Rosa Rubicondior: Refuting Creationism - An Ichthyosaur from 200 Million Years Before 'Creation Week'

Tuesday, 30 September 2025

Refuting Creationism - An Ichthyosaur from 200 Million Years Before 'Creation Week'

Eurhinosaurus mistelgauensis specimen from the Urwelt-Museum Oberfranken on a belemnite battleground. The fossil plate is about 4 m long.

Credit: Spicher et al (2025).

New Jurassic ichthyosaur species discovered in Mistelgau

It's shaping up to be another bad week for creationism, with the evidence for evolution on an old Earth continuing to accumulate, and evidence against any intelligence being involved in its evolution growing unabated. There is even a paper describing how and when Earth was really formed, and the contrast between that reality and the Bible’s version could hardly be greater.

This article looks at just one of these developments (more will follow). From the perspective of evolutionary biology, it is not especially remarkable—simply the description of a new species of extinct ichthyosaur, Eurhinosaurus mistelgauensis, from the Lower Jurassic (around 200 million years ago).

But for creationism, it serves as yet another stark reminder of how wrong the biblical creation story and timeline are. To put it bluntly, this fossil would not exist if the Bible’s story were true. It doesn’t take a genius to see how the fact of its existence bears on debates about the truth or falsity of Genesis—though creationists appear to struggle with this basic deductive logic.

Mistelgau clay pit (Upper Franconia)^ site & fossils.

What/where: The former brick-clay quarry at Mistelgau, ~10 km W of Bayreuth, now a protected geotope known as “Fossiliengrube Mistelgau – Zum Donnerkeil” (Bavaria’s “Most Beautiful Geotopes”, No. 94). Quarrying ceased in 2005. [1]
Geological setting & age: Lower Jurassic, notably Upper Toarcian strata of the Jurensismergel Formation (c. 182–174 Ma). The ichthyosaur finds include the youngest known occurrence of Eurhinosaurus in these layers. [2]
Research history: Systematic excavations have been run since 1998, chiefly by the Urwelt-Museum Oberfranken (Bayreuth), which recovers and prepares specimens prior to study. [3]
Notable taphonomy: Famous “belemnite battlegrounds” —dense accumulations of belemnite rostra—along with rich marine faunas; these concentrations contribute to the site’s European significance. [1]

Belemnite Battlegrounds:
The so-called “belemnite battlegrounds” are dense concentrations of belemnite rostra (the bullet-shaped internal skeletons of extinct squid-like cephalopods) preserved in layers of the clay. These deposits can contain thousands of rostra, often in close association with other marine organisms. The cause of these mass accumulations has long intrigued palaeontologists. Several hypotheses have been proposed, including:

Mass death events, possibly triggered by sudden changes in oxygen levels in the Jurassic seas.
Predator accumulations, where large marine reptiles or fish repeatedly fed on belemnites and their indigestible rostra collected on the seabed.
Swarming behaviour, analogous to modern squid, where huge gatherings may have died en masse during spawning.

Whatever their precise origin, these battlegrounds make Mistelgau a site of international importance for understanding Jurassic marine ecosystems. They provide a unique backdrop to the rarer vertebrate finds, giving context to how ichthyosaurs and other predators lived alongside abundant cephalopod prey.
Key fossils reported:

Ichthyosaurs: multiple finds, including Temnodontosaurus material curated at the Urwelt-Museum Oberfranken; and the newly named Eurhinosaurus mistelgauensis, based on three specimens from the pit. [4]
Cephalopods: abundant belemnites and ammonites (often silicified), forming classic assemblages for the Franconian Jura. [1]
Additional typical Lower Jurassic marine invertebrates (bivalves, gastropods) occur in the clay-marl sequence. [5]

Access/collecting: The fossil site is municipally owned and protected; public collecting is currently not permitted. Guided visits and interpretation exist via local partners. [6]
Why it matters: Mistelgau provides a high-resolution window into a Toarcian epicontinental sea, with Lagerstätte-like pockets (rostra beds) and articulated vertebrate remains—hence its frequent role in new taxonomic work (e.g., E. mistelgauensis). [1]

The discovery is reported by an international research team from Switzerland and Germany, led by Gaël Spicher of the JURASSICA Museum in Porrentruy, Switzerland, in a paper in Fossil Record and summarised in a Pensoft blog.

