Aren’t You Ashamed?

Feedback: Aren’t You Ashamed?

Absolute disgrace to the progress of man?

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, February 4, 2026 (Donate)

Letter, unedited:

You're business is an aboslute disgrace and abomination to the progression of man. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves for wanting to teach kids such fallacies you have no evidence for as 'facts'. Though a complete picture of how the world was derived hasn't been totally identified, the evidence is so far stacked toward evolution that I pity how heavily you must have been brainwashed and how much you have to ignore and reject to maintain your selfish beliefs. I am truely embarrassed to be on the same planet as you backward idiots! I challenge you to spend a few months to IMPARTIALLY research opposing theories and the possiblilty your 'God' does not exist. If you dont think your faith can withstand this examination, then I guess ignorance is bliss!

Who needs logic rationale and reason anyway. If you can believe a genocidal malevolant tyrant wants you to ignore science, then you better do it!

Response:

Thank you for contacting us. My comments are below and I really hope you consider these. Also note, they are said with sincerity and respect, though I am being direct in places.  

To whom it may concern, You're business 

It is actually a ministry and a non-profit. 

is an aboslute disgrace 

First, I’m glad you believe in absolutes; and second, I’m glad you believe there are such moral things as respect, honor, and subsequently shame, hence, where disgrace stems. Most evolutionists would disagree about these things.[1] They say “there are no absolutes or shame or honor, etc.” They argue that everything is material and all things happen—even one's own thoughts—as mere chemical reactions that ultimately have no meaning, because there is nothing immaterial. 

Of course, many evolutionists are being illogical when they claim there are no absolutes, as they just used an absolute! All this is to say that I’m glad you disagree with leading evolutionists about absolutes and morality. These are very Christian of you. However, by the email it seems the Bible is not a high priority (which where morality comes from) so why think there are absolutes and disgrace without the Bible being true?  

The battle is actually how an infallible God views things versus how fallible man does—God is always right; Image from Presentation Library

and abomination to the progression of man. 

But from an evolutionary perspective, why care about the progress of man? “Eat, pass on your genes, and die”; that is really the evolutionist’s motto. Why would the evolutionist care about the next generation—let the offspring fend for themselves before they die? Why care about anything? Really? 

When someone care about people or society that is Christian attribute (people are made in the image of God[2], Genesis 1:26-27; 9:5-6) and I’m glad you do, but that must be borrowed from the Bible to make sense of it.  

You should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves for wanting to teach kids such fallacies you have no evidence for as 'facts'. 

We are not ashamed since we are teaching the truth, but evolutionists should be ashamed that they teach kids lies about God, morality, truth, science, and justice…and even kill them in “abortion factories” like “weeding the garden” (recall that it is the evolutionists that teach that children are just animals that can be disposed). 

But let me ask…what fallacies? And furthermore, in an evolutionary worldview where everything is material, why would truth and logic even exist? These things are NOT material, they are abstract. It is a Christian worldview based on the Bible from which we can have a basis for knowledge, logic, reasoning, morality, and so on. The non-Christian must borrow from the Bible just to try to argue against it. 

Though a complete picture of how the world was derived hasn't been totally identified, 

Then why believe it is “absolute” enough to argue against other worldviews as the absolute standard? 

the evidence is so far stacked toward evolution 

Such as? We have the same evidence as the evolutionists and God disagrees with the evolutionists who make such claims. He says all of it is stacked His way: 

“The earth is the LORD’S, and all its fullness, the world and those who dwell therein (Psalm 24:1, NKJV).” 

So what is the best evidence that evolution is true (even though evolutionists say there is no such thing as truth)? 

that I pity 

Why “pity” if people are just chemicals? Chemical don’t “pity”?  Again, pity is a Christian thing, and I’m glad you have pity, even though it is misguided, because it refutes the position that that evolutionists are arguing for (that pity and other immaterial things do not exist) and verifies that you are indeed made in the image of God. 

If man is nothing but mere chemicals, they have no ultimate or eternal value; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

how heavily you must have been brainwashed and how much you have to ignore and reject 

I was brainwashed by public education that taught me that I was just a chemical and a “waste of space” in a “billions of years” universe where nothing matters and when you’re dead…you’re dead. But then, I actually studied the subject. And I found out who was doing the brainwashing. 

