Whale Genetics Refutes Phylogeny

When Darwinists tell the tale of whale evolution, people should be able to liken it to a just-so story without much effort. But no, naturalism demands stories that resemble, "Life evolved in the sea, some went on land and evolved further, others went back into the sea and became whales". Because evolution.

The fake science used to support whale evolution continues with the circular reasoning of phylogeny and misuse of genetics. Real science refutes these.
The Whale Beached by Esaias van de Velde, 1617
Since they have no actual science to back up their story, evolutionists began blubbering until they came up with the idea of using phylogenetics. However, we already saw that this is based on personal preferences, omitting important information, and circular reasoning (see "Phylogenetics — Based on Worldviews"). Piling up speculations and fake science has become far too common in evolutionism, but hey, give the people what they want, right?

Although phylogeny is easy to dismantle by knowledgeable people, Darwin's cheerleaders attempted to use genetics. It's interesting. Some genes are not the same in genes and cows. Because evolution. Papers were written to solve problems, and may seem to do so on the surface, but still left out information, indicating ignorance of whale physiology. All this wasted effort to deny the truth that whales were created to be whales despite Darwinism.
Whales are claimed to have proved one of the most popular so-called evidences for evolution. Whale evolution is presented in most biology textbooks as absolute fact, often with inaccurate depictions of the supposed transitional forms.
In the secular worldview, the currently accepted whale evolution model is that the hippopotamus is the closest living relatives of whales. But supposed “early” whales have little in common with hippos or living whales.
You can read the rest by clicking on "Whale Genetics and Evolution". You may also be interested in a previous post, "Telling Evolutionary Whale Tales".