New Jurassic ichthyosaur species discovered in Mistelgau
Ichthyosaurs were marine reptiles, with dolphin-like bodies, that lived during the time of the dinosaurs.
An international research team from Switzerland and Germany has described a new ichthyosaur species based on fossils curated at the Urwelt-Museum Oberfranken (Bayreuth, Germany). The study was published in Museum für Naturkunde Berlin’s open-access journal Fossil Record.

Ichthyosaurs were marine reptiles, with similar body shapes to dolphins and tuna, that lived during the time of the dinosaurs. The research team behind the discovery, led by Gaël Spicher (JURASSICA Museum, Porrentruy, Switzerland), named the new species Eurhinosaurus mistelgauensis in reference to the clay pit of Mistelgau in Upper Franconia, a fossil site that has yielded numerous important finds.

We wanted to highlight the scientific importance of the Mistelgau locality.

Gaël Spiche, lead author. Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn
Bonn, Germany.
And JURASSICA Museum
Porrentruy, Switzerland.

Excavations in the clay pit have been conducted regularly since 1998 by the Urwelt-Museum Oberfranken, which recovered and prepared the fossils prior to their scientific study. One specimen originates from a so-called “belemnite battleground,” dense accumulations of Jurassic cephalopod remains that are characteristic of the site.

The newly described species shares the elongation of the upper jaw typical for other species in the Eurhinosaurus genus, producing a pronounced “overbite” similar to that of modern swordfish. Eurhinosaurus mistelgauensis differs from previously known species by its notably robust ribs and special features in the joint connecting the skull and the neck.

The naming of a new species emphasises the significance of the Urwelt-Museum Oberfranken’s fossil collections for understanding Jurassic marine ecosystems. The Mistelgau site continues to provide rare insights into a time period that is otherwise scarcely documented worldwide.

Dr. Serjoscha Evers, not an author of the paper.
Director
Urwelt-Museum Oberfranken, Bayreuth, Germany.

Further studies on the Mistelgau material are in preparation. These include analyses of injuries preserved in the ichthyosaur skeletons, which may shed light on the ecology and life history of these ancient marine reptiles.

Publication:
Spicher GE, Miedema F, Heijne J, Klein N (2025)
A new Eurhinosaurus (Ichthyosauria) species from the Lower Jurassic (Toarcian) of Mistelgau (Bavaria, Southern Germany).
Fossil Record 28(2): 249–291. https://doi.org/10.3897/fr.28.154203

A new Eurhinosaurus (Ichthyosauria) species from the Lower Jurassic (Toarcian) of Mistelgau (Bavaria, Southern Germany)
Gaël E. Spicher, Feiko Miedema, Jelle Heijne, Nicole Klein

Abstract
Eurhinosaurus is a European Lower Jurassic longirostrine ichthyosaur, characterized by its remarkable overbite. Despite the long history of the genus, the taxonomy of Eurhinosaurus is still under debate, and its morphology is poorly understood. Over the past two decades, three specimens of Eurhinosaurus have been discovered in the Mistelgau clay pit in Bavaria, southern Germany, from Upper Toarcian layers. This makes these specimens the youngest stratigraphic occurrence of the genus Eurhinosaurus. The examined specimens include two nearly complete skeletons and a partial snout, preserved three-dimensionally in a semi-articulated state, with elements exposed in multiple orientations. The Mistelgau specimens exhibit clear morphological similarities to known Eurhinosaurus, confirming their affiliation to the genus based on numerous characteristics. However, the Eurhinosaurus specimens from Mistelgau exhibit notable differences in the basioccipital and rib morphology compared to known species. While not significant at the genus level, these distinctions allow recognition as a new species: Eurhinosaurus mistelgauensis sp. nov. These well-preserved fossils from Mistelgau further provide valuable insights into Eurhinosaurus morphology and significantly contribute to our understanding of this historically important ichthyosaur.