I thank the Lord God for saving me from the secular humanist religion (evolution and millions of years are aspects of this religion) that I was taught in school and university. It sounds like this religion was forced on you without question too. I want to encourage you to question it.[3]  

to maintain your selfish beliefs. 

How is being loving and caring to others selfish? How is teaching people the truth selfish? How is taking a stand to save lives of children selfish? How is loving and being obedient to the God that died to save us from sin and death selfish? How? 

But in an evolutionary worldview where it is “free for all” evolutionary world…why not be selfish? 

I am truely embarrassed 

Again, consistent evolutionists have no basis for truth, so why maintain this belief; if you want to be consistent, then either give up on truth and logic or give up on an evolutionary worldview.  

But what I don’t get is…why not be embarrassed of fellow evolutionists like Hitler or Stalin who killed many kids and adults or that maniac evolutionist Anders Behring Breivik who killed all those little kids in Norway…and yet email us to saying we who preach righteousness should be the ones embarrassed? 

to be on the same planet as you backward idiots! 

How are we backwards and how are we ignorant? Such a claim is merely a question begging epithet fallacy.  

I challenge you to spend a few months to IMPARTIALLY research opposing theories and 

Like this “impartial” email? The fact is no one is impartial. There is no such thing as impartial research.  This email and others we have received like it is evidence that those who criticize the biblical position clearly haven’t “lifted a finger” to honestly research what the Bible teaches about creation, truth, knowledge, science and so on.  

Furthermore, I have searched hosts of religious beliefs including the six differing views of evolution (Epicurean, Lamarckian, Traditional Darwinism, Neo-Darwinism, Punctuated Equilibrium, and Hopeful Monster).[4]  Since you’ve professed a belief in evolution, out of curiosity, which of these do you believe right now and why are the others wrong? 

As a matter of note, what Lamarck and Darwin did in trying to find a mechanism for evolution was really just a rehash of trying to make some Greek Mythology work.  The Epicurean Greeks proposed the myth of evolution; it was one popular form of Greek mythology – even Paul refuted it thousands of years ago in Acts 17. 

But with aspects added by Lamarck and Darwin, they simply made variations in this mythology. Rightly, it is still Greek mythology, but their new aspects can also be dubbed French mythology (Lamarck was from France) or English mythology (Darwin was from England).  Sadly, WWII in Europe was instigated by Adolf Hitler, who bought into English mythology of evolution…[5] 

the possiblilty your 'God' does not exist. If you dont think your faith can withstand this examination, then I guess ignorance is bliss! 

When it comes to the existence of God, I have searched the subject as well; be it the classical arguments which are still found wanting or the Transcendental Argument for the existence of God (TAG) which is foundational to the others.[6] How have you disproved the Transcendental Argument for the existence of the God of Christian Theism?[7] 

Who needs logic rationale and reason anyway. 

Evolutionists don’t consistently believe in such a thing since they are not material. 

If you can believe a genocidal malevolant tyrant 

Well this is clearly not the God of the Bible as anyone could tell who has actually read the Bible. This is straw man fallacy that God-haters like Dr. Richard Dawkins have set up. Keep in mind that the last few genocidal, malevolent tyrants have been evolutionists like Hitler and Stalin. 

wants you to ignore science, then you better do it! 

I love science and have Master’s Degree in it. It is sad to see when evolutionists can’t tell the difference between evolution and science. It is a common equivocation fallacy on their part. 

Mr. M., I would like to encourage you though. You have expressed a belief in evolution (with its atheism, since evolution comes out of an atheistic worldview) and yet you are living your life borrowing from the Bible that morality, logic, truth, and science exists. 

I even suspect that you wear clothes—which come directly from a literal Genesis 3. Let’s face it frogs don’t wake up in the morning and put their clothes on. The point is, you are living a life that is a contradiction—you follow the Bible in some areas (perhaps unknowingly) and yet you argue against its truthfulness.  

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened (Romans 1:18-22, NKJV). 

But it is time to stop and repent (Luke 13:3). It is time to change your life and start on the path of truth and righteousness. M., I would love to see you get saved. It seems you have a passion for standing up to things you feel is wrong, and that is a good Christian attribute.   That is something I would hope you continue to do. But you need to understand what is right and wrong and have a basis for it—the Bible. 

