Post-Flood log mats potentially can explain biogeography

by

The present-day and Ice Age distribution of many animals and plants is a major mystery of biogeography. The uniformitarian idea of rafting horizontally on tectonic plates, once thought to be the explanation for most biogeography, has recently been shown to be mostly wrong. The focus of this article will be on mammal distributions. One option for mammal migration is by land bridges but except for the Bering Land Bridge, this idea is not popular. The only other option is for rafting on vegetation mats, sometimes across oceans. Many problems occur with the uniformitarian rafting idea, such as the small extent of vegetation rafts observed today. Creationists, on the other hand, have a very potent mechanism to explain biogeography by the huge log and vegetation rafts that would be left over from the Genesis Flood and would last for decades floating on the oceans. Present-day floating islands give us a hint to the possibilities.


iStockphoto

map

Comparison between present-day and Ice Age animal distributions requires us to answer many questions about how they spread across oceans from the ‘Mountains of Ararat’. The same can be said of many of the plants but I will focus mainly on mammals in the field of biogeography. One of the most perplexing questions is how most of the marsupials, mammals with pouches on their stomachs, ended up in Australia.

In South and Central America, we find many unique fossils from late Cenozoic rocks.1 Many of these animals became extinct at the end of the Ice Age. Among these are the Toxodon, an animal about 1.5 m tall with a heavy rhinoceros-like body and a hippopotamus-like head; giant ground sloths; and glyptodonts, strange armadillo-like creatures the size of a small car. We know that Toxodon lived during the Ice Age because arrowheads are found with their skeletons. New World monkeys also lived during the Ice Age but did not become extinct afterwards. We need to answer the question: How did these animals get to the Americas from the mountains of Ararat, after the Flood?

The island of Madagascar is 430 km east of continental Africa and is separated from the continent by a deep ocean channel. Madagascar has existed for 120 Ma, according to uniformitarian geologists. It is home to a unique assortment of plants and animals, both extant and extinct (fossils), including gliding lemurs, which have diversified into numerous species, some of which are extinct.2 Some scientists estimate 84% of land mammals on the island are unique to Madagascar3 while others believe that number is close to 100%.4 Practically all its species of amphibians are unique to Madagascar:

“The amphibian fauna of Madagascar is highly exceptional, with more than 99% of the species endemic [unique] to this ‘micro-continent’ and its offshore islands.”5

Madagascar has an incredible diversity of reptiles, more than 90% of which are found only on Madagascar.6 Other animals existed on Madagascar from the late Ice Age up to about 2,500 years ago and later became extinct, most likely as a result of humans.7

Plate tectonics alone cannot explain biogeography

In the 1960s and 1970s, scientists were convinced plate tectonics would resolve most of the biogeographic puzzles. They assumed that plants and animals had evolved on a supercontinent, and as the supercontinent broke up and moved, the animals simply rode the plates to their present locations. Subsequent evolution was left to explain the differences in species between continents. This is called the vicariance hypothesis since the animals were vicariously or passively transported on diverging plates. This theory has suffered in the face of conflicting evidence.8,9 Molecular (mainly DNA) and morphological comparisons have proven to be an unwelcome obstacle for the vicariance hypothesis.10,11 These studies show that many plants and animals did not arrive on the separated continents or oceanic islands until well after the break-up of the supercontinent.12,13 This would require the animals to somehow cross water and, in some cases, oceans. Cowie and Holland summarize:

“We hope, therefore, that the trend identified by de Queiroz (2005)—the resurrection of oceanic dispersal as important in historical biogeography—is real and that the straightjacket of strict vicariance biogeography is being loosened to include once again the plurality of mechanisms and processes that make evolutionary biology the exasperating but ever fascinating discipline that it is.”14

Dispersal by either land bridges or rafting

Uniformitarian scientists are left with only two other mechanisms: (1) connections with land bridges that have since sunk, including island hopping, or (2) oceanic rafting.15 The concept of land bridges is not popular in secular literature, except for the Bering Land Bridge. Consequently some scientists opt for oceanic dispersal by rafting.16

Two especially difficult problems for the uniformitarian rafting hypothesis are the intercontinental dispersal of a burrowing reptile17 and the transatlantic rafting of a small legless reptile.18 Because of their environments, these animals should not have ended up on rafts, not to mention long-distance voyages across oceans. Biogeographers have concluded that amphibians such as frogs, which cannot tolerate saltwater but which are nevertheless found on Madagascar and other Indian Ocean islands, could only have been rafted, not once but several times.16 The presence of New World Monkeys, as well as rodents, in South America in the Late Cenozoic leads to the conclusion that these animals had to have been rafted from Africa to South America, since these types are also found in Africa.19,20

