Defending the Tale of the Whale

@RyanBebej reviews and addresses the misconceptions in the new series of the Discovery Institute’s videos attempting to debunk whale evolution evidence. Grateful to have an expert like him to explain things for people like me!


Does the Disco Institute have an alternative explanation for whales? Did God the Intelligent Designer just drop new whales in the ocean?

1 Like

I might mention that I love whale evolution. In 2013 I saw a fantastic exhibition called Whales: Giants of the Deep which was developed and presented by the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. It featured more than 20 skulls and skeletons from various whale species (ancient and modern) and showcases many rare specimens. It included a real skeleton of a male sperm whale measuring 58 feet long (or about 18 feet longer than a school bus); etc. What struck me was the ridiculous tiny vestigial hind limbs of the Basilosaurus.

I saw this traveling exhibition at the AMNH. Just the logistics of moving around these fossils was pretty amazing to think about.

1 Like

Thanks for posting this!
Due to the vast topic of evolution, it helps greatly to focus in on a species that has ‘strong’ evidence.
That said, to the novice whale evolution hardly comes across as 'overwhelming’to me. E.g. On a scale of convincingness; On the high side, we are convinved that ‘Dinosaus’ existed due to overwhelming fossil finds etc.
The transitial fossils that show the hind legs are great, but it is hardly ‘amazing’ when i consider all the stuff that needed to change for a species to transition from land to water, and to continue to be out there right now. To know that the current blue whale is the largest living ‘animal’ ever known in all of history, is gobsmacking.
So, insert EC as a reasonable conclusion i guess.
I find evolution a bit like asking, why did God create dinosaus? I need to be creative to come up with some ideas.
Anyway, just having a ramble.

I’ll read this for sure in the morning when I wake up. When I saw the title, i completely thought this was a defense of Jonah being literal xd.

Well, it’s a good piece which talks about the uncertainty over the period of evolution, but why and how do you think it justifies creationism?

Are you talking about the DI video this article is critiquing or the BioLogos article? If the former, the DI is all about throwing shade on evolution, while insisting it’s not defending creationism, so that is to be expected from them.

I was talking about the article. I went through the whole of it and 2-3 related links of the author, maybe I misinterpreted by combining the two articles. I’ll go through them once again and get back if I find something problematic.

I am reminded of an article Dawkins wrote:

The sad part is that for every fossil we find there are two more gaps.

This seems common with DI arguments. They miss the purpose and practice of science and scientists, claiming that any gap equates to no evidence at all. And like in the whale video, no other alternative is offered. A tactic that is used, as seen in The Genesis Impact movie, is that a non- related theory is brought up to prove evolution false. Scientific communities work via peer review, and if someone who disagrees cannot propose a more effective experiment or bring up new evidence using their own experiments that holds up to the peer review process, how do I say this…in the words of Mace Windu,

“Take a seat.”

Seeing the amount of people who cheer on the DI videos and articles and proceed to slam evolution, I think it’s important to point out the weaknesses of this approach to people who share it as evidence.


“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6

This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.