I want to encourage you to begin the journey. A good book to get you a good overview of who God is and what he Bible is all about with selected Scriptures in the Bible is simply entitled “Begin” compiled by myself and Ken Ham (by Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2011).  

At the very least, it would help teach you who God is, and what the Bible teaches on a number of subjects.  With kindness in Christ, 

Recommended Resources: Defending God’s Existence

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields. Originally at Answers in Genesis; Edited; Republished by permission. 

---

[1] Evolution is an atheistic worldview and one of the popular forms of Secular Humanism. Sadly some Christians try to mix this religion with biblical Christianity. This is no different from what many Israelites did mixing their religion with Baal worship and God was not happy with them. Is God happy with mixing evolution and Christianity?  

[2] See also: Bodie Hodge, The Fall of Satan, Master Books, Green Forests, AK,

[3] Please don’t me wrong – there are many great Christian teachers in the secular system and they need your prayers, but the system is now set up to oppose Christianity and promote the religion of secular humanism. 

[4] For a concise review of some of these positions see: New Answers Book 3, Ken Ham, Gen. Ed., Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2010, pp. 271-282.

[5] Hitler was purely an evolutionist and gave up any thoughts of God. For more on this, see Hitler’s Second Book, The Unpublished Sequel of Mein Kampf, dictated in 1928. It can be purchased offsite: http://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Second-Book-Unpublished-Sequel/dp/1929631162.

[6] See also, New Answers Book 3, Ken Ham, Gen. Ed., Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2010, pp.263-270.

[7] Being in the vein of Van Til in philosophy, I’ve tried to follow this debate. For good summary of people’s failed attempts to refute TAG, please see: The Transcendental Argument for God's Existence, Michael R. Butler, http://www.butler-harris.org/tag/; See also Defending God’s Existence, Ken Ham, Gen. Ed., Master Books, Green Forest, AK, 2025, .

Presuppositions The Evidence Doesn’t Speak For Itself

Feedback on Presuppositions: The Evidence Doesn’t Speak For Itself

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, February 2, 2026 (Donate)

Letter, unedited:

Evolution does not PRESUPPOSE no God. It merely attempts to discern the mechanisms of God’s universe. What you are saying is that you find it believable that God created a universe filled with evidence to teach us about how the world works. But that evidence shouldn’t be believed. Instead, we should believe a book written by primitive people with one foot still in a cave dwelling, rather than everything our God-given human abilities can see in God’s universe around us every day.

First of all, evolution is simply a collection of observations. If you prefer, you can see the hand of God in action within evolution. I do. I don’t see your problem.

S., USA

Response (in point-by-point style):

It is nice to hear from you and I’m glad that you are willing to make conversation about presuppositions and evolutionary thoughts. My comments below are said with sincerity and kindness.

Evolution does not PRESUPPOSE no God.

First of all, evolution doesn’t “think”, “presuppose”, or otherwise have human qualities—that is called the fallacy of reification. It is a worldview based on human thought. It would be better to say “evolutionists do not…”

Darwin rejected the God of the Bible and placed his faith in errant ideas of man; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Strangely, Darwin, the father of the modern evolutionary models, disagrees with you in his book The Descent of Man. He makes it clear that man invented the concept of a God/spiritual realm. He even said:

“The same high mental faculties which first led man to believe in unseen spiritual agencies, then in fetishism, polytheism, and ultimately in monotheism, would infallibly lead him, as long as his reasoning powers remained poorly developed, to various strange superstitions and customs.”^[1]

Also saying:

“The idea of a universal and beneficent Creator does not seem to arise in the mind of man, until he has been elevated by long-continued culture.”^[2]

Claiming that man invented God makes this a godless philosophy from the start and clarifies what Darwin’s position was. It was essentially a rehash of Epicureanism [which was a Greek mythology that was evolutionary by nature with no God(s)] or the more recent version of Lamarckian evolution.

It merely attempts to discern the mechanisms of God’s universe.

Actually, that is what experimental science does (as opposed to historical science). Most fields of experimental science were developed by Bible-believing Christians, like us, to understand the laws of science God created.^[3]

What you are saying is that you find it believable that God created a universe filled with evidence to teach us about how the world works. But that evidence shouldn’t be believed.

