Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community


Researchers: Ediacaran explosion? There were complex ecosystems before the Cambrian

One can claim that the Cambrian explosion was nothing new only at the risk of shortening the time to establish complex ecologies, which should begin to create doubt about random processes in an active mind. Read More ›

Those awful comb jellies betray the Darwinians again: They were even more complex than feared, starting at maybe 635 million years ago

They’re said to have appeared between 634 and 604 million years ago (Peterson and Butterfield, 2005) and figure in the Cambrian Explosion. Darwinians have been trying to Cancel the Cambrian Explosion since practically forever but it keeps coming back into the fact base. Read More ›

Can the Cambrian Explosion be explained away by the earlier Ediacaran Explosion?

David Klinghoffer: Lukas Ruegger is the personable new intelligent design “explainer” whose videos take an approach similar to Khan Academy’s. The latter’s offering on evolution is replete with junk science, as Casey Luskin has detailed. Ruegger’s treatment of the subject is much better, and I appreciate his clarity and brevity. Read More ›

Did giant mountain ranges provide nutrients in early Earth’s history?

According to the new thesis, the erosion of mountains provided nutrients that were hitherto unavailable, that helped life forms get started. Sounds like a rollout, actually. Read More ›

Did glaciers cause a billion-year gap in information about the development of life?

At Vice: This giant lapse in Earth’s memory exceeds one billion years in some places, resulting in 550 million-year-old rocks sitting atop ancient layers that date back 1.7 billion years, with no trace of the many lost epochs in between… Read More ›

Günter Bechly: Ediacarans are not animals

From Part II of the “Precambrian House of Cards”: Even Evans et al. (2021) themselves admit that “phylogenetic affinities for most of the Ediacara Biota remain enigmatic” and say that “Many Ediacara taxa may represent stem lineages of animal phyla but their diagnostic characters either were not preserved or had not yet evolved.” Hear, hear. Günter Bechly, “Ediacarans Are Not Animals” at Mind Matters News The rest of Gunter Bechly’s series is here. Maybe back then it just wasn’t as clear.

Precambrian creature scrunches the origin of life even further

This “revolutionary animal” is not that much like the Cambrian creatures so far found but the big question is, how did life explode so quickly if it was only by chance? Why not just give up on that idea and study the creature for what it is? Read More ›

Gunter Bechly dismisses the Darwinian explain-away of the Cambrian fossil record

Paleontologist Gunter Bechly looks at the claim that the Cambrian animals evolved from a long train of ancestors who somehow all just disappeared without a trace and finds it, well, unconvincing: Read More ›

Ediacaran life contrasted with Cambrian life to shape Darwinian tale

In reality, we don’t know that earlier Ediacarans didn’t “evolve” the ability to form shells or skeletons. True, we haven’t found any yet. But some of us can’t help remembering the “bombshell” of Neanderthal art. Why was it a bombshell? Because Darwinians had staked a claim on the idea that Neanderthals couldn’t “do” art. This is likely just an another attempt to shape the history of life as a Darwinian fairytale. Read More ›