Rafting was not taken seriously a few decades ago, but since uniformitarian scientists are faced with a lack of alternatives, it is now accepted as a valid mechanism. There is observational support for the rafting concept. Recently, a hurricane ripped up vegetation in the Caribbean islands. It was observed that some lizards survived on vegetation mats and colonized other islands in the area.21,22

Post-Flood dispersal

Creationists must explain how all of the present-day and Ice Age animals descended from the animals on the Ark and how they spread from the Mountains of Ararat after the Flood. We are left with the same two options as the evolutionary scientists: land bridges and oceanic rafting.23 Of course, we agree that some mammals spread by land bridges, especially across the Bering Land Bridge.

Northeast Siberia, the Bering Land Bridge, Alaska, and northwest Canada would have had mild winters early in the Ice Age.24 This could have aided in the dispersal of animals that required warmer temperature climates.24 An ice-free corridor has been postulated early in the Ice Age from the northwest Yukon through the unglaciated lowlands from the northwest Yukon Territory to central Montana along the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains.25 This iceless corridor would have allowed migration into the continental United States and to South America. The corridor was most likely formed and maintained by downslope westerly foehn winds, locally called Chinook winds.26 The winds would warm and dry the air, resulting in a thin winter snow cover that easily melted in the spring.

Many of the unique animals in Australia could have passed across other land bridges or island hopped. It is not likely that the unique animals of Madagascar and the flightless birds found on Pacific Ocean islands or the unique South American animals spread by land bridges. This also leaves creationists with rafting on logs or vegetation mats to explain the presence of these animals. However, creationists are in a far better position to explain these animals as there was much more vegetation available for rafting immediately after the global Flood.27

Uniformitarian scientists can only call upon a few scraps of vegetation to be used for rafting from one island to another. This is far short of what is required to explain all the biogeographic questions, especially for large mammals. The Flood, by contrast, would have created thick and extensive floating mats on the post-Flood oceans. We can observe a present-day example of a floating log mat on Spirit Lake, Washington (USA) which still remains decades after the logs were swept into the lake by the May 1980 eruption of Mount St Helens. Many similar, if not larger post-Flood log and vegetation mats were likely to have contributed significantly to both animals and plants spreading across the Earth after the Flood.

Mats could last decades

Figure 1. Schematic of log mat dispersal of plants and animals across water bodies, even oceans (drawn by Keaton Halley).

fig-1-a

A. A log mat is beached and animals that have dispersed from the ‘mountains of Ararat’ and made it to the shore accidentally walk onto the mat.

After the Noahic Flood, the log mats that were not beached could have continued floating for decades on the new oceans until they became water-logged, sank, or decayed. I noted in 1995 that: “Another application [of the log-mat model] is that some of the floating debris likely survived the Flood [emphasis in original]”.28 Wise and Croxton mention that a post-Flood log-mat model could have aided in the rapid repopulating of the continents.29 Wood and Murray have suggested that log mats can help explain biogeography.30 They showed that the best evolutionary biogeographic models have failed, despite the early promise of plate tectonics.

Modern floating islands support post-Flood rafting

It may be possible that some of the log mats were large enough for plants and trees to sprout and grow and support a diverse collection of animals, even burrowing mammals, in the same way some floating islands do today. Floating islands with growing vegetation, including trees, and containing animals have been observed in modern lakes. They have been observed many times.31 In a large bibliography on floating islands, Van Duzer writes:

fig-1-b

B. The log mat then separates from the shore and floats with the animals stranded on it.

“To those not acquainted with them, floating islands usually seem at first like a myth, a paradox, or an impossibility: surely chunks of the solid and massy earth on which we stand cannot drift easily about the surface of a body of water. Yet floating islands exist on at least six of the seven continents, and sometimes in the oceans that separate them; they may have trees growing upon them, be hundreds of meters across, and support the weight of a hundred cattle grazing on them.”32

Floating islands are both natural and artificial and are more abundant in the tropics. These islands commonly have a peaty soil that aids in buoyancy by gases released during decomposition of vegetation. Sediment is also occasionally blown onto the islands. Many plants have been observed growing in the nutrient-rich soils.33 Rice and other crops are cultivated on some floating islands.31 Consequently, there is at least the potential for floating islands to be able to disperse animals from one point to another.