Not so. We believe the evidence. We all have the same evidence but it doesn’t speak for itself.^[4] All evidence must be interpreted based on a belief system. As a Christian, I use the Bible to explain the evidence.

It would be illogical to think that God, who is perfect and who eye witnessed His creation, wouldn’t know how to explain it and that imperfect men who weren’t there would know more than God.

So when it comes to evidence, one’s faith needs to be in a perfect God or errantly in imperfect men to interpret it. I simply don’t have the “faith” in fallible men that some do.

Arguing against God and His Word never works out in the end; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Instead, we should believe a book written by primitive people

Primitive? I don’t accept your presupposition that man was originally primitive. The Bible is the proper presupposition, and it makes Adam out to be very intelligent. Adam had perfect DNA (“very good” in Genesis 1:31) and God programmed him with perfect knowledge (not infinite knowledge) so as to communicate with him right from the start. For more on Adam’s characteristics please see here.^[5]

Even looking into the past, there is evidence to confirm the biblical account that man has always been intelligent, not primitive, having ancient batteries, incredible ship building technology, and let’s not forget the pyramids!^[6]

with one foot still in a cave dwelling,

Again, I don’t accept your presupposition that man was primitive but as you probably know there are still people today living in caves and that doesn’t make them primitive—some have wifi and cable TV!

rather than everything our God-given human abilities can see in God’s universe around us every day.

I agree with the observations. In fact, Romans 1:20 makes it clear that God’s attributes can be seen in what is made so we are without excuse.

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse (Romans 1:20, NASB).

In essence, it is enough to condemn, but not enough to save. We all still need Jesus Christ.

First of all, evolution is simply a collection of observations.

Then why haven’t we observed these:

1. No one has been able to make life from nonlife (matter giving rise to life which is foundational to pond scum-to-people evolution).
2. No one has been able to change a single-celled life-form like an ameba into a cow or goat, etc.
3. No one has been able to observe and repeat the big bang (which is foundational to pond scum-to-people evolution).
4. We haven’t observed the billions of information-gaining mutations required to build the DNA strand to give rise to new kinds of life-forms.
5. Matter has never been observed to give rise to new information.

Evolution is clearly a worldview and more specifically it is a subset of the religion of Secular Humanism, in the same way creation is a subset of Christianity.

If you prefer, you can see the hand of God in action within evolution. I do.

You are confusing natural selection with evolution. Natural selection is good, observable science. In fact, natural selection was developed by Ed Blyth, a creationist, about 25 years before Darwin and is an excellent confirmation of God’s created kinds in Genesis.

Natural selection clearly shows dogs making dogs, cats making cats, weasels making weasels, etc. This is biblical. However, we don’t observe dogs giving rise to horses or mice giving rise to cats. Natural selection is not goo-to-you evolution.

I don’t see your problem.

Steve
USA

The issue is simple—you can either trust God’s Word or trust man’s ideas about the past. In whom will your faith be placed. God says:

And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him (Hebrews 11:6, NASB).

It is better to take refuge in the LORD Than to trust in man. (Psalm 118:8 NASB).

Our goal here isn’t to win or lose an argument, but to get people thinking, point people in the direction of Christ and His salvation and then disciple them as Jesus commanded in Matthew 28. I’m sure you’ve heard the “good news” of Jesus Christ before, but I’m not sure if you understand what this means.

The “good news” of being saved goes back to the “bad news” in Genesis. God originally created a perfect world (Genesis 1:31); there was no death and suffering (Genesis 1:29–30). Then man sinned against a perfect and holy God (Genesis 3).

God cursed the animals and the ground because of man and sentenced them to die (Genesis 3). It is due to man’s actions that sin and death entered the world. Now we are all sinners as a result and in need of a Savior (Romans 5:12).

When man sinned, God sacrificed animals (Genesis 3:21—coats of skins) to cover their sin because God commanded that sin is punishable by death (Genesis 2:17). This covering could only cover, not forgive and take away sins (Hebrews 9:22).

But God loved us enough to take that punishment upon Himself. He stepped into His creation as a perfect man (remaining fully God), Jesus Christ, to live and suffer and die a painful death—to be the final sacrifice to cover our sins for good and offer forgiveness (John 3:16).

