Coffee!! Latest non-Cambrian non-explosion

A friend asks a bunch of us if we are as incredulous of Darwinist attempts to explain away the Cambrian explosion as he is. Well, I always say, try me on some of the latest nonsense, and he did. It is conveniently here, in relations to the Dengying fossils in southern China (541 to 551 million years ago):

The first instance of biomineralization – i.e. the biologic use of minerals – was around 2 billion years ago when certain bacteria precipitated grains of magnetite to apparently help orient themselves in the Earth's magnetic field. However, the first animal skeletons didn't appear until right before the Cambrian explosion, at the end of the Ediacaran Period.

These early shell-bearing creatures help to resolve Charles Darwin's concern over the sudden appearance of so many new animal species during the Cambrian explosion. The fossil record gives the impression of a "Creation" event, but in reality, animals had evolved prior to the explosion. They just didn't leave much for paleontologists to find until they developed the skeleton-making trait.

Reminded me of something:

The first time anyone wondered about thefts from the liquor store was on March 22, when a couple of guys appeared to be loitering with intent. However, the first theft of cash and cases of liquor didn’t occur until June 29, at the end of the subsequent accounting period.

This reported theft helps to resolve management's concern over the sudden disappearance of so much cash and so many cases during the night of June 29. The inventory record gives the impression of a major theft, but in reality, lots of cash and cases had gone missing prior to the reported heist. They just didn't leave much for investigators to find because they weren’t logged into inventory in the first place.

Hardline Darwinists obviously fear the Cambrian explosion the way crooks fear an honest investigator. You can play their claim game yourself:

The first __________ was on/around ___________ when ______________. However, the first __________ didn't ___________ until _____________________.

This ___________ helps to resolve ____________’s concern over the sudden ________ of so many __________ during the ___________. The _________ record gives the impression of a __________, but in reality, ____________. They just didn't leave much for ___________ to find because they (in some way, you make it up, couldn’t be traced) ________________.

I guess in the world of Darwin, that counts for an explanation.

Cambrian explosion: Let's just say that the Echinoderm family goes back a long way ...

British physicist David Tyler comments on new findings that intensify the impact of the Cambrian explosion of life forms, about 550 million years ago:

Echinoderm diversity traced back to Lower Cambrian

Some have argued that echinoderm diversity is an Ordovician phenomenon: linked to the Great Ordovician Diversification. Others make the case for the radiation to have initiated earlier. All seem to be agreed that the origin of echinoderms is shrouded in uncertainty. One major problem is that the relevant fossils are unfamiliar and often poorly preserved and there are often doubts about their classification. However, in June 2010, research was reported dealing with Middle Cambrian echinoderms from Spain.

"The new Spanish data suggest that a number of the clades involved in [the Great Ordovician] diversification (such as sucocystid cinctans, cothurnocystid stylophorans, ctenocystoids, and isorophid edrioasteroids) appeared significantly earlier in Gondwanan settings than previously thought. This shows that, even by the earliest middle Cambrian, a variety of novel body plans and ecological strategies already existed among echinoderms, pushing back the timing of important divergences into the lower Cambrian."


A Middle Cambrian echinoid - a stromatocystitid edrioasteroid (source here)

For more, go here.

We've completed the set!: All phyla of life appeared in the Cambrian

Confronting the impact of the Cambrian explosion of life 550 million years ago, British physicist David Tyler notes that

All skeletalised metazoan phyla appeared in the Cambrian

Until this year, the Bryozoa were missing from the list of Cambrian organisms. Although some had been previously reported, critical scrutiny showed that they were misidentified and that the oldest known bryozoans came from Lower Ordovician strata. This year, however, Upper Cambrian bryozoans were reported from the lower Tinu Formation, southern Mexico. They were said to be about 8 Ma years older than the oldest Ordovician fossils. This means that Cambrian strata can be said to record examples of all the skeletalized metazoan phyla.

For more, go here.

The obvious lack of fit between the actual Cambrian event and the popular saga of the"long slow evolution of life" has sparked surprisingly little curiosity, compared to exercises in creative explanation of the "so-called" explosion, suppression of information, dunno-what-hit-us shock and reassurances about ongoing research. Too bad we can't just get past all that, to a genuine wish to know what happened.

Note: Illustration shows Bryozoan membranipora membranacea, US Geological Survey

Nectocaris appears in "the geological blink of an eye" - evolutionary biologist

In "Reinterpreting Nectocaris as a little Kraken", British physicist David Tyler reflects on new findings about just how swiftly the octopus family appeared, as Nectocaris demonstrates:

Since the studied samples all come from the Middle Cambrian Burgess Shale Formation, Nectocaris "extends the cephalopods' fossil record by over 30 million years".

