The following is another Secret of Evolutionism.
The theory belonging to evolutionism tells us that all life evolved from a common ancestor. This hypothesis is taught as fact in our schools and even presented from time to time on this and other forum as the truth. But is it true or just another lie from the camps of evolutionism which have been kept secret?
In answering the question we must ask the question:
Why do the major phyla and classes of animals suddenly appear fully developed in the cambrian fossils with no ancestral linage leading up to the phyla and classes that are found fossilized there?
In other word, you don’t see the speciation of animals producing different genera, then the continuation of morphological evolution producing animals that can be divided into different families and then orders.
Instead, as mentioned above, the geological record has fossilized animals that are very diverse in the hierarchy of the taxonomical rank and show no sign of a slow divergence from a common ancestor. The animals found in the cambrian strata appear suddenly already divided into different phyla and classes.
The bedrock, or the basement strata of rocks don’t present descent with modification as the theory of evolutionism calls for. In fact, one could claim that it appears to be somewhat up-side-down.
ref. icons of evolution
Secret of Evolutionism
Moderator: Moderators
Post #2
Things are hard to make into fossils. Once created, fossils can then be destroyed by the environment. This makes it extremely unlikely that you'll find more then a dozen fossils for a particular creature.
All that happened in the cambrian explosion was that things became easier to turn into fossils, and natural selection favored things that made better fossils (that wasn't the goal of natural selection, simply a side-effect). If an entire generation of easier to fossilize things happens, you'll get more fossils in the future.
Conversely.
Consider the carrier pigeon. They numbered in the billions in the 1800's, and it was said that they could darken the sky with their numbers. Can you produce even 1 carrier pigeon fossils for me? Of course not, thus, by your reasoning, the carrier pigeon was a lie of the evolutionists.
All that happened in the cambrian explosion was that things became easier to turn into fossils, and natural selection favored things that made better fossils (that wasn't the goal of natural selection, simply a side-effect). If an entire generation of easier to fossilize things happens, you'll get more fossils in the future.
Conversely.
Consider the carrier pigeon. They numbered in the billions in the 1800's, and it was said that they could darken the sky with their numbers. Can you produce even 1 carrier pigeon fossils for me? Of course not, thus, by your reasoning, the carrier pigeon was a lie of the evolutionists.
-
Yarr the Pirate
- Student
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:04 pm
-
Post #3http://www.belief.net/boards/message_li ... per_page=4
http://www.christianforums.com/t55221
How odd....
Anyway, in asnwer to this oft-repeated distortion:
1. Complex life has been around long before the cambrian - for evidence one may read about the Doushantuo rock formation (Chen et al 2000;2004) or the Stirling Range Formation in Australia (Rasmussen et al, 2002)
2. There's a lot of chemical evidence that eukaryotes may have appeared as early as 200million years ago (Brocks et al, 1999)
3.Lobopods, a mix of anthropods and worms (transitional fossil) appear in the cambrian (Conway Morris 1998)
4. Not all phyla first appear in the cambrian - all plants come after the cambrian (Brown 1999)
Just a few important points.
The References:
Chen, J.-Y. et al., 2000. Precambrian animal diversity: Putative phosphatized embryos from the Doushantuo Formation of China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 97(9): 4457-4462. http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4457
Rasmussen, B., S. Bengtson, I. R. Fletcher and N. J. McNaughton, 2002. Discoidal impressions and trace-like fossils more than 1200 million years old. Science 296: 1112-1115.
Brocks, J. J., G. A. Logan, R. Buick and R. E. Summons, 1999. Archean molecular fossils and the early rise of eukaryotes. Science 285: 1033-1036. See also Knoll, A. H., 1999. A new molecular window on early life. Science 285: 1025-1026. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/f ... /5430/1025
Conway Morris, Simon, 1998. The Crucible of Creation, Oxford.
Brown, Kathryn S., 1999. Deep Green rewrites evolutionary history of plants. Science 285: 990-991.
http://www.christianforums.com/t55221
How odd....
Anyway, in asnwer to this oft-repeated distortion:
1. Complex life has been around long before the cambrian - for evidence one may read about the Doushantuo rock formation (Chen et al 2000;2004) or the Stirling Range Formation in Australia (Rasmussen et al, 2002)
2. There's a lot of chemical evidence that eukaryotes may have appeared as early as 200million years ago (Brocks et al, 1999)
3.Lobopods, a mix of anthropods and worms (transitional fossil) appear in the cambrian (Conway Morris 1998)
4. Not all phyla first appear in the cambrian - all plants come after the cambrian (Brown 1999)
Just a few important points.
