I think what "makes sense" depends on what a person values the highest; young Earth creationists seem to value preserving their particular, fallible, human-derived way of reading the Bible higher than finding an interpretation that is consistent both with Christianity and real world data.  That's just my take on it.

Some kinds of snakes have remnants of legs as well.

May 9, 2012 -- 6:42PM, 57 wrote:

May 9, 2012 -- 9:01AM, christzen wrote:

They do,you know.The hind leg bones are just concealed withing the tissue and don't extend outside the body.So the question is,why?Why have leg bones when you don't have actual legs?

The scientific answer is evolutionary adaptation.Whales are mammals that evolved from land based mammals to live in water,and in doing so gradually adapted to a more streamlined body suitable for swimming rather than walking.But the leg bones of the ancestors didn't fall off or go away,they were just absorbed into the soft tissue of the body.But they are still there.

The creationist answer is God did it.But this answer begs the question of why.Why create an animal from scratch that has never lived on land with leg bones hidden within it's body?

Does it really make more sense for creationists to look at an animal that breathes air with land based lungs even though it lives in water,is warm blooded when fish are cold blooded,and has leg bones like land based mammals,and decide that God made it this way for some weird reason rather than explore the possibility that it evolved to life in the water from an amphibious mammal?

Do tell us how mutations added up and morphed into the spout. 

Actually,the question is...why would a Creator create a whale with hind leg bones that are worthless and are nestled inside the tissue of the whale.If you feel capable,please offer an answer.If you do not,then move along and let someone more qualified to speak for creationism give it a try.

I'm not interested in a juvenile debate with someone who can do nothing but try and divert the subject because of an inability to participate intelligently in a civil discussion.

May 9, 2012 -- 9:01AM, christzen wrote:

christzen: They do, you know.

The hind leg bones are just concealed withing the tissue and don't extend outside the body.So the question is,why?Why have leg bones when you don't have actual legs?

The scientific answer is evolutionary adaptation.Whales are mammals that evolved from land based mammals to live in water,and in doing so gradually adapted to a more streamlined body suitable for swimming rather than walking.But the leg bones of the ancestors didn't fall off or go away,they were just absorbed into the soft tissue of the body.But they are still there.

The creationist answer is God did it.But this answer begs the question of why.Why create an animal from scratch that has never lived on land with leg bones hidden within it's body?

Does it really make more sense for creationists to look at an animal that breathes air with land based lungs even though it lives in water, is warm blooded when fish are cold blooded,and has leg bones like land based mammals,and decide that God made it this way for some weird reason rather than explore the possibility that it evolved to life in the water from an amphibious mammal?

iama: Someone is pulling someone's leg!

What makes sense is what The Bible states:

The strange tale of the leg on the whale

.

May 9, 2012 -- 11:47PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

May 9, 2012 -- 9:01AM, christzen wrote:

christzen: They do, you know.

The hind leg bones are just concealed withing the tissue and don't extend outside the body.So the question is,why?Why have leg bones when you don't have actual legs?

The scientific answer is evolutionary adaptation.Whales are mammals that evolved from land based mammals to live in water,and in doing so gradually adapted to a more streamlined body suitable for swimming rather than walking.But the leg bones of the ancestors didn't fall off or go away,they were just absorbed into the soft tissue of the body.But they are still there.

The creationist answer is God did it.But this answer begs the question of why.Why create an animal from scratch that has never lived on land with leg bones hidden within it's body?

Does it really make more sense for creationists to look at an animal that breathes air with land based lungs even though it lives in water, is warm blooded when fish are cold blooded,and has leg bones like land based mammals,and decide that God made it this way for some weird reason rather than explore the possibility that it evolved to life in the water from an amphibious mammal?

iama: Someone is pulling someone's leg!

What makes sense is what The Bible states:

The strange tale of the leg on the whale

.

Hilarious.But sad,that there are people willing to take what creation.com says seriously.It doesn't say much for the reasoning capacity of their willingly duped readers.

What is even sadder is that readers of this stuff WANT to be lied to,so they can find some excuse to maintain their ignorance about science and evolution.

May 9, 2012 -- 11:47PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

What makes sense is what The Bible states:

Then why are creationists changing their story every few decades?