Reading the buzz on this particular discovery, and what one views is a demonstration once again on why evolution is bad for science. It’s the only explanation of nature that continues to create more complex questions with unobservable explanations than discovering confirmations with its predictions. Still, the discovery is quite amazing, New Scientist writes…
“Two 400-million-year-old fossil plants are the oldest known examples of wood. They are small herbs, suggesting that wood did not evolve to help plants grow tall. Both fossils date from the early Devonian period, by which time simple plants had long colonised the land and begun diversifying. One was found in France and dates from 407 million years ago, while the other, from Canada, is 397 million years old.”
So how does this discovery of the earliest known fossil of wood disagree with evolution? Let’s start with the research paper in the journal of science which says…“The identification of a derived anatomical feature such as wood in two Early Devonian plants was unexpected.” Why would this be a surprise? Because wood is a complicated biomolecule and evolution is supposed to go from simple to complex. The older the fossil is, the simpler its structure should be, right? Of course if evolution was true, this would be the case.
The research paper attempts to rescue wood evolution with this explanation…
“The secondary xylem of the plant from France predates, by at least 10 million years, other early occurrences of wood. The small size of both plants and the presence of thick-walled cells in their cortex support the earlier suggestion (4) that the evolution of wood was initially driven by hydraulic constraints rather than by the necessity of mechanical support for increasing height. This is consistent with the large diameter of the wood tracheids, which improves conducting capacities, and with the need for increased conductance, resulting from the decrease of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations during Early Devonian times (5).”
Wood consists of some highly advanced engineering which humans may not ever be able to manufacture. One common component is, cellulose which is used to produce paper and currently researched as an alternative for bio-fuel. Its manufacturing site has enzymes which supply with the required raw materials and then uses those materials by placing them together according to a specified chemical arrangement which is vital, and enzymes in the front that arrange and crystallize the elongating string-like cellulose fibrils.
In other words, wood is highly complex. It requires 30 or more wood-making enzymes and yet there is absolutely no evidence that less than 30 could still do the job. Also, the wood evolutionary story lacks any evidence in the fossil record of fleshy and woody plants transitions. Science is much better at discovering how things work, rather than turning into a science fiction by trying to explain it in light of evolution. The amazing and brilliant engineering that took place in creating the wood remains the same today as it does with the earliest known fossil, no surprise there, just another confirmation of creationism!