Soft Animal Discovered During The Cambrian Explosion

Lobopods resemble something like a velvet worm which means these worms have legs.  A pretty remarkable discovery, the Lobopod fossil was found in the midwest, namely in Illinois. Previously these animals were discovered in places like the Burgess Shale in Canada and also in Sweden.

There has been some confusion about the worms in terms of where they fit in the evolutionary tree (taxonomy). Evolutionists have narrowed it down to ancestors of arthropods or related to modern water bears. The discovery was a surprise to Paleontologists who thought these animals had died out in the middle Cambrian, but recently, an exquisitely-preserved fossil has been discovered in Carboniferous rock in Illinois!

In Current Biology

“Lobopodians, a nonmonophyletic assemblage of worm-shaped soft-bodied animals most closely related to arthropods, show two major morphotypes: long-legged and short-legged forms.”

“The morphotype with stubby, conical legs has a long evolutionary history, from the early Cambrian through the Carboniferous, including the living onychophorans and tardigrades. Species with tubular lobopods exceeding the body diameter have been reported exclusively from the Cambrian; the three-dimensionally preserved Orstenotubulus evamuellerae from the uppermost middle Cambrian “Orsten” (Sweden) is the youngest long-legged lobopodian reported thus far.”

“Here we describe a new long-legged lobopodian, Carbotubulus waloszeki gen. et sp. nov., from Mazon Creek, Illinois, USA (∼296 million years ago). This first post-Cambrian long-legged lobopodian extends the range of this morphotype by about 200 million years. The three-dimensionally preserved specimen differs significantly from the associated short-legged form Ilyodes inopinata, of which we also present new head details.”

“The discovery of a Carboniferous long-legged lobopodian provides a more striking example of the long-term survival of Cambrian morphotypes than, for example, the occurrence of a Burgess Shale-type biota in the Ordovician of Morocco and dampens the effect of any major extinction of taxa at the end of the middle Cambrian.”

No doubt, this remarkable find has increased the complexity (caused a problem) within the framework of evolution. For instance, with the stories of mass extinctions of other animals, this one did fine for supposedly 200 million years without changing.

Of course, the exquisite preservation found with the fossilized details of soft tissues challenges beliefs (in evolution) that these animals lasted nearly 300 million years with all the geologic and climatic changes that supposedly went on during all those years! However, the exquisite preservation of soft tissues does in fact confirm the creationist time frame of a young earth!

And finally, another remarkable thing about this fossil discovery is that the fact that the animal was found in the midwest,  which were known to be in Sweden and Canada, shows its wide “range extension” of these tiny creatures!

So these multicellular animals with coordinated legs, bilateral symmetry, a gut, and behavior suited for their life were unchanged, no evolution! And their delicate, little soft-bodied animals that did just wonderful for 200 million years in evolutionary time while other animals were having mass exits from the world along with geological and climate changes in the story of evolution.

Increased complexity in a theory is not confirmation, this discovery of a fossil demonstrates in part, that the story of evolution is not true!

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Soft Animal Discovered During The Cambrian Explosion

  1. Poor Michael. He has disproved evolution nine times in the past month, yet none of the world’s 440,000 life-sciences researchers has even noticed.

    Now we are treated to yet another maundering mixture of misrepresentation and ignorance of basic science.

    However, the exquisite preservation of soft tissues does in fact confirm the creationist time frame of a young earth!

    The abstract of the Current Biology paper does not say that any “soft tissue” was recovered. Michael made this up. It’s a lie.

    [W]ith the stories of mass extinctions of other animals, this one did fine for supposedly 200 million years without changing.

    This one is a toss-up between misrepresentation and ignorance of basic biology. The animal reported in the paper is not the same animal found in Cambrian shales from 200 million years previously. The abstract notes “Here we describe a new long-legged lobopodian, Carbotubulus waloszeki gen. et sp. nov.” Since Michael has not a clue as to taxonomy, the last four words of this quotation signify that the newly found fossil is not only a different species, but an entirely different genus. Unchanged for millions of years? Lie or ignorance.

    [A]nother remarkable thing about this fossil discovery is that the fact that the animal was found in the midwest, which were [sic] known to be in Sweden and Canada, shows [sic] its [sic] wide ”range extension” of these tiny creatures!

    The Burgess shale is one of a number of rock formations dating from the Cambrian epoch. Michael mentions Sweden. The name Cambrian came from the ancient name for Wales—Cambria—which is where the first fossils were found. Cambrian animals enjoyed a world-wide range. So why would it be unusual that, if some Cambian-era species survived to the Carboniferous period, they might be found in Illinois? In fact, the abstract notes that Ordovician descendants of Cambrian species have been found in Morocco—and that’s a long, long way from Tipperary. So Michael’s claim here results from stupidity.

    Final score for Michael’s three major claims in this post—
    > One outright lie.
    > One toss-up (lie or ignorance)
    > One ignorant brain failure.

  2. The desperation inherent in your attempt to spin this as evidence for creationism is palpable.

  3. In fact, it’s so palpable that you can actually feel it :-)

    Creationist arguments feel desperate because they do not stem from intellectual disagreement, but rather from fear. Since their entire religious belief system is grounded upon a literalist interpretation of Genesis, any chink in the physical evidence topples the entire structure.

    This fear requires unceasing efforts to ignore and distort growing bodies of evidence in biology, paleontology, anthropology, cosmology, and physics. This is why scientists refer to creationists as “liars for Jesus.” Dishonesty not only runs rampant, it inheres within the system itself. Creationists must lie.

    The irony is that this “naïve literalism” concept was considered by early Christian theologians and discarded 1,500 years ago. Then it was revived by the early 20thC Fundamentalist movement, whose founding principle was the rejection of the entire two-millenia corpus of theological studies. In another irony, their basis for treating Genesis as a factual account was the increasing popularization of science at that time. Nascent fundamentalists asked, why should we not also treat Genesis as a scientific record? Science created creationism.

  4. . . . . Soft Animal Discovered During The Cambrian Explosion

    So who discovered it? No humans existed during the Cambrian explosion.

    Oh, right. The discoverer must have been Adam or Eve.

  5. Speaking of soft animals—More recently, (Oct. 31) Jean K. Lightner[1] wrote yet another baraminology paper in Answers Journal.

    She didn’t know what to do with the greater gliding possums, so she gave this 17-species family its own “kind.” And she included a picture of a representative animal.

    The only problem was that the picture she showed was actually of a stuffed toy![2]

    As a result of all the laughter, the picture has been replaced. However, The Panda’s Thumb has saved a copy of the original stuffed-toy picture in “The Science of Antediluvian Plushies.

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

    [1] Answers Journal lists Dr. Lightner as an “independent scholar.” That’s because they didn’t want to add the “DVM” to her name. Right—Dr Lightner is a retired veterinarian!

    [2] Reminds one of the time Harun Yahya’s creationist book pictured a fishing lure as an actual insect.

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