Page 81 - The Cambrian Evidence that Darwin Failed to Comprehend

HARUN YAHYA

from it over long periods of time. Yet Walcott was looking at evi-
dence that demonstrated that over two dozen phyla had emerged
together and suddenly. This meant a total refutation of the “evolu-
tionary tree” idea. Phyla, represented by the most remote branches
of the tree and which should have appeared last, after species had
time to differentiate, actually emerged at the beginning of the histo-
ry of life.
No doubt Walcott’s discovery was highly significant, yet it took
another 70 years for the blow it had dealt to Darwinism to be re-
vealed.
Instead of making the fossils he had obtained available to the
world of science, Walcott decided to hide them. He was then the sec-
retary of the famous Smithsonian Institution in Washington D.C.,
and also a dyed-in-the-wool Darwinist. According to the theory of
evolution, relatively simple fossils should be expected in rocks of
that age. Yet in terms of anatomical complexity, there was no differ-
ence between the fossils Walcott discovered and present-day crea-
tures such as crabs, starfish and worms. For Darwinists, the alarm-
ing aspect about this was that in older rocks, no fossils had been en-
countered that could possibly be the forerunners of the creatures in
this Burgess Shale formation.
Faced by this dilemma, Walcott felt sure that the fossils he had
discovered would represent a major difficulty for the theory of evo-
lution. So instead of announcing them, he sent them to the
Smithsonian Institution, along with a few photographs he had tak-
en and a series of notes.
The Burgess Shale fossils were locked away in drawers and for-
gotten for the next 70 years. They saw the light of day only in 1985,
when the museum’s archives were being re-examined. The Israeli
scientist Gerald Schroeder comments:
Had Walcott wanted, he could have hired a phalanx of graduate stu-

Adnan Oktar

79