Creation Science Rebuttals

    The subtitle of the article explains that the dingo confirms Genesis.  While the dingo has not been in Australia long, it has little to do with confirming the young earth creation story.  Overall, the author, David Catchpoole, gives a good description of the issues surrounding the dingo.  I heartedly recommend this article for its general knowledge of the dingo.  One of the main issues is whether dingos are descended from domestic dogs, or are the descended from wolves.  Catchpoole claims that this issue is a matter of contention in secular circles.  While this is true, it makes no difference when considering the dingo's impact upon the Genesis account of creation.

     The author goes on to explain the secular understanding of the history of the dingo in Australia.  It had to have arrive in Australia at least 3,500 years ago, and no later than 12,000 years ago.  In the author's biblical timeframe section, he relates how the Flood of Noah, around 4,500 years ago, is central to the understanding of this issue.  The dingo is said to have arrived after the Flood, and thus its arrival agrees with the young earth flood model.  Although the dingo does fit the general dates of the Flood, there is no direct evidence linking the arrival of the dingo to the Flood.  Given that there is no geologic evidence for a global flood only 4,500 years ago, there is no physical evidence for the Flood that can be linked to the dingo.  The fact that the dingo arrived after the supposed flood is merely coincidence. 

     The real issue for the young earth believer is the indigenous peoples of Australia.  Even by the most conservative estimates, they have been in Australia for over 30,000 years.  Interestingly, the author claims that "the movement of dingoes and humans to this continent fits with the expected pattern of post-Flood dispersion from the Ark during the last 4,500 years."  However, this article was solely about the dingo, and not the native Australians...the author did not address the timing of the arrival of the indigenous peoples.  However, this does not prevent him from claiming as fact that people arrived only after the Flood, despite the fact that he fails to address this issue in the article.

     He assumes that the dingo was brought to Australia by people, and he assumes that they arrived at the same time, after the flood.  While it is true that direct evidence for the dingo only goes back 3,500 years, the archaeological evidence for aboriginal occupation of Australia goes back at least 30,000 years (most believe 40,000 years).  Since the aboriginal peoples must be descended from the people who were at the Tower of Babel, a date for the Tower then must be in excess of 40,000 years ago.  This clearly does not fit with the young earth theory of creation, with an earth that is only 6,000 years old.  However, it is no problem whatsoever for old earth creationists.

¹  Creation Magazine, Volume 27, Issue 2.  Published on the web at www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v27/i2/dingo.asp