The References:
Chen, J.-Y. et al., 2000. Precambrian animal diversity: Putative phosphatized embryos from the Doushantuo Formation of China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 97(9): 4457-4462. http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4457
Rasmussen, B., S. Bengtson, I. R. Fletcher and N. J. McNaughton, 2002. Discoidal impressions and trace-like fossils more than 1200 million years old. Science 296: 1112-1115.
Brocks, J. J., G. A. Logan, R. Buick and R. E. Summons, 1999. Archean molecular fossils and the early rise of eukaryotes. Science 285: 1033-1036. See also Knoll, A. H., 1999. A new molecular window on early life. Science 285: 1025-1026. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/f ... /5430/1025
Conway Morris, Simon, 1998. The Crucible of Creation, Oxford.
Brown, Kathryn S., 1999. Deep Green rewrites evolutionary history of plants. Science 285: 990-991.
Post #4
Here is TO's response to your question. Repeated enough by YEC's to have its own page.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC300.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC300.html
Response:
The Cambrian explosion was the seemingly sudden appearance of a variety of complex animals about 540 million years ago (Mya), but it was not the origin of complex life. Evidence of multicellular life from about 590 and 560 Mya appears in the Doushantuo Formation in China [Chen et al. 2000; 2004], and diverse fossil forms occurred before 555 Mya [Martin et al. 2000]. (The Cambrian began 543 Mya., and the Cambrian explosion is considered by many to start with the first trilobites, about 530 Mya.) Testate amoebae are known from about 750 Mya [Porter and Knoll 2000]. There is evidence in the form of wormlike burrows in the Chorhat Sandstone in India of animals over a billion years ago [Seilacher et al. 1998] and trace-like fossils more than 1200 Mya in the Stirling Range Formation of Australia [Rasmussen et al. 2002]. Eukaryotes (which have relatively complex cells) may have arisen 2700 Mya, according to fossil chemical evidence [Brocks et al. 1999]. Fossil microorganisms have been found from 3465 Mya [Schopf 1993]. There is isotopic evidence of sulfur-reducing bacteria from 3470 Mya [Shen et al. 2001] and possible evidence of microbial etching of volcanic glass from 3480 Mya [Furnes et al. 2004].
There are transitional fossils within the Cambrian explosion fossils. For example, there are lobopods (basically worms with legs) which are intermediate between arthropods and worms. [Conway Morris 1998]
Only some phyla appear in the Cambrian explosion. In particular, all plants post-date the Cambrian, and flowering plants, by far the dominant form of land life today, only appeared about 140 Mya [Brown 1999].
Even among animals, not all types appear in the Cambrian. Cnidarians, sponges, and probably other phyla appeared before the Cambrian. Molecular evidence shows that at least six animal phyla are Precambrian [Wang et al. 1999]. Bryozoans appear first in the Ordovician. Many other soft-bodied phyla don't appear in the fossil record until much later. Although many new animal forms appeared during the Cambrian, not all did. According to one reference [Collins 1994], 11 of 32 metazoan phyla appear during the Cambrian, one appears Precambrian, 8 after the Cambrian, and 12 have no fossil record.
And that just considers phyla. Almost none of the animal groups that people think of as groups, such as mammals, reptiles, birds, insects, and spiders, appeared in the Cambrian. The fish that appeared in the Cambrian was unlike any fish alive today.
The length of the "Cambrian explosion" is ambiguous and uncertain, but 5-10 million years is a reasonable estimate; some say the "explosion" spans 40 million years or more, starting about 553 million years ago. Even the shortest estimate of 5 million years is hardly sudden.
There are some plausible explanations for why diversification may have been relatively sudden.
The evolution of active predators in the late Precambrian likely spurred the coevolution of hard parts on other animals. These hard parts fossilize much more easily than the previous soft-bodied animals, leading to many more fossils but not necessarily more animals.
Early complex animals may have been nearly microscopic. Apparent fossil animals smaller than 0.2 mm have been found in the Doushantuo Formation, China, 40 to 55 million years before the Cambrian [Chen et al. 2004]. Much early evolution could have simply been too small to see.
The earth was just coming out of a global ice age at the beginning of the Cambrian [Hoffman 1998; Kerr 2000]. A "snowball earth" before the Cambrian explosion may have hindered development of complexity or kept populations down to where fossils would have been too rare to expect to find today. The more favorable environment after the snowball earth would have opened new niches for life to have evolved into.
Hox genes, which control much of an animal's basic body plan, were likely first evolving around that time. Development of these genes might have just then allowed the raw materials for body plans to diversify [Carroll 1997].
Atmospheric oxygen may have increased at the start of the Cambrian [Canfield and Teske 1996; Thomas 1997; Logan et al. 1995].
