Page 229 - The Cambrian Evidence that Darwin Failed to Comprehend

HARUN YAHYA

counterexamples are not confined to trilobites. No life form possess-
es any fossil record of such a kind as to confirm the kind of develop-
ment hypothesized by Darwinism.
Stephen Jay Gould writes:
The eyes of early trilobites, for example, have never been exceeded for
complexity or acuity by later arthropods . . . I regard the failure to find
a clear “vector of progress” in life’s history as the most puzzling fact
of the fossil record. 171
The fossil record has always reminded paleontologists just how
much Darwin’s theory is at odds with the scientific facts. As Ernst
Mayr admits:
Paleontologists had long been aware of a seeming contradiction be-
tween Darwin’s postulate of gradualism . . . and the actual findings of
paleontology. 172

As you can see from these statements, the natural history of life
forms cannot be explained in terms of Darwinism. The complexity
displayed in the Cambrian explosion was already at an exceedingly
high level. In later periods, species did not progress from the simple
to the complex, but remained exactly as they were when first creat-
ed by Almighty Allah.

The Imaginary Mechanisms of Evolution Are
Bankrupt

When Darwin proposed genetic variation and natural selection
as the mechanisms of the imaginary process of evolution, he as-
sumed that life was based on very simple foundations. He was un-
able to even imagine the complexity inside the cell, given the prim-
itive scientific climate of his day. In the second half of the 20th cen-
tury, however, advances in the field of molecular biology illuminat-
ed the cell’s complex structure, and it emerged that the cell con-

Adnan Oktar

227