Bronze-level article


From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Crocoduckus catpotatoensis, female plumage.
The divine comedy
Icon creationism.svg
Running gags
Jokes aside
Blooper reel
Evolutionism debunkers
[Mumbles under breath]: Oh my God... What a numbnut.
Brian Sapient, watching Kirk Cameron unveil the Crocoduck[1]

The Crocoduck is a hypothetical animal, intelligently designed by Creationists, and intended to demonstrate two things:

  1. What evilutionists ACTUALLY BELIEVE
  2. That evolution fails to account for (so-called) "missing links"

Crocoduck inventors Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort argue that the (intentionally bizarre?) Crocoduck is representative of what evolutionary theory actually teaches.[2]

The idea behind mocking up this hilarious mongrel was to make nonbelievers look stupid — a plan which backfired completely. Unsurprisingly, the mere conception of anything as half-baked as a 'Crocoduck' successfully communicated the polar opposite message — with the Crocoduck fast becoming a running gag in the reality-based community.

Honorable mentions include PZ Myers owning a Crocoduck-patterned tie (which he hilariously wore at the Creation Museum),[3] and Atheist YouTuber "King Crocoduck" honoring this timeless Creationist own goalWikipedia as his nom de plume.[4] Every October 28th, Potholer54 also hands out a Golden Crocoduck Award to one lucky Creationist;[5]

...for breaching the 9th commandment by deliberately lying about a scientific position in order to perpetuate a Creationist point of view.


A meme is born[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Rational Response Squad debate with Way of the Master

The Crocoduck's non-existence was first brought to light by Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort, during a 2007 debate on the existence of God (held at Calvary Baptist ChurchWikipedia in Manhattan) — parts of which aired on ABC NightlineWikipedia — wherein the duo explained their brilliant scheme:[2]

We imagined would-be genuine species-to-species transitional forms. We called one a 'Crocoduck' and another was called a 'Birddog.' This was to show exactly what evolutionists believe, but can't back up through the fossil record."

Consider their admission that the point of the Crocoduck was to "show exactly what evolutionists believe". No wonder the Crocoduck has become widely symbolic of the fact that evolution deniers tend not to understand even the basic principles of evolutionary theory.

While simply presenting the audience with their homebrew Crocoduck alone would clearly have been stupid enough to make their point, Kirk and Ray actually figured it was reasonable to present two additional creations of theirs — the "Sheep-dog" and "Bull-frog", respectively.[1]

The lack of creative talent available to this dynamic duo becomes all the more obvious when considering that both "bullfrog"Wikipedia and "sheepdog"Wikipedia already name animals which even Ray and Kirk must reasonably know exist.

Why it's bullshit[edit]

It goes without saying that the Creationist expectation of a transitional form being akin to "an individual chimaera of two random species" is not even wrong, and stems from their willful ignorance of how evolution even works. As such, the Crocoduck is a perfect example of the straw man fallacy of over-simplifying the opponent's argument — in this case, the scientific view on the nature of the fossil record.

Crocodiles and ducks have not had a common ancestor for 245 million years; their closest fossil common ancestor, Archosaurus,Wikipedia was far more like a crocodile than a duck, but both crocs and ducks have a mix of primitive and advanced features from their common ancestor, the basal ruling reptile.Wikipedia

Just for the sake of argument, a purported Crocoduck (or similar chimaera) would be a most astonishing find indeed. Creationists purport that Crocoduck-type chimaeras are what evolutionary theory rests on. But if such a fossilized chimaera was ever uncovered, it would in fact serve as evidence against evolution as understood by modern biologists.

Hence, the Crocoduck argument demonstrates that Creationists fail to understand the most basic claims made by the theory of evolution, and as such, literally don't even realize that they don't know what they're talking about.

"Real Crocoducks"[edit]

Anatosuchus. This is the real deal!
Take pity on the lonely Crocoduck
Whom none do love not bird nor reptile
Across the fields he runs amok
Proving evolution all the while

Various fossil species can be argued to be "Crocoducks", due to convergent evolution:

  • DromaeosaursWikipedia like VelociraptorWikipedia and DeinonychusWikipedia had feathers, which would kind of make them Crocoducks by any reasonable definition of the term. As dromaeosaurs were close cousins to birds[6] and were distantly related to crocodiles by virtue of both being archosaurs ancestrally... yeah, but, you know, whatever, it's not like Creationists know how taxonomy actually works.
  • In 2009, fossils of duck-billed alligators were found. The genus has been named AnatosuchusWikipedia (literally, "duck crocodile").[7] Although it would be more accurately be called a "duckodile" as the positions of duck and crocodile are reversed between this and the original theory; we are anxiously waiting to see what chimaera Creationists will howl about next.
  • False-toothed birds (PelagornithidaeWikipedia) were a family of seabirds with a superficially crocodile-like beak and teeth.
  • SpinosaurusWikipedia was an aquatic-adapted dinosaur with a long jaw, described by one paleontologist as "a chimera — half duck, half crocodile."[8]
  • ObdurodonWikipedia was a monotreme related to modern platypuses. Like them (as, as it turns out, unlike many extinct monotremes, which had no evidence of beaks), it has a beak, albeit full of teeth. It foraged pelagically, making it more akin to a crocodile or an otter than the mostly bottom-feeding modern platypus.[9]


See also[edit]

Want to read this in another language?[edit]

Een Nederlandse versie van dit artikel is te vinden via Kroko-eend.