For those who receive Jesus Christ, there will be salvation and a new heaven and new earth (Isaiah 65:17; Revelation 21:1). They will one day see a perfect world again with no pain and sorrow (Revelation 21:4)—the curse will be removed (Revelation 22:3). When you remove the reason for the gospel and replace it with goo-to-you evolution, it undermines the reason for Christ.

I want to encourage you to consider this. Kind regards in Christ,

Bodie

A sinner saved by greace

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.

His love of science was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields. Originally at Answers in Genesis; Edited; Republished by permission.

 

---

[1] Darwin, C., The Descent of Man,  Chapter 3, www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-descent-of-man/chapter-03.html

[2] Darwin, C., The Descent of Man,  Chapter 21, www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-descent-of-man/chapter-21.html

[3] Which scientists of the past believed in a Creator? Answers in Genesis website,  http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp#pastsci.

[4] Creation: Where’s the “proof?”, Ken Ham, December 1, 1999, Answers in Genesis website, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v22/n1/creation-proof.

[5] See also: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v13/n4/adam and is by Ken Ham.

[6] See: Ancient Civilizations and Modern Man, David Criswell, March 1, 1995, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v17/n2/ancient-civilizations, The large ships of antiquity, Larry Pierce, Answers in Genesis website, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v22/n3/ships, The Pyramids of Ancient Egypt, David Down, September 1, 2004, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v26/n4/pyramids-of-ancient-egypt. 

Chromosome 2 Fusion?

Chromosome 2 Fusion? 

(Semi-Technical)

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, November 21, 2025 (Donate)

Introduction

God created apes on Day 6 and man distinctly different on Day 6. The evolutionary religion doesn’t believe God on this, but have man evolving from great apes. As genetic studies and knowledge grew there was a new problem for the evolutionists.

Humans have 46 chromosomes (23 pairs of chromosomes), while great apes have 48 (24 pairs of chromosomes). This is what we expected if God created man and apes distinctly. But in the evolutionary framework, they needed to figure out how, if humans evolved from the ape-like ancestors, did man arrive at 46?

This is where the evolutionary storytelling begins. Because two ape chromosomes are “somewhat” similar in structure and gene order to human chromosome 2, evolutionists proposed that these two chromosomes fused in a common ancestor. They even renamed these chromosomes in apes (2A and 2B). Thus, the fusion idea was suggested to explain the chromosome number difference while maintaining an evolutionary model of shared ancestry.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Creationist Researchers Did Their Homework

The idea that human chromosome 2 formed through the fusion of two ancestral ape-like chromosomes has been presented as strong evidence for common ancestry between humans and apes like chimpanzees. However, the claim is not not that good when you look closely at the observable genomic evidence, particularly the alleged telomere–telomere fusion site, the supposed remnant centromere, and the functional genetic features found in the region.

I stand with creationists researchers who maintain that the fusion model relies heavily on evolutionary assumptions and does not correspond well with the structural and biochemical expectations of chromosome biology.

Evolutionists believe that human chromosome 2 formed when two ape-like chromosomes fused end to end about 0.9 million years ago, leaving behind a relic centromere and head-to-head telomeric sequences. This has never been observed to occur nor has it been repeated; thus, it is a belief system based in the religion of evolutionary humanism.

Even so, there are millions of nucleotide differences, multiple gene-order differences, structural rearrangements, regulatory changes, centromere mismatches, and telomere-structure discrepancies between ape chromosomes 2A and 2B and human chromosome 2. Millions of genomic changes in 0.9 million years should throw up red flags even on the evolutionary side.

Evidence Analysis

The evolutionary conclusion is premature, poorly supported, and inconsistent with what is actually found in the genome. Our objections generally fall under several main problems: (1) the telomere issue, (2) the centromere issue, (3) functional DNA problems, and (4) assumptions built into evolutionary reasoning.

Telomeres

A telomere is a protective DNA sequence made of repeated patterns located at the ends of chromosomes to prevent damage during cell division.

A primary, and devastating, problem for the fusion conjecture concerns the telomeric sequences located at the proposed fusion site. A genuine end-to-end fusion of two chromosomes should contain a large block of intact telomeric repeats in a head-to-head orientation.

Instead, the region contains only a small, highly degenerated cluster of repeats that is far shorter and more disorganized than expected. These repeats are fragmented, mutated, and embedded within sequences not characteristic of functional or structural telomeres. Thus, the evolutionary prediction failed. This level of degradation is not consistent with a historic fusion event.

