For those who haven’t listened to it, I encourage UD readers to check out The Incorrigible Dr. Berlinski. I paraphrase some of his comments below the fold.
The whale, which is a mammal after all… If its origins were land-based originally, we have some crude way of assessing the scope of the project of transformation. Let’s put it in vividly accessible terms: You’ve got a cow. You want to teach it how to live all of its life in the open ocean, still retaining its air-breathing characteristics. What do you have to do from an engineering point of view to change a cow into a whale? If the same question were raised with respect to a car, and you asked what it would take to turn a car into a submarine, we would understand immediately that it would be a massive project of redesign. Virtually every feature of the cow must be changed and adapted, and many of these features must be altered in simultaneous coordination.
Darwinists continually complain that objections to the blind-watchmaker thesis are based on religious fundamentalism, but examples like this give the lie to such presumptions. Even given all of Allen MacNeill’s stochastic sources of variation, the transformation of a land-dwelling mammal into a whale by such means should stretch credulity beyond the breaking point for any rational person.