Cliff Lundberg wrote:
>Somehow the sudden appearance of complex organisms representing
>a superset of the modern phyla seems like more than a detail to me,
>but we all have our prejudices.
we certainly do! We also seem to have different definitions of "sudden." 100
million years just doesn't seem all that sudden to me. And yes, the *phyla*
seem to have originated then, but our own phylum--cordata--was represented
only by a few small fish. Obviously cordata have diversified quite a bit in
the 500 million years since then. For example, 180 million years ago,
mammals first appear.
>>Thus the rapid diversification of life during the Early Cambrian and the
>>appearance of organisms in the fossil record are related, but separate,
>>phenomenon.
>
>It doesn't bother me that I don't understand this statement, since its
>purpose is presumably to explain away that which should be elucidated
>with facts.
not understanding something should bother you.
>>Neither are "sudden" or "instantaneous", but show a sequential,
>>progressive increase.
>
>This is true to a degree, *if* you make up stories about, for example,
>Ediacaran fauna evolving into Cambrian forms.
you seem to think there's no evidence to support the remarks made by the
original writer. Evidence is the name of the game, obviously. Some of the
Ediacaran fauna bear a resemblance to some of the Cambrian fauna--which is
what the original writer was trying to say. You'll need to come up with a
good reason why that resemblance isn't important.
Susan
Susan
--------
Peace is not the absence of conflict--it is the presence of justice.
--Martin Luther King, Jr.
Please visit my website:
http://www.telepath.com/susanb