"The findings make the ancestors of modern squid and octopuses at least 30 million years older. Evolutionary biologist Martin Smith, the main author of the study, told PA news agency that the findings bring cephalopods much closer to the first appearance of complex animals. "We go from very simple pre-Cambrian life-forms to something as complex as a cephalopod in the geological blink of an eye, which illustrates just how quickly evolution can produce complexity," said Mr Smith."


[ ... ]

The above quote from Martin Smith illustrates both the significance for the Cambrian Explosion and the conundrum the evidence provides for evolutionary theory. The problem is that everything occurs "in the geological blink of an eye" - whether it be the origins of the phyla with radically different body plans, or whether it be the origins of different classes within a phylum (such as the origin of cephalopods within the mollusca).

The problem here is that the evolutionary biologists mean "random evolution", which obviously does not account for this speed. Meanwhile,

Cephalopods are not like other molluscs.

Anything but sluggish, they are capable of instant and rapid movement. Far from being mindless filterers or grazers, they are active predators possessing the most advanced nervous system known among invertebrates. Their brain-to-body ratio exceeds that of most vertebrates (although we have not been smart enough to figure out exactly how smart they are). They are masters of camouflage, changing shape, surface pattern, texture and colour in the blink of an eye - and they do have good eyes. When threatened, they escape by means of a built-in hydro jet that can even send them squirting through the air like little rockets on a tail of water."

For more, go here.

The fundamental problem now is that "evolution" is becoming indistinguishable from creation. Darwinian evolutionists appear in no hurry to face up to it.

Note: The image is from Citron.

Cambrian explosion film to be shown, after all

Anika Smith, at the Discovery Institute, informs me that:

Those who live in the Los Angeles area are invited to attend a gala premiere screening of Illustra Media's new documentary, Darwin's Dilemma: The Mystery of the Cambrian Fossil Record next Sunday, October 25th at 7:00 pm at the University of Southern California. The event is sponsored by the American Freedom Alliance.

This premiere was originally scheduled for the California Science Center, but the Center canceled the event just a few days ago, leaving the organizers virtually no time to find a new location. If you live in the Los Angeles area, you can show your support for free speech ...

That might be a very good idea. Especially if you note what is going on in Canada (which recently dropped a number of points in press freedom rankings, due to struggles that have sucked up much of the lives of many of my friends).

Basically, Darwin always knew that the Cambrian explosion was a problem for his theory, and he attributed it to the poverty of the fossil record. Now that the record is better, it is a bigger problem for his theory. The film might be good or bad, right or wrong, but if it cannot be shown ... welcome to the world where government tells you what to think.

Which reminds me: The 19th century Smithsonian secretary avoided dealing with this evidence for many years. Ever since, it has been downplayed. We are expected to forever wait for a Darwinian explanation. That's like waiting for the guy dead drunk at the bottom of the stairs to pay his rent.

So if, as some have said, the Smithsonian had anything to do with the sudden cancellation, it would be no surprise.

Personally, I am sick and tired of all the garbage. Darwinism is an unbelievable belief currently funded by government. It makes about as much sense as this stuff.

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy, with comments

1. I see where Ladd Allen, producer of the Privileged Planet DVD that caused such a ruckus when it was shown at the Smithsonian in 2005, has now come out with Darwin's Dilemma.

Darwin's Dilemma presumably references the sudden Cambrian explosion of complex, multicellular life forms, including vertebrates, the creatures most likely to have intelligence, about half a billion years ago. Note how they talk around the problem here. Darwinists have twisted themselves into pretzels trying to explain how this could happen purely by natural selection acting on random mutation. Darwin started the thing off by suggesting that the explanation was that the fossil record was poor. Well, the fossil record is way better now, and it supports him even less. Not what you expected to hear in the Year of Darwin, eh?

Behind the Scenes With Darwin's Dilemma: An Interview With Producer Lad Allen

On this episode of ID the Future Anika Smith interviews Illustra Media producer Lad Allen on the new film out next week, Darwin's Dilemma. As the third film in the intelligent design trilogy from Illustra Media, Darwin's Dilemma represents a capstone for Allen, who traversed the globe to present the story of Darwin's journey to his theory of evolution and the Cambrian Explosion, the nagging problem for Darwin in the fossil record that has become a crisis for evolution today.

Listen in as Lad Allen shares with us what it's like to shoot on location in four continents and work with scientists like Simon Conway Morris and Stephen Meyer.

Go here to listen.

(Note: The Smithsonian always had a huge problem with the Cambrian explosion because it never supported Darwinism, and their key scientist on the case in the days it first came to public notice attempted to hide the results.)

