizations) William Ramsay (helped develop the science of isotopic chemistry / discovered inert gases) John Ray (helped develop science of biology and natural science) Lord Rayleigh (helped develop science of dimensional analysis) Bernhard Riemann (helped develop non-Euclidean geometry) James Simpson (helped develop the field of gynecology / developed the use of chloroform) Nicholas Steno (helped develop the science of stratigraphy) George Stokes (helped develop science of fluid mechanics) Charles B. Thaxton (chemist) William Thompson (Lord Kelvin) (helped develop sciences of thermodynamics and energetics / invented the Absolute Temperature Scale / developed the Trans-Atlantic Cable) Larry Vardiman (astrophysicist and geophysicist) Leonardo da Vinci (helped develop science of hydraulics) Rudolf Virchow (helped develop science of pathology) A.J. (Monty) White (chemist) A.E. Wilder-Smith (chemist and pharmacology expert) John Woodward (helped develop the science of paleontology) A more thorough list of current (and past) Creationist scientists is not provided for two reasons: (1) A complete list would be extremely lengthy, and (2) Some scientists would rather not have their name made public due to justified fear of job discrimination and persecution in today's atmosphere of limited academic freedom in Evolutionist-controlled institutions. In light of this new evidence favoring Creationism, how can so many people, who are clearly behind the times, advocate that intelligent people be fired for professing an informed opinion and explanation of the world? How can so many rude people say that Creationists are "stupid" or "not educated"? I would guess that any Creationist on the list above is more intelligent, informed and well educated than those who criticize them.
9 :
So what? There was a fish, called the coelacanth, which was thought extinct, but a colony was found in the deep sea off Africa. If you think these discoveries challenge evolution, then you don't understand evolution. You don't understand that species can split diverge, and BOTH diverging lines can survive. Allopatric speciation is a common way in which this can occur. (Geographical isolation of one half of the species occurs, each one evolves seperately. Chimps and Bonobos are living examples.) Now, talk to me when they find a living T-rex. lol
10 :
"See, no answer for this" Lie. "Just like the many other infallible proofs that dispel evolution" No such "proofs" exist. You're lying again. "It takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in creation" Very unoriginal lie. "This animal is only one example of what was thought to be an ancestor of the modern rodent. They still exist to make a mockery of man's foolish attempt to explain away God." Pfft. That's just too inane to even rise to the level of "lie". It's just BS. Doesn't the fact that you have to lie so much to defend your beliefs tell you something about the quality of those beliefs? It should.
Read more discussions :