Centromere

A centromere is the central region of a chromosome where sister chromatids (one side of a chromosome) are held together and where spindle fibers attach during cell division.

During an alleged fusion event, there should be two centromeres from two different previous chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 doesn’t have that. So, evolutionists look and try to interpret particular regions to be a remnant or vestigial secondary centromere.

And of course, this alleged secondary centromere provides a second major point of contention. Evolutionists assert that human chromosome 2 retains a primary functional centromere and a second, vestigial centromere from one of the chromosomes that supposedly fused.

The problem is that this alleged vestigial centromere bears little resemblance to a true centromere, lacking:

·        the characteristic alpha satellite structure

·        epigenetic markers

·        specific sequence organization required for centromeric activity

What this means is that it isn’t a remnant centromere at all. The region displays only sparse repetitive content that does not match with the structure of known centromeres, refuting its identification as a functional remnant of a prior chromosomal structure.

Making matters worse, is that the evidence is not simply a genomic scar with useless information but contains functional DNA. Portions of the alleged fusion site overlap with regulatory regions and other genetic features that appear to play active roles in gene expression. In other words, it is not useless nor vestigial but proper working and fully functional genes!

From a design-based perspective, the presence of such function indicates that the region was never a meaningless leftover from a fusion event but an important and useful part of the original human genome architecture.

A Fusion Should Have Been Eliminated And Not Passed Along

In addition to sequence-based concerns, there is a huge biological challenge. This challenge has to do with fixing a broken chromosomal fusion event and then have it spread throughout a population. This is pure arbitrary storytelling.  

Chromosomal fusions often cause massive reproductive problems, like reduced fertility, due to mismatched chromosome pairing during meiosis. For a fused chromosome to spread throughout an ancestral population, multiple individuals, via dumb luck, would have needed to inherit and reproduce successfully with the same rare mutation. This scenario is just outrageous and speculative storytelling.

Evolutionary Framework Assumptions

The interpretive framework surrounding an alleged chromosome 2 fusion is influenced by a commitment to the evolutionary religion. Similarities between human and ape chromosomes are treated as evidence of ancestry rather than potentially reflecting common design.

Common design is rather a confirmation of a common designer, not ancestry. God, of course, being the Designer in this instance which is what we expect when we start with God’s Word as authoritative.  

Conclusion

When discrepancies arise—such as the degraded telomeric sequences or the lack of a recognizable secondary centromere—evolutionary decay is invoked as the explanation. This approach puts the arbitrary evolutionary assumptions into both the interpretation and the justification.

The chromosome 2 fusion argument does not withstand careful scrutiny. The fusion site lacks the intact telomeric signatures expected from a true chromosomal fusion, the supposed vestigial centromere fails to match the structural and epigenetic requirements of a centromere, the region contains functional DNA inconsistent with being a mutation-derived remnant, and the population-level feasibility of fixing such a fusion event remains questionable. These combined issues are a huge problem for the evolutionary camp.  Human chromosome 2 is best understood not as a product of ancient fusion but as a uniquely designed component of the human genome.

Recommended Reading:

·        Jeffrey P. Tomkins, October 16, 2013; Answers Research Journal 6 (2013): 367–375. https://answersresearchjournal.org/alleged-human-chromosome-2-fusion-site/.

·        John Sanford, Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, FMS Publications, 2014.

·        Avery Foley Unraveling the Chromosome 2 Connection, March 21, 2021, Answers Magazine, https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/unraveling-chromosome-2-connection/.

·        Jean Lightner, Chromosome Tales and the Importance of a Biblical Worldview, Answers in Depth, June 18, 2014, https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/dna-similarities/chromosome-tales-and-importance-biblical-worldview/.

·        Ken Ham and Bodie Hodge, Glass House, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2019.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.  

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children. 

 

Whale Evolution?

Whale Evolution?

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, November 11, 2025 (Donate)

Introduction

Whale evolution is almost taken as established fact in textbooks, museums, and media. It is a big deal because it is a mammal living, and brilliantly designed, for the deep oceans. Intriguingly, mammals almost exclusively live on land with minor exceptions like dolphins, porpoises, manatees, and whales. Whales, due to their size and popularity, are often the focal point for discussion over aquatic mammalian evolution.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

The evolutionists must have whales evolve from land creatures because it is far too outrageous to have parallel evolution in ocean with mammalian features. In other words, the dumb luck of whales (and other mammals of the sea) evolving strictly from the aquatic ancestors and arriving at most of the same bodily features as mammalian land animals seems too much like a myth and fable that evolutionists even reject it out of hand.   

