The unique animals of Australia present a challenge to the theory of evolution.

The accepted paradigm is that the Australian marsupials are ancestors of mammals who carry their young in placentas. However, this theory cannot be correct because none of the native animal families have a fossil record outside of the Australian realm. In other words, the unique animals of Australia and even their immediate ancestors only existed in Australia. Perhaps the answer lies elsewhere.

Primitive or Adaptive?

Why should marsupials be called primitive just because of the way the young are born and raised? Why can't they be considered adaptive?

A newborn joey (baby kangaroo) in its mother's pouch. Marsupials are born prematurely but then...

Placental mammals usually migrate based on the season. Young are born in the favorable season and can move on their own from an early age. This is very important to species that require stable seasonal food supplies and have to undergo long migrations between seasons.

The same cannot be said for Australia. The food is far less predictable and migration is not an option. The unique reproductive style might have been an early answer to the challenges of this environment.

Marsupial reproduction is not primitive, unless premature birth is considered primitive. Marsupials' young receive the best protection while still preventing the parent from having to carry fetuses to full term. Marsupials are thus reproductively more flexible and capable of meeting extreme environmental circumstances.

For example, marsupials can raise two young simultaneously and give them differential treatment according to their needs. This parenting must be considered adaptive rather than primitive, especially because environmental stress can cause the young to stop developing.

Only Creation seems Plausible

A wombat. All the Australian marsupials fill similar niches to placentals on other continents. Rather...

The particular challenges of the post-flood isolated island communities like Australia have indeed led to some wild and wonderful animal adaptations. Rather than reflecting primitive conditions, they could be demonstrating the superb adaptability of organisms and the built-in capacity of the genome to produce and supply variation when needed.

No model of origins can supply all the answers, particularly if our knowledge of many biochemical and genetic mechanisms is still so incomplete. The creationist model does, however, supply many plausible answers to some of the many questions that plague us in terms of origins. There will be areas where faith must supply the lack of knowledge, but the same is true for the evolutionary paradigm.

In the final analysis, both paradigms thus require faith. The question that everyone must ask himself is, which of the two requires more faith?