So, it is not every day that I get to start a topic about one of my great loves on BioLogos… that’s right, insects! 
(Security, lock the doors).
I came across this article on Naturalis Historia showing media buzz around the discovery of a fossilized mosquito which contains the remnant products of a blood meal in its abdomen.
Here is a summary from Naturalis Historia about the discovery for those who don’t want to read the whole article:
What scientists found was a high abundance of iron and iron containing compounds in the fossilized abdomen of a female mosquito and a lack of similar iron compounds in the male fossil abdomens. Did they find blood cells? Absolutely not!
They found evidence of porphyrin molecules which they reasonably deduced are the degraded remnants of former hemoglobin molecules which are found in red blood cells of vertebrates. Using some very precise instruments that allow them to examine tiny portions of the fossil they were able to show that these iron-beading organic molecules were found in the abdomens but not in the surrounding rock matrix. So not only are the scientists involved NOT claiming to have found red blood cells in the fossil they aren’t even saying they have found hemoglobin but rather only the incredibly stable biomolecular remains (porphyrin) of a small portion of the hemoglobin molecule found in blood cells.
And here is a link to the published research for anyone who wants to go down the rabbit hole.
Unsurprisingly, said media buzz includes our best buds over at AiG. The first half of the AIG article by Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, MD, is a mixed bag. On the one hand, she writes in the introduction that:
the Kishenehn Paleobiology Collection’s most unique specimen to date is a fossilized female mosquito confirmed to have a bulging abdomen full of blood.
That all sounds very Jurrasic Park come Creation Museum, but as you can see from the NH quote above that “confirmed to have a bulging abdomen full of blood” is patently inaccurate. Granted, later on she does clarify saying:
How do scientists know the tiny fossilized mosquito’s abdomen contains blood? Comparing her to a male mosquito fossil from the same location, they found the two components of vertebrate hemoglobin preserved in the female. Hemoglobin, the oxygen-carrying substance in blood, contains iron bound to organic molecules called porphyrins. Both iron and porphyrins are localized in the female’s distended abdomen.
Nevertheless, what is far more concerning to me is the conclusion of the article. Here, Dr. Mitchell, MD, writes:
The sudden catastrophic burial of this mosquito and countless other creatures beneath tons of water-borne sediment associated with the global Flood explains the findings far more believably and is supported by the biblical historical record. Much of the fossil record is a record of the order of burial of organisms as their habitats were destroyed.
Ok, indulge me a moment, I wonder when you last took a good look at a mosquito? Preferably, one that you haven’t smushed? Well, next time you do you’ll notice that other than being incredibly intracate, they also look incredibly fragile. And for good reason, because they are fragile. A mosquito is essential a hypodermic needle attached to a balloon with wings, eyes, and legs. The more the mosquito feeds, the more distended the abdomen becomes, and the so the more fragile it becomes. Strangely, Dr. Mitchell’s article even acknowledges this fact when she quotes Dale Greenwalt and Ralph Harbach as saying:
“The insect had to take a blood meal, be blown to the water’s surface, and sink to the bottom of a pond or similar structure to be quickly embedded in fine anaerobic sediment, all without disruption of its fragile distended blood-filled abdomen.” Emphases added.
So you will have to forgive me for my, frankly, beggars belief that Dr. Mitchell, MD, would conclude that “The sudden catastrophic burial of this mosquito… beneath tons of water-borne sediment associated with the global Flood explains the findings far more believably”. That kind of force and mass bearing down on an overfilled blood-balloon with wings would vaporise the mosquito rather than fossilise it.
For comparison, imagine filling a water bomb from the kitchen tap, the more the balloon fills with water the thinner the rubber becomes until eventually, it tears. It is the same principle. Now imagine you fill that water balloon to bursting point, place it at the bottom of the Hoover Dam, and then explode the dam. All that concrete and water comes crashing down on your little balloon… would you look at that scene at expect to find your balloon preserved under all the sediment and rubble when the water subsides?
Look, cards on the table, I’m not a professional palaeontologist or entomologist, but I do believe that one does not need to be either of those to see that something is very wrong with the conclusion being drawn in this article and how the evidence is being utilised. Especially, if someone thinks that a global catastrophic flood is a plausible explanation for the origins of a mosquito fossil.
I was recently reminded of this AIG cartoon from back in the day:
WIthout being cute, it strikes me that if you have to do all kinds of gymnastics to makes sense of mosquito fossilisation in your creation account in Genesis, you’re doing it wrong.
Wrapping up this brain dump, I would love to hear the thoughts of…
-
some of our resident ologists on how a “sudden catastrophic burial of… creatures beneath tons of water-borne sediment associated with the global Flood” would impact the chance of fossilisation occurring for another organism?
-
Some of our resident YECs, which explanation of the mosquito fossilisation do you find most convincing and why?
-
Anyone else who fancies wading in on this one.
NB: I really wanted to call this thread ‘Bl***dy Mosquitos are causing a buzz for palaeontologists!’ but thought better of it.