Introduction
Ichthyosauria is a diverse group of reptiles well-adapted to marine life that thrived from the Early Triassic to the early Late Cretaceous (e.g., Sander 2000; McGowan and Motani 2003; Motani 2005; Fischer et al. 2016). Ichthyosaurs exhibit morphological features such as limbs modified into fins, elongated snouts, deeply amphicoelous vertebrae, and the development of a tail fin that shows that they were fully adapted to aquatic life (e.g., Sander 2000; McGowan and Motani 2003; Motani 2005). Ichthyosaurs had a cosmopolitan distribution during their entire existence (Sander 2000). Southern Germany, especially, is famous for its extensive record of fossil ichthyosaurs from the Lower Jurassic, mainly the Posidonienschiefer Formation, which has yielded thousands of specimens (Urlichs et al. 1994). The Lower Jurassic ichthyosaurs from southern Germany show a great diversity, with numerous genera and species recognized. At least five established genera and one more recently described genus are currently identified: Temnodontosaurus, Suevoleviathan, Stenopterygius, Hauffiopteryx, Eurhinosaurus, and Magnipterygius (von Huene 1922; Swinton 1930; Maisch 1998a, 1998.1b, 2001, 2008; Maxwell 2012, 2018; Maxwell and Cortés 2020; Maisch 2020.1, 2022; Maisch and Matzke 2022.1). Among these Lower Jurassic ichthyosaurs, Eurhinosaurus is a relatively rare faunal component (Hauff 1921; von Huene 1922; Maxwell and Vincent 2016.1). This genus is notable for its distinctive elongated and slender snout with an extreme overbite by having the mandible drastically shorter than the upper jaw (more than 60% according to McGowan and Motani 2003; see also, e.g., Abel 1909; McGowan 1994.1; Maisch 2022). The biology of Eurhinosaurus is poorly understood and discussed controversially. According to McGowan (1979) and Sander (2000), Eurhinosaurus, with its snout resembling the extant swordfish Xiphias that also shows a similar extensive overbite, might have fed in a similar way to this fish by preying on schools of small fish. The teeth of Eurhinosaurus are conical, slender, and pointed, and correspond to the “Pierce 1” predatory guild, which implies predation on soft prey (Massare 1987).

Eurhinosaurus is a representative of the clade Leptonectidae (Maisch 1998.1b; McGowan and Motani 2003; sensu Moon 2017), a group that has elongated and slender limbs, a long and slender snout and a skull with very large orbits and a short postorbital portion (Maisch 1998.1b). According to recent studies (e.g., Moon 2017; Maxwell and Cortés 2020), the clade Leptonectidae includes only a few genera: Eurhinosaurus Abel, 1909, Excalibosaurus McGowan, 1986, Leptonectes McGowan, 1996, and Wahlisaurus Lomax, 2016. Recent phylogenetic studies have also retrieved Temnodontosaurus azerguensis Martin et al., 2012.1 as a representative of the clade Leptonectidae or closer related to species classically interpreted as leptonectid when the clade Leptonectidae was not recovered (Moon 2017; Maxwell and Cortés 2020; Laboury et al. 2022.2).

Despite being a historical genus known since the mid-19th century (e.g., Mantell 1851; von Theodori 1854; von Jaeger 1856), recent detailed morphological descriptions of Eurhinosaurus specimens are limited, as well as our understanding of the morphological variation (von Huene 1951; McGowan 1979; Maisch 2022). Additionally, Eurhinosaurus suffers from problematic and unstable taxonomy (e.g., McGowan 1994.1; Maisch 2022). Moreover, the lack of detailed bone-by-bone descriptions and studies assessing morphological variation in detail among Eurhinosaurus specimens leads to the current misunderstanding regarding the diversity within this genus.