If modern floating islands can support this type of flora and fauna, then the potentially more massive floating islands after the Flood could explain some of the mysteries of biogeography. It is possible that these floating islands could have moved across large expanses of ocean after the Flood. Evidence that large mammals can be transported across open waters by post-Flood log mats is the observation that the ground sloths that colonized South America also colonized the West Indies islands.34

fig-1-c

C. The log mat finally beaches on another landmass where the animals disembark.

Animals disperse by log mats after the Flood

After the Flood there is likely to have been a population explosion of animals as many new habitats lay open, initially with few predators to retard multiplication. If a log mat became temporarily beached, some animals could have unknowingly climbed onto the log mat and been carried across seas and oceans to other islands or continents (figure 1). Shorelines with significant tides would have been good candidates for temporary groundings. Small animals would have had the easiest time surviving the voyages but, as seen today, it is not unreasonable that medium to large animals also were carried on the rafts. The primary factor for survival would have been the resilience of the mat itself. Rain would have been more abundant immediately after the Flood24 to water the floating mats and assist with new plant growth. Wise and Croxton also believe dispersal by log mats was an efficient mechanism:

“Whereas today’s occasional log or stick provides a ‘sweepstakes’-like probability of successful transoceanic transport, log mats immediately after the Flood may have been nearly as efficient for dispersal of some terrestrial organisms as was the land itself.”35

Conclusion

Many details of biogeography remain to be elucidated but we have a general model with great potential to explain the dispersal patterns we observe today. Creation scientists are in a much better position than the uniformitarians. Log or vegetation mat rafting appears to be one of the best options for solving some of the biogeographic mysteries. The log mats that formed at the end of the Flood could have been large enough and ecologically diverse enough to transport many animals across sizeable expanses of the ocean.

