In what ways could finding a live plesiosaur be evidence for creation?

Question

It was in a section in answers in genesis which said creationists should not use the argument that a dead plesiosaur was found, as it was a basking shark.

But how could a plesiosaur be evidence for creation?

Answer 1

it couldn't just a coelocanth can't

just because something didn't die doesn't mean it was created or that evolution is wrong.. it just means none have been found ad all the other evidence (fossils etc) didn't show a living one

Answer 2

You have stumbled into a long-standing feud between the Creationists at answersingenesis, and Creationist Kent Hovind (a.k.a. "Dr. Dino").

Kent Hovind is famous for many things, including his claim that dinosaurs still roam the earth, and that reports of the catch of a plesiosaur in a fishing net is evidence that the scientists are wrong about the dinosaurs being long extinct.  Hovind's argument (if I understand it right) is that if dinosaurs are shown to still exist, then the scientists are wrong about them having gone extinct 65 million years ago, and in fact the dinosaurs are contemporary animals ... so the scientists are also wrong about the age of the earth.    

[Aside:  It's worth mentioning two things.   First, plesiosaurs are not dinosaurs.   And second, the absence of long-extinct aquatic animals like plesiosaurs is a particular problem for Creationism.  Their explanation for the absence of dinosaurs, despite the plenfiful fossil evidence that they once existed, is that these are all animals that did not make it onto Noah's Ark, and thus perished in the Flood.   However, since plesiosaurs were aquatic, there is no explanation for why they would have perished in the Flood, while all the other aquatic animals (from sharks, to dolphins, to freshwater trout, to goldfish) survived.]

Answersingenesis considers Kent Hovind to be an embarassment to the Creationist cause ... because his claims are *so* extreme and bizarre, and his tactics *so* intellectually dishonest.   (The fact that Kent Hovind is serving time in jail for tax fraud doesn't help much either ... not exactly a pristine image of honesty and integrity.)   Things got so bad that AiG put together its list of "Arguments We Think Creationists Should NOT Use", which you seem to have found.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/are...

Most of which are specifically addressing favorite Kent Hovind arguments (see last source, below).

However, most scientists consider the people at answersingenesis to be almost as bad as Kent Hovind ... as they engage in many of the same tactics, and make the same kind of unverifiable claims.

Answer 3

I don't see how -- unless it showed up in the middle of someone's landlocked swimming pool or small pond.

If it's found in an ocean, or in a really murky large lake, then it's just evidence that there's a population of plesiosaurs that don't hang out near people and/or are pretty good at remaining hidden.

Answer 4

Creationists, in this case, rely on the Fallacy of Necessity.

Science believes that there was a major mass-extinction event ~65 million years ago that closed off the cretaceous. During this mass extinction it is believed that we lost over 90% of the species, likely in a single cataclysmic event.

The discovery of a living (or recently living) plesiosaur would, in the mind of a creationist, negate the theory of the mass extinction using the argument that if part of the theory is wrong, the whole theory is wrong.

This is a fallacy of necessity. Science has never said that ALL species were lost, just most. Finding that some cretaceous era plesiosaurs survived does not have any significant impact on the evidence supporting the K-T Extinction Event.

Answer 5

It would not be an argument for creation, it would simply mean that a population of plesiosaurs had survived the extinction of the other dinosaurs.

Some creationists might try to make mileage out of it by claiming that it discredits the scientists who said dinosaurs were extinct. Something similar happened with the coelacanth, a fish which was thought to have been extinct for millions of years, then turned up in a fisherman's nets.

It is extremely unlikely that we could have missed a surviving population of plesiosaurs though!