In this blog post, we will examine whether living fossils can actually serve as evidence against the theory of evolution, or if they are, in fact, evidence that supports it.
The term “living fossil” refers to a species that resembles ancient organisms in appearance and has no living relatives today. Such living fossils are often cited by creationists as evidence that the theory of evolution is wrong. For example, they argue that since the ginkgo tree or the cockroach look exactly the same as their fossil counterparts, evolution has not occurred. But are living fossils truly evidence that the theory of evolution is wrong? To put it simply, this claim is completely false. Let’s examine why.
There are three major flaws in the claim that living fossils are evidence against the theory of evolution. First, evolution is not a law that requires change to occur. People who make this erroneous claim often misunderstand the theory of evolution as a process that begins with single-celled organisms like amoebas, progresses through fish, amphibians, and reptiles, and ultimately results in humans. This is why they sometimes ask the misguided question, “When will monkeys become humans?” However, this stems from a major misunderstanding of evolutionary theory. According to evolutionary theory, all current species are the result of evolution over more than 3 billion years from a common ancestor of life on Earth. In other words, all current species have evolved in the same way over the same period of time. E. coli, lizards, and cats have all evolved over the same period of time. So why haven’t they become human? This is because the theory of evolution does not claim that all species must undergo changes to ultimately become human. In evolutionary theory, there is no law stating that species must change toward a specific goal. However, since life began with the simplest forms, if changes occur later, they are generally more likely to result in larger and more complex forms. In most cases, species evolve in ways that favor survival based on environmental factors such as the surrounding terrain, climate, and predator-prey relationships. The key point is that species change into forms that are advantageous for survival by adapting to their environment. Conversely, this means that if a change is not advantageous or is even detrimental to survival, the species may not change at all. Therefore, species inhabiting places where environmental changes are minimal, such as the deep sea, or species whose current form is highly advantageous for survival, may remain virtually unchanged over long periods of time. Examples include the coelacanth, which inhabits the deep sea, and the cockroach, which is highly adapted for survival. Thus, the existence of living fossils can be fully explained by evolutionary theory.
The second reason is that living fossils cannot be judged to be identical to ancient species. Those who reject evolutionary theory believe that living fossils undermine it and search diligently for them. In fact, in the book *Atlas of Creation* by creationist Harun Yahya, living fossils are mentioned in as many as 1,397 entries. They argue that the fact that these organisms have remained unchanged over long periods of time is evidence that living beings are unchanging and that evolution does not occur. However, there is not a single species of living fossil for which we can definitively state that it has not evolved. This is because fossils can only reveal the external appearance of ancient organisms. Fossils alone cannot reveal an organism’s genes, biochemical systems, or immune responses. Therefore, even if a living fossil resembles an ancient species in appearance, we cannot be certain that it has remained completely unchanged in aspects that cannot be judged by outward appearance. In fact, it is more difficult for no changes to occur at the genetic level. It is a well-known fact that errors occur during DNA replication, causing changes in DNA even after just one generation.
Furthermore, species referred to as “living fossils” are often arbitrarily grouped into the same species solely because of their similar appearance. In reality, they have evolved into quite diverse forms. For example, cockroaches have evolved into various sizes and shapes, with approximately 4,000 species existing today, which are quite different from the giant cockroach species of the past. They have also become significantly smaller in size, and the physical structures of modern cockroach species have become more complex.
The final reason is that most of the organisms found in fossils no longer exist today. Simply put, with the exception of a tiny handful of living fossils, the vast majority of ancient species preserved as fossils are no longer alive today. This poses a significant problem for creationists. They completely ignore this fact. Furthermore, this is why it is so difficult to find living fossils, even though they are desperately sought to disprove the theory of evolution. Those who reject evolution argue that all species were created and have remained unchanged to this day. They also believe that fossils were formed all at once by the Great Flood approximately 4,000 years ago. This raises a question: how many species were actually wiped out by the Great Flood? According to their argument, since Noah saved every species by bringing a pair of each onto the ark, the conclusion is that no species went extinct. If that is the case, how can we explain the fossilized organisms that are no longer alive today? The more creationists claim that living fossils are evidence against the theory of evolution, the more they end up emphasizing species that exist only as fossils, thereby weakening their own logic. At present, the only theory that can explain the tiny minority of living fossils and the vast majority of species found only as fossils is the theory of evolution.
Through the three points above, we have confirmed that living fossils cannot serve as evidence against the theory of evolution; rather, they can serve as evidence in support of it. Furthermore, we have seen that the evolutionary perspective on living fossils is more valid than the creationist perspective. However, this evidence alone is insufficient to definitively conclude that the theory of evolution is “right” or “wrong.” This is because neither the theory of evolution nor its opposing stance can be universally observed or experimentally verified. In reality, unless a time machine is invented, we cannot know exactly how the existence of living fossils came about. However, it cannot be denied that, as of now, the theory of evolution is the most plausible and scientific theory. Although the theory of evolution currently relies on uncertain factors such as chance and natural selection, over time, it will be able to clearly explain the evolutionary phenomena of all living organisms, including living fossils.
