Cambrian Explosion Destroys Evolution!
Top Comments
All Comments (635)
-
The Cambrian explosion is not an explosion of animals, but an explosion of fossils. The truth is that organisms had evolved early under conditions that did not favor fossilization, so that by the time organisms began to venture into areas that did favor fossilization, the progress of evolution was well established.
Remember, the fossil record is not a literal translation of evolution. But rather snapshots in the time, 99% of evolution did not fossilize.
-
@foxhole8063 Again depends how you define it but I should of been clear, on the theory where you go from none life to life- That step is where it "starts". Anyhoo this is turning into pointless discusson. Check out this interestng debate instea dif u feel like it /watch?v=LgwqgSmIdHY
-
@Stianchez "... the same process accounts going from soup to fish and fish to land animal."
How do inherited genetic variation and natural selection apply to non-living things?
-
@foxhole8063 I never quite got why people who support the theory always are so distinct in evolution and abiogenesis. It intuitely is the exact same thing, the same process accounts going from soup to fish and fish to land animal.
Then again you have to define what you mean by diversity, there's diversity within humans but we are still just humans ;)
-
@Stianchez True, evolutionary theory explains the diversity of life, not the origin. I think the problem with reading some of my comments to David is that they sometimes carry over from other threads ... that's an oversight on my part.
-
@foxhole8063 In short, as every scientists who works within the field of research excluded of how life orginiated. Does not care how life originated in regards to their work. Just the function ;) That was my whole claim. You seemed to assert somehow this supported the evolution theory in any way which it really has nothing to do with it.
-
@Stianchez Directed evolution is an application of the same exact principles, even if scientists are the ones who apply the selective pressures instead of nature.
I'm not trying to take credit for anything ... I'm just showing how these fields (including evolutionary biology) are interconnected. Their continued demonstrated success (and advances) is validation of the existing theories, even if they still need improvement. I don't care if they were developed by Mormons or Rastafarians.
-
@foxhole8063 It was some random poll targetting the world view people idenfitied themselves to who worked on the development teams. Then again, majority is often wrong i was merely stating my point.
The problem here is you try to take credit for something which just as easily applies to my side of the table.
Directed evolution is just survival of the fittest(luckiest) although it is done in an enclosed area. It has nothing to do with the evolution theory in the sense we are discussing.
-
@evoTARDSareINSANE Hopefully not for much longer. =)
-
@Stianchez OK smartassed comments aside, look up "directed evolution", showing how it is applied to botany / agriculture, medicine, etc. As I said, these fields are interconnected.
Not sure what your point is about this poll you read about, though.
@BereanBeacon1 "We are very interested in real science, but you have nothing that you would dare to expose in a science format in a public debate. "
The success of evolutionary biology, medicine, genetics, microbiology, etc., (and the national / international journals in which all of their findings are published for review) have repeatedly discredited your singularly unique and feebly manufactured interpretation of reality.
Keep on cluckin'.
foxhole8063 1 year ago 11
11 Seconds before they lie. The Cambrian Period is when most PHYLA first showed up in the fossil record, NOT the first Complex Animals. There were no land animals, no reptiles, no birds, no mammals, Nothing but small marine creatures. There were ''complex'' animals in the Pre-Cambrian. Everyone had a mom and a dad just like today.
gregrutz 9 months ago 4