Planktonic grazers began producing fecal pellets that fell to the bottom of the ocean rapidly, profoundly changing the ocean state, especially its oxygenation [Logan et al. 1995].
Unusual amounts of phosphate were deposited in shallow seas at the start of the Cambrian [Cook and Shergold 1986; Lipps and Signor 1992].
Cambrian life was still unlike almost everything alive today. Using number of cell types as a measure of complexity, complexity has been increasing more-or-less constantly since the beginning of the Cambrian [Valentine et al. 1994].
Major radiations of life forms have occurred at other times, too. One of the most extensive diversifications of life occurred in the Ordovician, for example [Miller 1997].
References:
Brocks, J. J., G. A. Logan, R. Buick and R. E. Summons, 1999. Archean molecular fossils and the early rise of eukaryotes. Science 285: 1033-1036. See also Knoll, A. H., 1999. A new molecular window on early life. Science 285: 1025-1026. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/f ... /5430/1025
Brown, Kathryn S., 1999. Deep Green rewrites evolutionary history of plants. Science 285: 990-991.
Canfield, D. E. and A. Teske, 1996. Late Proterozoic rise in atmospheric oxygen concentration inferred from phylogenetic and sulphur-isotope studies. Nature 382: 127-132. See also: Knoll, A. H., 1996. Breathing room for early animals. Nature 382: 111-112.
Carroll, Robert L., 1997. Patterns and Processes of Vertebrate Evolution. Cambridge University Press.
Chen, J.-Y. et al., 2000. Precambrian animal diversity: Putative phosphatized embryos from the Doushantuo Formation of China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 97(9): 4457-4462. http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4457
Chen, J.-Y. et al., 2004. Small bilaterian fossils from 40 to 55 million years before the Cambrian. Science 305: 218-222, http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1099213 . See also Stokstad, E., 2004. Controversial fossil could shed light on early animals' blueprint. Science 304: 1425.
Collins, Allen G., 1994. Metazoa: Fossil record. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/phyla/metazoafr.html
Conway Morris, Simon, 1998. The Crucible of Creation, Oxford.
Cook, P. J. and J. H. Shergold (eds.), 1986. Phosphate Deposits of the World, Volume 1. Proterozoic and Cambrian Phosphorites. Cambridge University Press.
Furnes, H., N. R. Banerjee, K. Muehlenbachs, H. Staudigel and M. de Wit, 2004. Early life recorded in Archean pillow lavas. Science 304: 578-581.
Hoffman, Paul F. et al., 1998. A Neoproterozoic snowball earth. Science 281: 1342-1346. See also: Kerr, Richard A., 1998. Did an ancient deep freeze nearly doom life? Science 281: 1259,1261.
Kerr, Richard A., 2000. An appealing snowball earth that's still hard to swallow. Science 287: 1734-1736.
Logan, G. A., J. M. Hayes, G. B. Hieshima and R. E. Summons, 1995. Terminal Proterozoic reorganization of biogeochemical cycles. Nature 376: 53-56. See also Walter, M., 1995. Faecal pellets in world events. Nature 376: 16-17.
Lipps, J. H. and P. W. Signor (eds.), 1992. Origin and Early Evolution of the Metazoa. New York: Plenum Press.
Martin, M. W. et al., 2000. Age of Neoproterozoic bilatarian body and trace fossils, White Sea, Russia: Implications for metazoan evolution. Science 288: 841-845. See also Kerr, Richard A., 2000. Stretching the reign of early animals. Science 288: 789.
Miller, Arnold I., 1997. Dissecting global diversity patterns: Examples from the Ordovician radiation. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 28: 85-104.
Porter, Susannah M. and Andrew H. Knoll, 2000. Testate amoebae in the Neoproterozoic Era: evidence from vase-shaped microfossils in the Chuar Group, Grand Canyon. Paleobiology 26(3): 360-385.
Rasmussen, B., S. Bengtson, I. R. Fletcher and N. J. McNaughton, 2002. Discoidal impressions and trace-like fossils more than 1200 million years old. Science 296: 1112-1115.
Seilacher, A., P. K. Bose and F. Pfüger, 1998. Triploblastic animals more than 1 billion years ago: Trace fossil evidence from India. Science 282: 80-83.
Schopf, J. W., 1993. Microfossils of the Early Archean Apex Chert: New evidence of the antiquity of life. Science 260: 640-646.
Shen, Y., R. Buick and D. E. Canfield, 2001. Isotopic evidence for microbial sulphate reduction in the early Archaean era. Nature 410: 77-81.
