[_ Old Earth _] Burgess shale BC. Creation Evidence.

[John]

I just got back from Field BC, i climbed Mt. Field and came back with some awesome trilobite fossils

I find it funny, this is what i sign said near the Mount.


"Discovered in 1909 in Yoho National Park by Charles D. Walcott, the Burgess Shale not only challenges the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin, but provides a glimpse of what life was like on Earth - 505 million years ago (Burgess Shale Geoscience Foundation)."


Your darn right it challenges Darwin. The "Cambrian" explosion actually rips Darwins assumptions of a common ancestor of all life apart, yet this evidence for creation is never discussed in the classroom.

 

[John]

Bump.

 

[lordkalvan]

Bump.

You need to elaborate how you think the existence of the Burgess Shale fossils in any way challenges evolutionary theory.

 

[John]

Bump.

You need to elaborate how you think the existence of the Burgess Shale fossils in any way challenges evolutionary theory.

Cambrian explosion.

 

[lordkalvan]

Bump.

You need to elaborate how you think the existence of the Burgess Shale fossils in any way challenges evolutionary theory.

Cambrian explosion.

This is not an elaboration. You do not explain how you believe this 'explosion' challenges evolutionary theory and understanding.

 

[John]

Because it shows many organisms coming into existence at once whereas Darwin suggests that every animal and man shares a common ancestor. The evidence does not show darwins "tree of life" anywhere.

 

[Barbarian]

Actually, there were complex animals long before the Cambrian (something Darwin did not realize) and the "explosion" seems to have been started by the evolution of completely armored bodies, allowing a great diversity of life styles.

And yes, we have much evidence of partly-sclerotized organisms before the Cambrian, including soft-bodied trilobitoids.

 

[John]

Or...There is no such thing as the "Cambrian" and the sorting and sediments were all from the flood of Noah. ;)

 

[lordkalvan]

Because it shows many organisms coming into existence at once....

Er, no it doesn't:

The biota of the Burgess Shale appears to be typical of Middle Cambrian deposits. Although the hard-part bearing organisms make up as little as 14% of the community, these same organisms are found in similar proportions in other Cambrian localities. This means that there is no reason to assume that the organisms without hard parts are exceptional in any way; indeed, many appear in other lagerstätten of different age and locations.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgess_Shale

 

[John]

[youtube:ivz5hrin]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p8ISxxDKWA&feature=channel_page[/youtube:ivz5hrin]

 

[lordkalvan]

^ Lots of assertions, some strawmen and not much evidence to be seen. At least read Stephen Jay Gould's Wonderful Life, but maybe you don't believe anything Gould writes either:

Darwin has been vindicated by a rich Precambrian record, all discovered in the past thirty years [Gould was writing in 1989; knowledge of life in the Precambrian has expanded considerably since then, but the clip you posted prefers to ignore this uncomfortable fact].

Wonderful Life, p.57.

Just because evolutionary theory cannot explain in painstaking detail every tiny facet of the development of every form of life on Earth, simply because their are gaps in our knowledge and understanding, does not mean that the theory of evolution has been falsified.