Congrats Rob Byers - Convergent Marsupialism in Australia is boon to Hyper-Evolution!

(George) #1

In the eccentric article I link to below, the author wonders how the ecology of Earth would be affected by the magical ability to extinguish 50% of all life with the click of the finger. In the discussion, the writer comments on a strange development in Australia in the 1890’s: the Australian dung beetles had evolved to process marsupial dung … and they had no interest in the placental sheep dung that was being dropped all over the place.

This triggered a “massive” surge in fly populations! Imagine the plague!!! All this is very understandable under an evolutionary scenario. But in a Young Earth scenario, there wouldn’t be enough time for dung beetles to so exclusively adapt to “only marsupial dung”!

Would this mean that not only did the marsupials have to race to Australia to occupy the vast territory before it moved out to the middle of the ocean … but that even specialized dung beetles had to race to Australia?

No… not to the same degree. Beetles can fly! But the whole situation is starting to sound more and more ridiculous!

" . . . insects are also important cleanup crews, dealing with materials like corpses or dung that other animals can’t break down. There’s a whole community of dung-feeding insects, and when this community is absent, then you end up knee deep in dung,” Berenbaum says. A situation like this actually happened to Australia in the 1890s."

“Colonists brought non-marsupial mammals like sheep to the continent, and the local dung beetles couldn’t digest their different poop. The accumulation of feces and accompanying flies caused a massive problem until a Hungarian ecologist named George Bornemissza recognized the cause and started importing dung beetles that could process the waste. Thanos’ snap could cause a similar situation worldwide.”

Read more: If Thanos Actually Wiped Out Half of All Life, How Would Earth Fare in the Aftermath? | Science | Smithsonian


(Robert Byers) #2

Marsupials did not race or relay to australia. The creatures that migrated to Australia etc were just the same as others but upon arriving in far places from the ark, in order to increase reproduction due to a limited timeline before the water rose separating places,THEY developed marsupial traits. so the bigs there could only adapt to them or die. They didn’t evolve anymore then the marsupials did. This is not a good criticism.

(George) #3


Your explanation would be wonderful except for one little thing… if Australia is the BIRTHPLACE of marsupialism… how did they get from Australia TO North and South America?


Sorry, Mr. Contestant. That’s the buzzer. Time is out, and your answer is wrong.

1 Like

That doesn’t match up to the genetic evidence. Human and dog genes are more similar than dog and marsupial genes. In fact, any two placental species have more similar DNA than a placental and marsupial species.

1 Like
(Robert Byers) #5

I just said it is not the birthplace. The Americas marsupials are no different then the Australian ones. the same mechanism took place. they were not less/more related then any creatures on the planet.

(Robert Byers) #6

That makes my point. using dNA to make conclusions about creatures is a wrong trail. Saying we are more alike to dogs then dogs to marsupial dogs is unressonable. RATHER the conclusion should be that as bodyplans change so does the genetic makeup. marsupialism came later. so it messed all the 'marsupials" DNA up.
There is no reason /evidence (except lack of imagination/options) to say dNA is a trail and extrapolating back is a trail. DNA is just a parts department score. marsupials changed some parts and this changed all the dna score. cause and effect.
Marsupials are clearly just the same creatures as elsewhere but with minor changes. This then fits fine with ARK dispersal.


Why is it wrong, and why is it unreasonable?

Where is the evidence for this?

If they are just minor changes, then why do we see big differences in DNA?

(George) #8


So … not only are you proposing Hyper-Evolution in Australia (where mammals changed from placental to marsupial in less than 6000 years)… but you also say it happened the same way in 2 different regions of the world! The placental creatures of Australia, and of South America, and of North America … are all highly related physically and genetically!

So that’s Convergent Hyper-Evolution or Speciation!

You are brilliant, @Robert_Byers. You have saved YEC’s from total oblivion… by proposing Speciation even faster than Evolutionists propose!