Thomas, A. L. R., 1997. The breath of life -- did increased oxygen levels trigger the Cambrian Explosion? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12: 44-45.
Valentine, James W., Allen G. Collins and C. Porter Meyer, 1994. Morphological complexity increase in metazoans. Paleobiology 20(2): 131-142.
Wang, D. Y.-C., S. Kumar and S. B. Hedges, 1999. Divergence time estimates for the early history of animal phyla and the origin of plants, animals and fungi. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological Sciences 266: 163-71.
-
Yarr the Pirate
- Student
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:04 pm
Post #6
Google allows you to search within a particular page using an advanced search.
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en
However in the instance of TO and Panda's thumb, they've already got a preconfigured google search to search both those sites (and another) in place.
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/search.html
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?hl=en
However in the instance of TO and Panda's thumb, they've already got a preconfigured google search to search both those sites (and another) in place.
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/search.html
-
Yarr the Pirate
- Student
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 4:04 pm
Post #8
Osteng already stared a Cambrian Explosion thread.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... .php?t=584
Before we continue, I would much like it if everyone could read through the thread, and decide if any questions remain that are not addressed there, so we can continue the debate without repeating ourselves several dozen times.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... .php?t=584
Before we continue, I would much like it if everyone could read through the thread, and decide if any questions remain that are not addressed there, so we can continue the debate without repeating ourselves several dozen times.
Last edited by Nyril on Sun Jan 02, 2005 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Secular schools can never be tolerated because such schools have no religious instruction, and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air...we need believing people."
[Adolf Hitler, April 26, 1933]
[Adolf Hitler, April 26, 1933]
Post #9
I think we understand that..but why don't we find species that are already in different phylum with no ancestral linage leading up to them?Nyril wrote:Things are hard to make into fossils. Once created, fossils can then be destroyed by the environment. This makes it extremely unlikely that you'll find more then a dozen fossils for a particular creature.
All that happened in the cambrian explosion was that things became easier to turn into fossils, and natural selection favored things that made better fossils (that wasn't the goal of natural selection, simply a side-effect). If an entire generation of easier to fossilize things happens, you'll get more fossils in the future.
Conversely.
Consider the carrier pigeon. They numbered in the billions in the 1800's, and it was said that they could darken the sky with their numbers. Can you produce even 1 carrier pigeon fossils for me? Of course not, thus, by your reasoning, the carrier pigeon was a lie of the evolutionists.
Considering that we do find fossils...I think we should also see the in-b-tweeners..but for some reason they are missing...certainly they all are not carrier pigeons.
i don't think your view adequately answers the question.
Post #10
It was posted...
There are transitional fossils within the Cambrian explosion fossils. For example, there are lobopods (basically worms with legs) which are intermediate between arthropods and worms. [Conway Morris 1998]
just for the record, even the evos disagree on who this guy really is or isn't...
Modern molecular phylogeny has shown that annelids and arthropods are not at all closely related (contrary to previous opinion), in which case (and contra to the arguments of Ernst Haeckel and many other Darwinists since) embryology is not necessarily a good aid to phylogeny. Conversely it has been suggested note that the Onychophora are actually modified arthropods, rather than the other way around. Some Cambrian forms (the Microdictyoniida, which includes the fossil genera Ayshenia, Hallucigenia (spectacularly misinterpreted when first discovered, and by Gould in Wonderful Life), Microdictyonia, and Xenusion) have been placed in this group on the basis of superficial appearance, but the relationship is by no means certain.
ref:http://www.palaeos.com/Invertebrates/Ar ... bopoda.htm
So to claim we have an intermediate here is simply incorrect..or speculation at best....sorry my evo friends.
There are transitional fossils within the Cambrian explosion fossils. For example, there are lobopods (basically worms with legs) which are intermediate between arthropods and worms. [Conway Morris 1998]
just for the record, even the evos disagree on who this guy really is or isn't...
Modern molecular phylogeny has shown that annelids and arthropods are not at all closely related (contrary to previous opinion), in which case (and contra to the arguments of Ernst Haeckel and many other Darwinists since) embryology is not necessarily a good aid to phylogeny. Conversely it has been suggested note that the Onychophora are actually modified arthropods, rather than the other way around. Some Cambrian forms (the Microdictyoniida, which includes the fossil genera Ayshenia, Hallucigenia (spectacularly misinterpreted when first discovered, and by Gould in Wonderful Life), Microdictyonia, and Xenusion) have been placed in this group on the basis of superficial appearance, but the relationship is by no means certain.
ref:http://www.palaeos.com/Invertebrates/Ar ... bopoda.htm
So to claim we have an intermediate here is simply incorrect..or speculation at best....sorry my evo friends.