Eurhinosaurus is so far restricted to the Toarcian (Lower Jurassic) (McGowan and Motani 2003). Its paleogeographic distribution is restricted to what is today Europe, with fossil evidence from Germany (von Theodori 1854; von Jaeger 1856; von Huene 1922, 1926, 1928, 1931a, 1951; Hauff et al. 2017.1; Kosma 2018.1; Maisch 2022), the United Kingdom (Mantell 1851; McGowan 1994.1), France (Lamaud 1979.1; Pharisat et al. 1993; Fischer et al. 2011), Luxembourg (Godefroit 1994.2), and Switzerland (Reisdorf et al. 2011.1; Klug et al. 2024).

Taxonomic history
The taxonomic history of Eurhinosaurus was already extensively reported and discussed in McGowan (1994.1) and Maisch (2022). Therefore, we herein only briefly review the history of the three species of Eurhinosaurus currently discussed as being valid by different authors. After a revision by McGowan (1994.1), Eurhinosaurus was considered monospecific with E. longirostris being the only valid species (see also McGowan and Motani 2003) despite a certain observed morphological variability (von Huene 1931a, 1951; McGowan 1994.1; McGowan and Motani 2003; Maisch 2022). A recent study by Maisch (2022), however, questioned the monospecific status of E. longirostris, attributing this doubt to the poor preservation of the holotype from Whitby (partial skull, vertebral column, and forefin) and its lack of a detailed description, although the latter is not a sufficient basis for questioning the name’s validity. Maisch (2022) claimed that the Eurhinosaurus specimens found in Germany cannot be categorically associated with E. longirostris just on the basis of having a strong overbite because this feature is generic and only allows affiliation with the genus Eurhinosaurus and not with the species E. longirostris. Maisch (2022), therefore, proposed that E. longirostris must be considered a nomen dubium.

The earliest valid name for a species of Eurhinosaurus exclusively from Germany is E. huenei Swinton, 1930 based on a complete specimen from Holzmaden (NHMUK PV R 5465). However, this species was later invalidated by von Huene (1931a) and then by McGowan (1994.1), claiming that there were no notable differences between the proposed holotype of E. huenei and other known complete specimens of E. longirostris from Germany, except for the number of notched fin elements, which was considered an individual anomaly. Maisch (2022) agrees with McGowan’s (1994.1) conclusions regarding the validity of the characters of Eurhinosaurus huenei brought forward by Swinton (1930) but disagrees with McGowan (1994.1) by still considering Eurhinosaurus huenei valid.

The problem remains that the most recent diagnosis for E. longirostris and E. huenei is based on the same specimens and, if Eurhinosaurus should not be monotypic as suggested by Maisch (2022), that the species diagnosis of E. longirostris is not separated from the diagnosis of the genus. Maisch (2022) argued that a detailed description of the Whitby holotype of E. longirostris is needed to gain more evidence regarding the taxonomic relationship between the English and German specimens. Further on, Maisch (2022) erected a new species in the same work where he recognizes Eurhinosaurus huenei as valid and declares E. longirostris invalid. This new species, E. quenstedti Maisch, 2022, is based on a specimen from the Lower Toarcian of Ohmden in southern Germany, discovered in 1999, which Maisch (2022) found to be distinct from E. huenei, primarily based on differences in forelimb proportions, the number of presacral vertebrae, and the morphology of the neural spines in the mid-trunk region (see Maisch 2022 for the detailed diagnosis).

