Dear Kirk Cameron

Photo taken at the 41st Emmy Awards 9/17/89

Image via Wikipedia

Dear Kirk Cameron,

Why do you joke about how scientists have not discovered a “crocoduck”? Do you really just not understand how evolution works? Do you understand, but are purposely being misleading and dishonest with the eight-or-so people who cling to your every word? Have you ever thought about the fact that a true chimera (half one animal, half another) would essentially disprove evolution and falsify the theory of natural selection?

I mean, really, have you ever actually heard a biologist say that one animal simply morphs into another, and that’s how we get a new species? Things don’t work that way, Seaver, and nobody who knows what they’re talking about has ever said they do. An animal that is half-one thing and half-another would pretty much be indicative of divine intervention. That is precisely why we don’t have crocoducks, kangaphants, or narwalruses. Although that last one would be pretty sweet. Really, instead of asking “why don’t we have crocoducks,” you should be asking “why don’t we have crocoducks?” Note where the emphasis lies.

In short, that smirk on your face when you say “why aren’t there any crocoducks” looks really bad on you.


PS: bad-mouthing Stephen Hawking doesn’t help your case, like, at all.

7 thoughts on “Dear Kirk Cameron

    • The platypus is not half-anything/half-anything else. It is 100% mammal. Yes, it has unique characteristics but to ignorantly suggest that it is half-bird/half-mammal is, well, ignorant, and is just more evidence that you know very little about a great number of things.

      Talk Origins – Platypus

      • An egg-laying mammal? Not very characteristic is it? Only two that we know of in existence. How would evolution explain that? Wouldn’t you say that’s…how did you put it? “indicative”?
        I like you Dave. You made my week quite interesting. I’m going to pray that God blesses you this week on my account.

        • Are you being serious? Because I’m beginning to wonder if you’re just trolling. To answer the question “how would evolution explain that,” you need to first realize that monotremes (egg-laying mammals) are found only in very particular parts of a very particular place: Australia.

          In fact, aside from a few bats and rats, Australia’s native mammal life consists entirely of monotremes and marsupials, whereas only placental mammals will be found throughout the rest of the world (with only very few exceptions). This is because Australia drifted away from the mainland very early on in mammal evolution, so its mammals evolved differently.

          Being that mammals and birds both evolved from reptiles, it is not unfathomable that birds lay eggs, and that some mammals (more than two, but not many) also happen to lay eggs. A platypus or echidna’s eggs are much more reptilian than avian, anyway.

          Honestly, these things are easy to figure out. If there’s something that confuses you about evolution (and it’s plain to see plenty confuses you about evolution) it’s not difficult to look it up. Don’t take my word for it. Research it for yourself.

  1. that pic of a ‘crocoduck’ is so cute. Creationists that think a platypus disproves evolution are ignorant. Did the two monotremes (platypus & echidna) & all the marsupials (not just kangaroos but hundreds of species of marsupials, including tree kangaroos, betongs, potoroos) just all get of the ark and the whole lot of them end up in Australia? And no placental mammals (the dingo was introduced by humans). Hmmmm…try explaining that, man o god

  2. So creationists claim that there are no Chimeras therefore evolution is false – Demonstrating a massive lack of understanding on the subject;
    However – If a Platypus is presented as a Chimera (which it isnt) then they say “aha! a Chimera, therefore evolution is false”.
    If corrected and the classification of a Platypus is explained (including its evolution) then they say “aha! No Chimeras! therefore evolution is false!”

    In the creationists mind Chimera = Evolution is a lie
    No Chimeras = Evolution is a lie

    Anyone else see a conondrum here? Its true what they say, you cannot reason with a religious person, for if you could, there would be no religious people.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s