Changes

::::::::::My understanding (after reading the article and conversation here) is that the evolution of the whale, while there is a solution that has been tabled, has no ''plausible'' explanation and that the scientists refuse to accept that. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:04, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

::::::::::My understanding (after reading the article and conversation here) is that the evolution of the whale, while there is a solution that has been tabled, has no ''plausible'' explanation and that the scientists refuse to accept that. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:04, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

:::::::::::The difficulty that I was trying to point out is that the evolution of the whale, as it is currently explained by evolutionary scientists, is no more or less plausible than the evolution of any other creature. It cannot, therefore, be an example of deliberate ignorance any more than, for example, a belief in evolution generally is an example of deliberate ignorance.  I don't know if I can express it in clearer terms than that.  --[[User:CecilQ|CecilQ]] 17:57, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

:::::::::::The difficulty that I was trying to point out is that the evolution of the whale, as it is currently explained by evolutionary scientists, is no more or less plausible than the evolution of any other creature. It cannot, therefore, be an example of deliberate ignorance any more than, for example, a belief in evolution generally is an example of deliberate ignorance.  I don't know if I can express it in clearer terms than that.  --[[User:CecilQ|CecilQ]]  

17:57, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

 

::::::::::::The whale, a mammal, has many extraordinary characteristics that are not found in any other creatures.  Darwin recognized this as a serious problem, and suggested that whales evolved from black bears swimming.  No more plausible ancestor has been suggested ever since.  It is a counterexample to the [[theory of evolution]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:12, 22 March 2011 (EDT)