“Organs Of Extreme Perfection” Discovered In Cambrian

Wow, that is one word which describes this incredible find in the Early Cambrian! Some think that the fossil record somehow proves evolution. Most of us who went to school have seen a diagram of the geologic column presented to us as we learned about the story of evolution. It displays smooth progressions over millions of years, and does give you the impression that fossils are always discovered in the same definite order with no problems fossils ever being discovered ‘in the wrong place’.

This latest discovery is quite remarkable. Trilobite eyes found in the Cambrian were already astonishing and surprisingly complex due to the fact on where it was found, and now complex eyes with amazingly designed modern optics from an unknown arthropod was discovered!

In Nature

“Despite the status of the eye as an “organ of extreme perfection”, theory suggests that complex eyes can evolve very rapidly. The fossil record has, until now, been inadequate in providing insight into the early evolution of eyes during the initial radiation of many animal groups known as the Cambrian explosion.

This is surprising because Cambrian Burgess-Shale-type deposits are replete with exquisitely preserved animals, especially arthropods, that possess eyes. However, with the exception of biomineralized trilobite eyes, virtually nothing is known about the details of their optical design. Here we report exceptionally preserved fossil eyes from the Early Cambrian (~515 million years ago) Emu Bay Shale of South Australia, revealing that some of the earliest arthropods possessed highly advanced compound eyes, each with over 3,000 large ommatidial lenses and a specialized ‘bright zone’.

These are the oldest non-biomineralized eyes known in such detail, with preservation quality exceeding that found in the Burgess Shale and Chengjiang deposits. Non-biomineralized eyes of similar complexity are otherwise unknown until about 85 million years later. The arrangement and size of the lenses indicate that these eyes belonged to an active predator that was capable of seeing in low light.

The eyes are more complex than those known from contemporaneous trilobites and are as advanced as those of many living forms. They provide further evidence that the Cambrian explosion involved rapid innovation in fine-scale anatomy as well as gross morphology, and are consistent with the concept that the development of advanced vision helped to drive this great evolutionary event.”

Let me begin by asking a few important questions, How does a sudden appearance in the fossil record that has a complex trait like vision could “drive” an evolutionary event? Where are the transitional eyes in the fossil record that are simpler than these which were recently discovered? Was evolution so fast nobody could see the transitional eyes in the fossil record? While the authors invent more stuff into the story of evolution due to another falsification, the evidence points to more complexity and adaptive perfection than was thought possible for animals this early!

There are a number of things to take note of, first, let’s do a science experiment by taking a look at a side-by-side comparison of the fossil imprint with a living insect eye, and one notices that it’s virtually no difference in complexity!  “The extremely regular arrangement of lenses seen here exceeds even that in certain modern taxa, such as the horseshoe crab,” the authors point out. The eyes were designed advanced enough to give the owner binocular vision!

What is even more amazing is this admission, “The arrangement and size gradient of lenses creates a distinct ‘bright zone’ (also called the acute zone or fovea), where the visual field is sampled with higher light sensitivity (due to large ommatidia) and possibly a higher acuity (due to what seems to be a more parallel orientation of ommatidia),” they said.  “Such visual specializations, characteristic of many modern taxa, are otherwise unknown in the Early Cambrian.”

The authors even used the term, “explosion” in their conclusion but with the story of evolution without any evidence of in the fossil record that contain transitional forms of this newly discovered animal. Also, one cannot call this a “trigger” of the Cambrian explosion! It would be like saying, a rocket appeared abruptly which then triggered a trip to the moon! Talk about completely and utterly nonsense! By the way, evolutionists for years have been trying to refute, the Cambrian explosion , claiming it wasn’t really an explosion (another illusion) but here we find authors who most likely dislike creationism or intelligent design, using the term “explosion” a number of times in their paper!

So they find these “organs of extreme perfection” in the early Cambrian with no transitions just giving the public a story about how stuff just happens in evolution. But Christians ought to rejoice in such a discovery and feel blessed, it clearly reveals a Creator, one with an amazing mindset that goes well beyond our understanding that we can learn from and also confirms this as His creation not some mindless process of errors!

Advertisements

5 thoughts on ““Organs Of Extreme Perfection” Discovered In Cambrian

  1. Michael: “Some think that the fossil record somehow proves evolution. ”

    Nah, not some, but most.

    Donald Prothero’s “What the fossils say” is a very nice read, and very convincing.

  2. Once again, Michael’s train of thought fails to leave the station.

    Let me begin by asking a few important questions, How does a sudden appearance in the fossil record that has a complex trait like vision could “drive” an evolutionary event?