Here's a video on the explosion:




2. Discovery Jeopardizes Darwinist Argument Against Cambrian Explosion

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin discusses how trails of microorganisms knock down a favorite Darwinist argument against the Cambrian explosion. Listen in as Luskin explains why Darwinists remain stuck — whether they like it or not — with a very explosive Cambrian explosion that isn't the mere artifact of an imperfect fossil record.

Go here to listen.

[From Denyse: In my view, the Cambrian explosion knocked Darwinism through a cocked hat, and Darwin himself knew this all too well. But he had good public relations agents then and now. Earnest folk, happy to front an impossible idea if it keeps materialist atheism alive. What's so telling - and damning - is their sheer defensiveness.

3.

An Atheist Discusses the Scientific Merits of Intelligent Design

On this episode of ID the Future, atheist philosopher Bradley Monton defends intelligent design as science, discussing methodological naturalism and the evidential force of ID with Casey Luskin. Listen in as Professor Monton shares how ID-critic Robert Pennock tried to intimidate him.

Bradley J. Monton, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado, Boulder, is author of the new book, Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design (Broadview Press, 2009).

Listen to Part One of this series.

I wonder when Bradley Monton will start to get even more real flak for asking key, rude questions about Darwinism, but then he doesn't yet blog at Uncommon Descent either. Hey, Brad, wanna be bad?

No, but seriously, Darwinism - as it exists today - is a tax-supported cult gone rotten. It attracts people like Pennock who have little to offer except policing the views of others, as he attempted to do with Monton, who sensibly repelled him. That's the principle reason that cults eventually implode - no new ideas, just new PR hacks and new thugs. With the "evolutionary psychology" branch, the stink is finally coming to public attention.

Coffee!!: Official Canadian monster from 505 million years ago

In "ROM unravels 'monster mystery': Fossil analysis sheds light on pint-sized predator that stalked Canada's seas 505 million years ago", (March 20, 2009), Joseph Hall tells us,

That painstaking, jigsaw-puzzle analysis, published today in the journal Science, reveals that this razor-toothed predator was in fact one of nature's weirdest creatures.

And, boy, was it ugly.

It had protruding, button-like eyes, set behind a large armoured plate that extended from its head like a blue whale's snout. This bony "carpus" likely funnelled prey into a pair of grasping pincers that shoved the hapless food into a round mouth sporting at least three rows of pointed teeth.

"This mouth is kind of nasty. I always use the analogy of a pencil sharpener," said Jean-Bernard Caron, an associate curator of invertebrate paleontology at the ROM.

"You put anything into this and you get the prey completely cut and broken into pieces," said Caron, a paper co-author.

The rest of the body was segmented with a tiny set of propeller-like fins at the end to help move this formidable predator along.

This reminds me of the comment of a friend who ran into Professor Guy Narbonne on the Avalon Peninsula in Newfoundland. That excellent scholar kindly showed him and his family some Burgess Shale/Cambrian fossils.

My friend said later, "Oh wow! I'm glad that's not around here today!"

(But of course my friend was only joking, really.)

Still, if you think life is bad now ...

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy:

The Cambrian explosion: Why Darwinism is just propaganda for a worldview you do not really want

Robert Deyes explains, over at Access Research Network:

The Cambrian 'Expulsion': Crucial Evidence That Kicked Out Darwinian Gradualism

There is one accomplishment that stands out as spectacular for the simple reason that it changed the way scientists looked at the origins of multicellular life. The discovery of the Burgess Shale in the Canadian Rockies by the American geologist Charles Doolittle Walcott in the summer of 1909 was an occurrence that required both good fortune and opportunity (Ref 3, p.42). It likewise satisfies our romantic view of scientific discovery. According to folklore, Walcott was riding on horseback together with his wife Helena and son Stuart when his wife's horse stumbled on a rock. Dismounting his horse, Walcott broke open the rock to reveal a host of soft-bodied fossils (Ref 3, p.42).

In the days that followed Walcott and his party found more fossils amongst the pieces of broken shale that covered the neighboring hillside. So it was that several years later, after a number of return expeditions to the Burgess Shale, Walcott would describe his finding as "the finest and largest series of Middle Cambrian fossils yet discovered" (Ref 3, p.44).

Go here for an intro to the Burgess Shale, also here for more. Darwin, incidentally, knew about the sudden appearance of new life forms, and tried to talk his way out of the problem for his theory, claiming that the fossil record was "incomplete." From what we can tell today, when it is "complete," it will still show sudden appearances. The challenge is to account for that, not to explain it away.