Thus, at present, we recognize three species in the literature with their state of validity depending on the respective authors: E. longirostris Mantell, 1851, E. huenei Swinton, 1930, and E. quenstedti Maisch, 2022. Whether German Eurhinosaurus specimens, aside from the two affiliated with Eurhinosaurus quenstedti, should be assigned to Eurhinosaurus longirostris or Eurhinosaurus huenei remains an open question until a comprehensive revision of the material from Baden-Württemberg is conducted. Additionally, the validity of Eurhinosaurus huenei and E. quenstedti remains uncertain when based on the most recent diagnoses by Maisch (2022). Many of the diagnostic features proposed by Maisch (2022) can be attributed to taphonomic deformation, particularly cranial compression caused by headfirst impact with the seafloor, a process documented in several similarly preserved ichthyosaur skeletons (e.g., Hänggi and Reisdorf 2007; Maxwell et al. 2022.3; Erin Maxwell, pers. comm. 01/2025). Additionally, preservation and taphonomic biases may account for some of the listed characteristics, such as characters based on deformed limbs or vertebral count-based characters, which are unreliable when the vertebral column is disarticulated (e.g., E. quenstedti diagnosis in Maisch 2022). Due to this taxonomic confusion and the lack of adequate diagnoses for genus and species, detailed descriptions of Eurhinosaurus specimens are essential for clarifying the genus’ taxonomic diversity and understanding the influence of intra- and interspecific morphological as well as ontogenetic variation. Due to their exceptional 3D preservation and the fact that they were exposed in their original position with different cranial and postcranial elements exposed in various views, the herein described specimens are particularly important, considering the above-mentioned aspects.

Therefore, the objective of this study is to provide a comprehensive bone-by-bone description of the Eurhinosaurus specimens from Mistelgau, thereby enhancing our understanding of the morphology of Eurhinosaurus. Furthermore, this study aims to discuss the taxonomical affiliation of the Mistelgau specimens when considering the above-discussed taxonomical issues.

Spicher GE, Miedema F, Heijne J, Klein N (2025)
A new Eurhinosaurus (Ichthyosauria) species from the Lower Jurassic (Toarcian) of Mistelgau (Bavaria, Southern Germany).
Fossil Record 28(2): 249–291. https://doi.org/10.3897/fr.28.154203

Copyright: © 2025 The authors/ Pensoft Publishers.
Published by Pensoft Publishers. Open access.
Reprinted under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0)

Finds like Eurhinosaurus mistelgauensis are a reminder that the fossil record is not just a catalogue of long-extinct creatures, but a window into entire vanished worlds. The clay pit at Mistelgau preserves the remains of a thriving Jurassic marine ecosystem—predators, prey, and the traces of their interactions—locked away for nearly 200 million years until chance and science brought them to light.

For evolutionary biology, a new ichthyosaur species may not be revolutionary, but it adds another vital piece to the jigsaw of life’s history. Each new description refines our understanding of how groups diversified, adapted, and ultimately disappeared, shaping the lineages we see today. In the case of Eurhinosaurus, we see a lineage of streamlined, fish-like reptiles that flourished for tens of millions of years before vanishing entirely by the mid-Cretaceous, leaving only their stone imprints as testimony.

For creationism, however, such discoveries remain deeply problematic. Here is a fossil that should not exist if the biblical account of creation and the timeline of Genesis were accurate. Yet it does exist—along with countless others, consistently dated and placed in a coherent evolutionary framework. The rocks of Mistelgau quietly but firmly refute the claim of a young Earth created in six days.

In short, the new ichthyosaur from Upper Franconia is not just another addition to the scientific literature. It is also another small but decisive blow against biblical literalism — another fossil witness testifying to an ancient Earth shaped by natural processes, not divine fiat.

Advertisement

What Makes You So Special? From The Big Bang To You

How did you come to be here, now? This books takes you from the Big Bang to the evolution of modern humans and the history of human cultures, showing that science is an adventure of discovery and a source of limitless wonder, giving us richer and more rewarding appreciation of the phenomenal privilege of merely being alive and able to begin to understand it all.

Ten Reasons To Lose Faith: And Why You Are Better Off Without It

This book explains why faith is a fallacy and serves no useful purpose other than providing an excuse for pretending to know things that are unknown. It also explains how losing faith liberates former sufferers from fear, delusion and the control of others, freeing them to see the world in a different light, to recognise the injustices that religions cause and to accept people for who they are, not which group they happened to be born in. A society based on atheist, Humanist principles would be a less divided, more inclusive, more peaceful society and one more appreciative of the one opportunity that life gives us to enjoy and wonder at the world we live in.

Amazon