(Neil Rickert) #9

Somehow, kangaroos don’t look at all like the same deer but with minor changes.

(George) #10

Hey… don’t spoil the man’s mojo!

Opossums in the Americas must look like SOMETHING!!!

(Neil Rickert) #11

At least they can live on in comedy routines.

(Robert Byers) #12

Thats my point. the new bodyplan changes the DNA and this changes the whole dna completly. Its a better option. The dna is not so fixed but is tied into itself intimately.
Anyways the dominating evidence is that marsupials are just placentals with minor changes. So the dna concepts must give in to this greater truth.

(Robert Byers) #13

Its not hyuper evolution. nothing to do with unlikely/impossible claims of selection on mutation plus time equals BIOLOGY.
Instead creatures, like people, have innate mechanisms in the biology to change bodyplans instantly upon thresholds being crossed for preservation. Especially back in the old days when likely bodies were more healthy.
Yes there was no difference between marsupial morphing in australia or the americas. Same mechanism.
No the creatures are not alike save in marsupial traits. in fact its a curious point WHERE THEY say marsupial cats not only converged to bodyplans like placental cats but separately into cats iin the two Areas. Aust/americas.

(Robert Byers) #14

Kangaroos are just bigger wallabys in a spectrum of sizes. This is common in the fossil record for many creatures. looking ONLY at living examples is not accurate sampling of the former diversity.
A walliby might just be a type of creature from which rabbits come. I don’t think its related to deers but one not impossible that deers on the planet are just a type of creature within a kind.

(Retired Professor & Minister.) #15

Wow. Tell us more about these instantaneous-morphing creatures! Are there any Youtube videos where I can observe animals in peril instantly changing their body plans? Cartoons don’t count.

Robert, tell us about the evidence which supports your outlandish claim.

(Robert Byers) #16

Conception to birth to maturity is a morphing experience. What happens there is a hint at what happens in biology in other ways. many creatures morph their colours in the sea.
However its people which are the obvious case. Even evolutionists can’t imagine a slow bodyplan change into different colours and other traits. Populations must of changed instantly. In fact PE was created to explain this because the fossil record never showed slow evolution.

(Retired Professor & Minister.) #17

One more time, Robert: What is the evidence which supports your outlandish claim?

(George) #18

So… like I said @Robert_Byers,

you have just gone on the record for:

Hyper-Fast form of Evolution, performed not just in Australia, but in the Americas too, and… it is CONVERGENT Hyper-Evolution!

I admire your boldness… what you assert as stubbornness in your opposition to conventional Evolution is now more than compensated by your willingness to assert Evolution faster than anything we’ve ever imagined… and you include “convergence” in your thinking! Truly outstanding.

(Robert Byers) #19

i don’t assert evolution or convergence by Darwinian mechanism. Yes biooogical change and yes the same results. in human colour or echolocationism amongst segregated creatures or arctic while colouration or thousands of things THERE is a limited number of options in a common blueprint…
Its not hyper if its natural.
Nobody sees the mechanism and action but only results.
however its knock down clear marsupials are just the same dumb critters as everywhere else on the planet, back in those days, with minor variation due to other reassons. i say just to increae reproduction and some local issues.
further one will find this ACROSS THE BOARD in other orders of creatures. Like creodonts and litopoterns.
i wrote a essay on it it called “Post Flood Marsupial Migration Explained” by Robert Byers. Just google.

(George) #20


I don’t think you understand your own scenario:

If the flood happened around 4,000 yeas ago, that would mean you have less than 4,000 years for placental mammals, in 2 different regions (the Americas vs. Australia) hyper-evolving into new species (i.e. marsupial mammals)… and that evolutionary forces on these mammals was so similar that the hyper-evolution was convergent (which makes oppossum more like the mammals of Australia than like the placental mammals in the Americas).

Congratulations… you are such a hybrid YEC, you have turned 180 degrees in your theology!


I have renamed the thread in your honor!