Larry Blanchard wrote:
Fletis Humplebacker wrote:

I've answered that as well. I even posted links as to what led them
to their conclusions. In the case of the Cambrian Explosion the
evidence doesn't fit the long running assertions of natural outcome.


Says who? Below is a quote from a PBS (Horrors - Satan incarnate) website:

"The question of how so many immense changes occurred in such a short
time is one that stirs scientists. Why did many fundamentally different
body plans evolve so early and in such profusion?


That right there is inaccurate so their biased showed up right out
of the gate. The life forms appeared fully formed, many of them
quite complex. We have less life forms now than then, which is
at odds with the often displayed evo-tree. To say it evolved that
way defies the theory of evolution itself and didn't give a fair
assessment to the controversy within the community itself.


Some point to the
increase in oxygen that began around 700 million years ago, providing
fuel for movement and the evolution of more complex body structures.


Unfortunantly the geological evidence has done away with that one.
PBS did some sloppy research. What a surprise.



Others propose that an extinction of life just before the Cambrian
opened up ecological roles, or "adaptive space," that the new forms
exploited.


I've seen that one too. That too defies Darwinian Evolution. We
are now suggesting that DNA somehow senses opportunity
and makes the best of it while the going is good.


External, ecological factors like these were undoubtedly
important in creating the opportunity for the Cambrian explosion to occur.


How so?

http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/Ec...sil_record.htm
Understanding both the onset and the termination of such bursts is a
major challenge. Critical tests for the trigger or damper of the Cambrian
explosion have been difficult. Potential mechanisms are plentiful and fall
roughly into an extrinsic set of ecological or physical triggers and brakes
and an intrinsic set of thresholds in the increasing complexity and later
stabilization of developmental systems. However, without a time machine
to perform reciprocal transplant experiments between Cambrian and
modern seas, the rival hypotheses so far have resisted falsification; clearly,
broadly multidisciplinary work is essential to crack this problem.



Internal, genetic factors were also crucial. Recent research suggests
that the period prior to the Cambrian explosion saw the gradual
evolution of a "genetic tool kit" of genes that govern developmental
processes.


I'm not a biologist, I don't think you are either, but doesn't that
sound a bit like groping to you? Research suggesting a genetic
tool kit? Did they even bother sourcing that one?


Once assembled, this genetic tool kit enabled an
unprecedented period of evolutionary experimentation -- and competition.

Wow. Them genes is smart.


Many forms seen in the fossil record of the Cambrian disappeared without
trace.


Except for the fossils, of course. Did they mean abrupt ending?
How rude, you'd think they would have the decency to die off
gradually like any self respecting creature.

Once the body plans that proved most successful came to dominate
the biosphere,


Wait...could that explain the sudden disappearances? Hmmm,
I think they may be onto something.


evolution never had such a free hand again, and
evolutionary change was limited to relatively minor tinkering with the
body plans that already existed."


In other words the fossil record disproves the evo-tree we've
all been subjected to. We have less life forms now, they didn't
keep evolving into ever increasing phyla.


And there's also the view that many of the early multicelled animals
were softbodied and left little evidence of their existence. The
Burgess Shale is the only site I know of.


Good news, there's a better one at Chengjiang, China.
http://www.origins.org/articles/chie...ionoflife.html


And I have trouble calling a change over 30,000,000 years an "explosion".

That's easy for you to say.