    This is not a question. It’s not even a sentence. What “evolutionary event” does this refer to?

    Where are the transitional eyes in the fossil record that are simpler than these which were recently discovered?

    They are all over the place. But the ones discovered so far have been biomineralized, which destroys details of the optics. However, the fossil record of the Cambrian does contain eyes whose gross structure is simpler, including simpler trilobite eyes.[1]. In fact, although all trilobite eyes were more advanced than contemporaneous eyes, they have a simpler construction, which allows both visual acuity and better preservation: they were formed of inorganic mineral (calcite), rather than complex organic compounds. In addition, they were compound eyes, which are more easily evolved,[2] although ultimately more limited.[3]

    Michael also fails to note the ways in which the newly discovered eyes were “more advanced” than contemporaneous trilobite eyes. (a) They had 3,000 facets, where the trilobites had only 100 facets. The facets themselves had the same construction, there were merely more of them. This is not any kind of radical change in structure. but merely a numerical proliferation. (b) One area of the eyes had a greater sensitivity than the remaining areas. Again, this is a difference in number of receptor cells, and not a difference in the kind of cells or their construction. Merely a numerical proliferation. This is the kind of change where evolution excels—if something works, make more of them.

    Was evolution so fast nobody could see the transitional eyes in the fossil record?

    Only creationists cannot see it. They seem to have a third type of eye—one that allows only objects of a certain kind to be perceived, and is insensitive to others. (See [1] below.)

    .

    We should also note one other elementary point that Michael overlooks. This is the first discovery of a non-biomineralized eye from this period. All that means is that no others have yet been found. Michael’s fallacy is to assume that this implies that no others exist.

    =============

    [1] Michael even notes this in his post. But then he ignores it: “with the exception of biomineralized trilobite eyes, virtually nothing is known about the details of their optical design.”

    [2] Because they involve repetition of a simple basic structure, rather than a streucture having many different kinds of parts, sucgh as a vertebrate eye.

    [3] That is, although compound eyes are better light gatherers than simple camera-type eyes, they cannot achieved anything close to the image-forming ability of camera eyes. The “advanced” trilobite eye had about 3,000 pixels; the human eye has the equivalent of a million..

  3. What is even more amazing is this admission, ….

    Why does Michael describe so many unexpected discoveries as “admissions”?

    Does he think that scientists are trying to hide evidence, the way creationists do?

    Does he think that scientists’ statements can demolish a theory, the way that prophets’ revelations can invalidate religious beliefs?

    Give it up, Michael. You’ve gone beyond ignorance, at least to reckless disregard for truth, and in some cases to deliberate lies. No one trusts you anymore, even to report the bare facts correctly. Your few fans may share your beliefs, but even they would not trust you enough to take action based upon what you say.

  4. The eyes were designed advanced enough to give the owner binocular vision!

    Michael again demonstrates his ignorance of biology. Or his intent to deceive. Take your pick.

    Does binocular vision require an adavnced or more complex structure? Does it require a different type of eye or a different neural structure?

    NO. Take any two eyes of any type. If their fields of vision overlap each other, then their owner has binocular vision, if not, not.

    And there are situations that favor binocular and that favor monocular. Binocular vision is better in forward vision, and allows depth percweption. But it inherently sacrifices acuity and range of peripheral vision. Generally, predators like binocular vision. Monocular vision saxcrifices depth perception, but has higher acuity over a much wider total field of view. Generally, prey prefer monocuular vision.

    Please stop making things up, Michael.

  5. Eelco,

    Does Prothero’s writings rely on the 1994 Nilsson paper where all of a sudden the eye could evolve rapidly while omitting the entire evolution of cellular signal transduction and the vision cascade?

    In another paper which has been referred to in the original post, it also stated…

    “Charles Darwin thought that the eye, which he called an “organ of extreme perfection,” was a serious challenge to evolutionary theory — but he was mistaken. Theory predicts that eyes can evolve with great speed, and now there is support for this prediction from the fossil record.”

    As a result of discovering highly complex eyes in an ancient part of the fossil record, they concluded that evolution can go in rapid mode as well as predicting it. You can do this with anything like my invention of botrons which I mentioned to you in another post as an explanation of what’s keeping the universe together. All one has to do is assume is true and it will start making predictions with observations, and when observations falsify one of its many predictions, one absorbs into the ‘theory’ so it does in the future. That’s how you keep a story based on a faulty interpretation of the data going. So it’s not what the fossils are telling you, it’s you telling the fossils.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s