Page 54 - The Cambrian Evidence that Darwin Failed to Comprehend
P. 54

The Cambrian Evidence That Darwin Failed to Comprehend

                   period, evolutionists took them to be of great importance.
                        Following the discovery in Australia of many fossils from this pe-
                   riod, specimens from the same age were found in Southern Namibia,
                   Russia, Great Britain, Sweden, Canada and America as well. Thorough
                   examination of all these fossils showed that the 16 or so different spe-
                   cies found in the Ediacara strata had left behind no remains of their
                              24
                   hard tissues. To put it another way, these creatures were entirely soft-
                   bodied.
                        It is true that a wide variety of multi-celled organisms emerged
                   suddenly in Ediacaran-period strata, immediately following after the
                   pre-Cambrian. However, their forms were completely unique and dif-
                   ferent from those of the later Cambrian life forms. Unlike Cambrian life
                   forms, they had no hard tissues, no complex structures and organs.
                   They were generally shaped like ferns, pouches or discs. These organ-
                   isms had various sensory extensions, but no apparent head sections or
                   respiratory, nervous or digestive systems. They had no complex physi-
                   ological systems, and their features are generally unclear.
                        The fact that these multi-cellular organisms emerged immediately
                   before the Cambrian led to their being the subjects of considerable spec-
                   ulation. Every evolutionist scientist trying to account for Cambrian life
                   forms looked for an ancestor by formulating a theory on Ediacaran life
                   forms.
                        For example, the evolutionist paleontologist Martin Glaessner and
                   his colleagues claimed that in this fauna, they could detect certain fea-
                   tures belonging to present-day phyla, but that these fossilized remains
                   were not sufficiently well preserved to be able to identify their charac-
                   teristics.
                        Another evolutionist, Adolf Seilacher, believed that jellyfish
                   would have been preserved as depressions in the sand. The Ediacaran
                   jellyfish, however, appeared as bumps on the undersides of sandstone
                   beds. In his view, this implied that those animals lived on the bottom







                                                    52
   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59