References and notes

  1. The geological column and timescale are used for discussion purposes only. Return to text.
  2. Karanth, K.P., Delefosse, T., Rakotosamimanana, B., Parsons, T.J. and Yoder, A.D., Ancient DNA from giant extinct lemurs confirms single origin of Malagasy primates, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 102:5090–5095, 2005. Return to text.
  3. Goodman, S.M. and Benstead, J.P., Updated estimates of biotic diversity and endemism for Madagascar, Oryx 39(1):73–77, 2005. Return to text.
  4. Goodman, S.M., Ganzhorn, J.U. and Rakotondravony, D., Chapter 13, Mammals; in: Goodman, S.M. and Benstead, J.P. (Eds), The Natural History of Madagascar, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, p. 1159, 2003. Return to text.
  5. Glaw, F. and Vences, M., Chapter 10, Amphibians; in: Goodman, S.M. and Benstead, J.P. (Eds), The Natural History of Madagascar, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, p. 883, 2003. Return to text.
  6. Raxworthy, C.J., Chapter 11, Reptiles; in: Goodman, S.M. and Benstead, J.P. (Eds), The Natural History of Madagascar, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, p. 934, 2003. Return to text.
  7. Crowley, B.E., A refined chronology of prehistoric Madagascar and the demise of the megafauna, Quaternary Science Reviews 29:2591–2603, 2010. Return to text.
  8. Statham, D., Plants and animals around the world: why are they found where they are?, Creation 32(4):45–47, 2010; creation.com/plants-animals-biogeography. Return to text.
  9. Johnson, B., Biogeography: a creationist perspective, Creation Research Society Quarterly 48(3):212–223, 2012. Return to text.
  10. Statham, D., Biogeography, J. Creation 24(1):82–87, 2010; creation.com/biogeography. Return to text.
  11. Snelling, A.A., Earth’s Catastrophic Past: Geology, Creation & the Flood, Institute for Creation Research, Dallas, TX, pp. 163–182, 2009. Return to text.
  12. De Queiroz, A., The resurrection of oceanic dispersal in historical biogeography, Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(2):68–73, 2005. Return to text.
  13. Winkworth, R.C., Wagstaff, S.J., Glenny, D. and Lockhart, P.J., Plant dispersal N.E.W.S. from New Zealand, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17(11):514–520, 2002. Return to text.
  14. Cowie, R.H. and Holland, B.S., Dispersal is fundamental to biogeography and the evolution of biodiversity on oceanic islands, J. Biogeography 33:196, 2006. Return to text.
  15. Cowie and Holland, ref. 14, pp. 193–198. Return to text.
  16. Vences, M., Vieites, D.R., Glaw, F., Brinkmann, H., Kosuch, J., Veith, M. and Meyer, A., Multiple overseas dispersal in amphibians, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 270:2435–2442, 2003. Return to text.
  17. Townsend, T.M., Leavitt, D.H. and Reeder, T.W., Intercontinental dispersal by a microendemic burrowing reptile (Dibamidae), Proceedings of the Royal Society B 278:2568–2574, 2011. Return to text.
  18. Vidal, N., Azolinsky, A., Cruaud, C. and Hedges, S.B., Origin of tropical American burrowing reptiles by transatlantic rafting, Biology Letters 4:115–118, 2008. Return to text.
  19. Houle, A., The origin of platyrrhines: an evaluation of the Antarctic scenario and the floating island model, American J. Physical Anthropology 109:541–559, 1999. Return to text.
  20. Houle, A., Floating islands: a mode of long-distance dispersal for small and medium-sized terrestrial vertebrates, Diversity and Distributions 4:201–216, 1998. Return to text.
  21. Censky, E.J., Hodge, K. and Dudley, J., Over-water dispersal of lizards due to hurricanes, Nature 395:556, 1998. Return to text.
  22. Calsbeek, R. and Smith, T.B., Ocean currents mediate evolution in island lizards, Nature 426:552–555, 2003. Return to text.
  23. It is possible that in some cases, the dispersals can be explained by humans taking plants and animals with them during colonization. However, the large number of over-water dispersals and the many types of plants and animals that would have little or no use for man show that this explanation is unlikely. For example, the legless, burrowing caecilian amphibian is found on oceanic islands up to several hundred kilometres off the coast of western Africa. Return to text.
  24. Oard, M.J., Frozen in Time: Woolly Mammoths, the Ice Age, and the Biblical Key to Their Secrets, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2004. Return to text.
  25. Stalker, A.M., Indications of Wisconsin and early man from the Southwest Canadian prairies, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 288:119–136 1977. Return to text.
  26. Oard, M.J., A method for predicting chinook winds east of the Montana Rockies, Weather and Forecasting 8(2):166–180, 1993. Return to text.
  27. Oard, M.J., The Genesis Flood and Floating Log Mats: Solving Geological Riddles, Creation Book Publishers ebook, Powder Springs, GA, 2014. Return to text.
  28. Oard, M.J., Mid and high latitude flora deposited in the Genesis Flood part II: creationist hypotheses, Creation Research Society Quarterly 32(3):140, 1995. Return to text.
  29. Wise, K.P. and Croxton, M., Rafting: a post-Flood biogeographic dispersal mechanism; in: Ivey Jr., R.L. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism, technical symposium sessions, Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 465–477, 2003. Return to text.
  30. Wood, T.C. and Murray, M.J., Understanding the Pattern of Life: Origins and Organization of the Species, Broadman & Holman Publishers, Nashville, TN, pp. 193–202, 2003. Return to text.
  31. Van Duzer, C., Floating Islands: A Global Bibliography, Cantor Press, Los Altos Hills, CA, 2004. Return to text.
