Cliff wrote:
>>The only evolutionary transformations we really have evidence of involve
>>distortion of skeletal parts and loss of parts; but the implied
>>simple-chordate to vertebrate transformation is highly *elaborative*.
>But that, in itself, should go a long way towards showing the reality of
>evolution.
I don't see how. I believe in evolution because I believe in naturalistic
explanation of natural phenomena, not because I can see how it all
happened. Showing the reality of evolution is not an issue for me.
Puzzling it out is.
>Actually the cambrian explosion is becoming less explosive.
>[various citations about pre-Cambrian invertebrates]
I don't see how these references shed light on the emergence of the
vertebrates. I guess if one is convinced that these inverts are vertebrate
progenitors, then every new one discovered is an exciting new puzzle
piece set into place.
--Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ cliff@noe.com