So, this brings us to the hot topic—how did whales get from the land to the sea? What evidence is there and how good is that evidence? 

Fossil Evidence

From the onset, the evolutionary account of whale origins is built on speculation rather than solid evidence. Simply put, the fossil record lacks genuine intermediates between land mammals and modern whales.

Instead of a clear, step-by-step lineage, a set of unrelated animals are interpreted to fit an evolutionary narrative. Textbooks often present a "convincing" series of transitional forms—such as Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, Rodhocetus, and Basilosaurus—but fail to reveal to readers that this lineup depends heavily on artistic reconstructions and assumptions about how these animals may have lived, their size, or that they are fully functioning creatures of entirely different kinds.

When the full fossil evidence is evaluated closely, these creatures do not demonstrate a smooth transformation from land to sea but instead show distinct, fully functional species with no verifiable genetic or developmental links between them. In laymen’s terms, think of it like this. If someone came up and said whales evolved and they put a rat, a dog, a horse, and then an hippo in front of you and told you they were the missing links for whales, would you believe them? No.

One of the central objections concerns the claim that whales evolved from land-dwelling hoofed mammals, possibly related to artiodactyls or even-toed ungulates (think of domestic animals like cow, sheep, camels and hogs or wild creatures like antelope, wildebeest, or pronghorns). There are major disagreements among evolutionists themselves about which group might be ancestral—earlier candidates such as mesonychids (large hoofed extinct mammals thought to be carnivorous) have been abandoned, and newer hypotheses are trying to link whales to hippos.

This shifting story is evidence of a weak idea built on arbitrary inference rather than observation. In other words, they don’t really know. From a creationist perspective, this is not a problem. We didn’t expect these creatures to be interrelated but distinct created kinds and a proper understanding of the evidence is a confirmation of what we expect in light of Scripture.

These supposed transitions require enormous structural and physiological innovations—such as modifications in locomotion, breathing, reproduction, and sensory systems—that cannot plausibly arise through small, undirected and random mutations preserved by natural selection. We simply didn’t observe any data of novel (technically, nascent) characteristic-forming, new functional features. Molecular data, anatomy, and fossil placement often conflict with the evolutionary story, making it incoherent.

Functional Complexity

The functional complexity of whale anatomy is a good reason to reject land-animal-to-whale evolution due to the whale’s specialized design features—its echolocation system, baleen feeding structures, tail flukes, blowhole, and specialized ear bones—would have to appear fully formed to work. A half-developed echolocation organ or blowhole would provide no survival benefit and thus could not be preserved through selection since the creature would die or be a serious detriment to their system.

Consider that the intricate “melon” organ used by dolphins for echolocation and the ability to dive to immense depths cannot be explained through small incremental changes. The absence of credible, fully functional intermediates means that whales and dolphins were created as such in their created kind (baramin), already equipped for aquatic life.

Therefore, it should be obvious to conclude that the whale’s unique features are products of functional design, not gradual evolution. This is not a problem for an all-powerful God who designed their fully functioning ancestors during Creation Week. Whales and other sea creatures were created specially by God on Day 5. 

Pakicetus

Another key point is that the fossil evidence does not align with the evolutionary story presented in textbooks. For instance, Pakicetus was originally described in the 1980s from a partial skull and interpreted as a semi-aquatic “walking whale.” However, later discoveries of more complete skeletons show that Pakicetus had long limbs, functional legs, and terrestrial ear bones—features consistent with a fully-featured, land-dwelling animal—not a missing link.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Its reclassification as a “proto-whale” was driven more by evolutionary religious fervor than by data.

Ambulocetus

Similarly, Ambulocetus—often depicted and assumed as an amphibious creature that could walk and swim—was known initially from fragmentary remains. Much of its reconstruction, including its supposed swimming style and diving behavior, rested on arbitrary artistic conjecture rather than fossil evidence.

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

After further finds, Ambulocetus looks more like an extinct land mammal than a genuine transition between land mammals and whales.

