Page 60 - The Cambrian Evidence that Darwin Failed to Comprehend

Darwinists maintain that supposedly, the ancestors of
Cambrian life forms left no traces behind because
they were soft-tissued. Yet the earliest fossils of bac-
teria, dating back 3.5 billion years, totally do away
with these deceptive evolutionist claims.

comers. Rather, the change that occurred between the two faunas
looks much more like a case of replacement. 33
As it became apparent that the life forms that emerged in the
Cambrian were so very different from those that had appeared in the
Ediacaran, some evolutionists ascribed the failure to find the supposed
“ancestors” of Cambrian life forms to the scattered, dispersed nature of
the fossil record. Some maintained that the supposed ancestors of
Cambrian life forms were either very small, or else had failed to fossil-
ize because of their soft body structure. Others, through various molec-
ular comparisons, referred to an imaginary ancestor that had lived mil-
lions of centuries before the Cambrian.
None of these, or any similar claims, had any scientific basis, and
certainly went no further than being hypotheses. The idea of “dispersed
fossil record” was rejected by many paleontologists. Sufficient pre-
Cambrian and Cambrian fossils had been found, and paleontologists

58