  32. Van Duzer, ref. 31, p. v. Return to text.
  33. Trivedy, R.K., Sharma, K.P., Geol, P.K. and Gopal, B., Some ecological observations on floating islands, Hydrobiologia 60(2):187–190, 1978. Return to text.
  34. Koch, P.L. and Barnofsky, A.D., Late Quaternary extinctions: state of the debate, Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 37:215–250, 2006. Return to text.
  35. Wise and Croxton, ref. 29, p. 69. Return to text.
The geological column and timescale are used for discussion purposes only.
Karanth, K.P., Delefosse, T., Rakotosamimanana, B., Parsons, T.J. and Yoder, A.D., Ancient DNA from giant extinct lemurs confirms single origin of Malagasy primates, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 102:5090–5095, 2005.
Goodman, S.M. and Benstead, J.P., Updated estimates of biotic diversity and endemism for Madagascar, Oryx 39(1):73–77, 2005.
Goodman, S.M., Ganzhorn, J.U. and Rakotondravony, D., Chapter 13, Mammals; in: Goodman, S.M. and Benstead, J.P. (Eds), The Natural History of Madagascar, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, p. 1159, 2003.
Glaw, F. and Vences, M., Chapter 10, Amphibians; in: Goodman, S.M. and Benstead, J.P. (Eds), The Natural History of Madagascar, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, p. 883, 2003.
Raxworthy, C.J., Chapter 11, Reptiles; in: Goodman, S.M. and Benstead, J.P. (Eds), The Natural History of Madagascar, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, p. 934, 2003.
Crowley, B.E., A refined chronology of prehistoric Madagascar and the demise of the megafauna, Quaternary Science Reviews 29:2591–2603, 2010.
Statham, D.,
Johnson, B., Biogeography: a creationist perspective, Creation Research Society Quarterly 48(3):212–223, 2012.
Statham, D.,
Snelling, A.A., Earth’s Catastrophic Past: Geology, Creation & the Flood, Institute for Creation Research, Dallas, TX, pp. 163–182, 2009.
De Queiroz, A., The resurrection of oceanic dispersal in historical biogeography, Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(2):68–73, 2005.
Winkworth, R.C., Wagstaff, S.J., Glenny, D. and Lockhart, P.J., Plant dispersal N.E.W.S. from New Zealand, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17(11):514–520, 2002.
Cowie, R.H. and Holland, B.S., Dispersal is fundamental to biogeography and the evolution of biodiversity on oceanic islands, J. Biogeography 33:196, 2006.
Cowie and Holland, ref. 14, pp. 193–198.
Vences, M., Vieites, D.R., Glaw, F., Brinkmann, H., Kosuch, J., Veith, M. and Meyer, A., Multiple overseas dispersal in amphibians, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 270:2435–2442, 2003.
Townsend, T.M., Leavitt, D.H. and Reeder, T.W., Intercontinental dispersal by a microendemic burrowing reptile (Dibamidae), Proceedings of the Royal Society B 278:2568–2574, 2011.
Vidal, N., Azolinsky, A., Cruaud, C. and Hedges, S.B., Origin of tropical American burrowing reptiles by transatlantic rafting, Biology Letters 4:115–118, 2008.
Houle, A., The origin of platyrrhines: an evaluation of the Antarctic scenario and the floating island model, American J. Physical Anthropology 109:541–559, 1999.
Houle, A., Floating islands: a mode of long-distance dispersal for small and medium-sized terrestrial vertebrates, Diversity and Distributions 4:201–216, 1998.
Censky, E.J., Hodge, K. and Dudley, J., Over-water dispersal of lizards due to hurricanes, Nature 395:556, 1998.
Calsbeek, R. and Smith, T.B., Ocean currents mediate evolution in island lizards, Nature 426:552–555, 2003.
It is possible that in some cases, the dispersals can be explained by humans taking plants and animals with them during colonization. However, the large number of over-water dispersals and the many types of plants and animals that would have little or no use for man show that this explanation is unlikely. For example, the legless, burrowing caecilian amphibian is found on oceanic islands up to several hundred kilometres off the coast of western Africa.
Oard, M.J., Frozen in Time: Woolly Mammoths, the Ice Age, and the Biblical Key to Their Secrets, Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2004.
Stalker, A.M., Indications of Wisconsin and early man from the Southwest Canadian prairies, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 288:119–136 1977.
Oard, M.J., A method for predicting chinook winds east of the Montana Rockies, Weather and Forecasting 8(2):166–180, 1993.
Oard, M.J., The Genesis Flood and Floating Log Mats: Solving Geological Riddles, Creation Book Publishers ebook, Powder Springs, GA, 2014.
Oard, M.J., Mid and high latitude flora deposited in the Genesis Flood part II: creationist hypotheses, Creation Research Society Quarterly 32(3):140, 1995.
Wise, K.P. and Croxton, M., Rafting: a post-Flood biogeographic dispersal mechanism; in: Ivey Jr., R.L. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism, technical symposium sessions, Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 465–477, 2003.
Wood, T.C. and Murray, M.J., Understanding the Pattern of Life: Origins and Organization of the Species, Broadman & Holman Publishers, Nashville, TN, pp. 193–202, 2003.
Van Duzer, C., Floating Islands: A Global Bibliography, Cantor Press, Los Altos Hills, CA, 2004.
Van Duzer, ref. 31, p. v.
Trivedy, R.K., Sharma, K.P., Geol, P.K. and Gopal, B., Some ecological observations on floating islands, Hydrobiologia 60(2):187–190, 1978.
Koch, P.L. and Barnofsky, A.D., Late Quaternary extinctions: state of the debate, Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 37:215–250, 2006.
Wise and Croxton, ref. 29, p. 69.