Rodhocetus

The fossil known as Rodhocetus also comes under scrutiny. Early artistic reconstructions gave Rodhocetus a whale-like fluke and tail based on evolutionary assumptions, yet later data found no fossil evidence for these features! It shows the evolutionary religious story’s influence on the artists.  

Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

The pelvis and limb bones indicate some semi-aquatic ability, but nothing like the fully marine features seen in whales.

Basilosaurus

Basilosaurus, a large serpentine marine mammal, is another fossil frequently portrayed as an intermediate. However, Basilosaurus was fully aquatic, with small hind limbs likely used for reproduction or stabilization rather than walking (this is a common design feature today). It, therefore, cannot serve as a true link between land and sea mammals, since it is already a sea creature.

The dramatic differences in size among these supposed “transitional” species is also a huge problem. Pakicetus happens to be the size of a wolf and yet, the Basilosaurus is gigantic reaching about 65 feet (~20 meters) long. This is massive problem for such variation undermines the claim of a single lineage. Interestingly, each of these fossils in question all died the same year—being buried in the Flood of Noah. So from a biblical perspective, they are not ancestral in their forms, but coexisted and died in the same catastrophe. 

The 65 foot Basilosaurus; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)

Biomechanics

In addition to fossil concerns, the plausibility of changing a land mammal into a fully aquatic whale is a biomechanical problem. Whales exhibit major differences in reproduction—giving birth underwater, nursing with specialized mammary glands, and having internalized genitals designed for streamlining.

Their respiratory systems must manage deep-diving pressure, oxygen storage, and voluntary breathing, none of which are present in land mammals. Their inner ears are encased in specialized dense bone (the involucrum) for underwater hearing, their tails move vertically instead of horizontally, and their spines and flippers are uniquely adapted for propulsion through water.

As a creationist, we contend that each of these features would require multiple simultaneous genetic and developmental changes, coordinated across entire body systems. Undirected random mutations and selection cannot achieve this level of integrated innovation. It’s simply a fairy tale.

A Philosophical Consideration

Any shared design features are better explained by a common Designer (Jesus Christ) who used similar structures for similar functions, not by evolutionary modification from a common ancestor. This shows the brilliance of an all-knowing God.

Consider the philosophical underpinnings of the evolutionary story. The evolutionist asserts that evolutionary scientists interpret evidence within a naturalistic framework that excludes the possibility of design or creation from the outset. This worldview bias causes scientists to interpret every new discovery in terms of common ancestry, even when the data are fragmentary or ambiguous.

Take note of the big picture. Evolution is assumed first, and the fossils are then interpreted through that lens. To make artist reconstructions based on evolution—which is then used as “proof” of evolution. The reality is that this a vicious circular argument and thus, fallacious.  

Where are the massive numbers of missing links? If this was occurring over millions of years, then where are all the intermediates? There should be millions of them! Instead, there are only a handful and very questionable creatures that simply don’t “fit the expected trend”.

The supposed “transitional” fossils appear suddenly in the record, without the numerous intermediate stages one would expect if slow transformation occurred. The absence of gradual change through geological layers makes more sense of rapid burial during catastrophic events, of the global Flood recorded in Genesis.

When fossils and biological systems are viewed through a biblical worldview (i.e., God is always right), these findings make much more sense. Whales, in this view, were created as fully formed marine mammals during the Creation Week, and their specialized design features reflect the Creator’s intent and foresight—even in a sin-cursed and broken world.

The evolutionary story of whale origins should be rejected on multiple grounds: the absence of clearly transitional fossils, the functional impossibility of half-formed systems, contradictions between fossil and molecular data, constant reclassification of supposed ancestors, and the enormous anatomical and physiological gaps that must be crossed.

Conclusion

Each fossil candidate in the chain—Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, Rodhocetus, Basilosaurus—is argued to be either fully terrestrial or fully aquatic, never truly intermediate. These animals were distinct kinds, not evolutionary stages, and that the whale’s complex design confirms an intelligent Creator God rather than undirected evolutionary processes.

The fossil series often touted as proof of whale evolution is artificially assembled from animals that are not chronologically connected. No direct ancestor-descendant relationships are demonstrable. Fossils are drawn from different locations and time periods (by the evolutionary story), then arranged to tell an evolutionary whale of a tale. 

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council. 

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.