Related Articles

Further Reading

Readers’ comments
Roger T., Australia, 14 October 2016
I was surprised that Thor Heyerdahl didn't get a mention in the article as his Kon Tiki, Ra and Tigris expeditions clearly demonstrated that ocean currents could well have aided migration of people and by implication plants. Also, it is quite possible that seeds survived the turbulence of the flood and would have become lodged in the raft mats. It would also seem that during the period from when the Ark grounded on Mt Ararat and God opened the Ark to let Noah and company to disembark there must have been a period of re-vegetation to provide feed and protection for the animals as well as for the surviving humans. The dove returned with an olive leaf that Noah was able to identify as an olive, therefore it must have been mature. So in a very short period God must have accelerated the growth of the plants by another act of creation and by implication on the newly formed continents as well. So whether or not there was rafting is irrelevant - God was in control from start to finish. Praise God! Keep up the good work CMI. Blessings, Roger.
Egil W., Norway, 14 October 2016
Thanks for the article, My impression is also that for the migration from Asia to Australia it would have been possible to cross it by walking if the sea-level was lower. During the Ice Age a lot of the water that is now in the seas could have been in the form of ice and be spent covering all the areas affected by that ice age. I believe to have read lots things like this here on creation.com, so for what particular regions are log-mats most necessary as a means of spreading post-Flood fauna (and flora?). I also wonder if the continental drift could have been somewhat faster than today, after the Flood, for example due to newly formed edges and ridges being somewhat softer and giving less resistance than today. That would mean that the distances right after the Flood and in the ice age would have been somewhat shorter. And lets not forget that some of these animals could have followed humans, after the migration and dispersal from Babel. It's also good to see that rafting is being taken seriously also by uniformitarians. Has creationists generally held to or used log-mats as an explanation to biogeographical distribution longer than uniformitarians? The neo-catastrophists, for example, can in many ways be said to finally catch up with creation-research; what Flood-geology/hydrology has necessitated all along - rapid catastrophic processes in nature have a major-part in explaining the features of geology as we see it today.
Robert B., United States, 14 October 2016
Something else that may have explanatory power is a theory that I ran across (I didn't note where unfortunately) that the dual riddles of all the non-placental mammal migration to Australia and the existence of so many examples of convergent evolution of placental and marsupial versions of very similar looking creatures. Both evolutionists and creationists have to come up with ad hoc theories that are less than satisfactory. the novel theory that I stumbled upon was that marsupialism may be the result of an epigenetic switch common to many types of mammal. The theory proposed that for instance, the marsupial wolf and the canis wolf are the SAME KIND!. His theory is testable with DNA evidence of course. It would resolve many of thew riddles nicely though. Perhaps the extreme conditions in Australia triggered the same switch in several types of animal. The existence of such a switch would also explain the occasional marsupials on other continents as well.
Tas Walker responds
This idea has been proposed before, but there are a number of reasons why it does not stack up. 1, Marsupial versions of animals are very different genetically to their placental parallels. They do not differ just in some genetic switch. 2. What is a kangaroo a genetic switch variant of? 3. There are plenty of ‘harsh’ environments, etc., other than Australia (and many marsupials don’t live in harsh environments). Surely someone would have noticed the switch happening somewhere. 4. Etc.
Phil K., United States, 14 October 2016
The plain text of Genesis states that God brought the animals to Noah prior to the flood. There is no reason to doubt that God dispersed the animals after the flood. That being the case, I have no trouble with the thought that there could have also been some divine assistance rounding up the log mats and directing the animals onto them.
Roger W N., United States, 15 October 2016
You guys have a much easier explanation than the evolutionists, and I'm surprised nobody mentioned it--people! According to evolution, there were no people when this separation happened. But the Bible said that there were. When the Flood survivors split after the Flood, or the Babel incident, they went all over the world, including the Western hemisphere. Isn't it logical that they would take animals with them? After all, who knows what they would find in new countries? The animals and vegetation certainly changed after the Flood. No more giant sloths or mastodons. But the new settlers would bring in new plants and animals. So things would be different. Did God guide them what to bring? I don't know. But that is certainly a simpler explanation. Or are they all true?
John Z., Canada, 17 October 2016
Great article. I think log mats are very relevant, not to our trust in God, but to a possible explanation for the method God used for dispersal of animals, plants and people.