quote:
Somehow I think the message in the OP and the links are not getting through.
Somehow I think you are getting fustrated that the implications that can be drawn from the scientific research are not the implications you would like to draw.
-
quote:
Chen's work shows that soft-bodied creatures are extremely well-preserved in the fossil record, thus refuting the common evo explanation you offered.
What evo explanation did I offer that was refuted by Chen? From your quote:
What they had actually proved was that phosphate is fully capable of preserving whatever animals may have lived there in Precambrian times.
Is this what you are referring to? This isn't new -- hell, Stephen Jay Gould wrote an essay over ten years ago discussing this method of preservation and explaining the insights that these fossil discoveries have offered concerning the pre-Cambrian history of metazooan evolution.
-
...Chen instead found a chordate that already displayed many vertebrate characteristics 15 million years earlier.
So? The origin of vertebrates is at least 15 million years earlier than originally thought. That is an interesting discovery, to be sure, but not anything that is going to overturn the theory of evolution.
-
Taiwanese biologist Li was also direct: "No evolution theory can explain these kinds of phenomena."
Which is incorrect. Natural selection on randomly occurring variations is adequate. I don't see anything in these people's research, at least nothing that you have posted, that denies that these species were produced by natural selection acting on random variations.
At most, the papers are discussing timing issues which, as interesting as they are, are nothing that contradicts the theory of evolution.
-
quote:
What I would like to see is some evo here take the time to grasp Chen's and his associates' claims....
It doesn't take much time to grasp their claims. Chen has (or had) some hair-brained alternate idea of evolution that he favored, and decided to read into the data a problem that doesn't exist in order to promote his own idiosyncratic theory.
--
quote:
To date, it doesn't appear anyone even "gets" what the Asian scientists are saying.
Until someone presents some sort of citation for these scientists' alternate theory of evolution, including a mechanism that would make their ideas work, and a discussion of
actual (as opposed to imaginary) problems that this theory explains better than the standard theory of evolution, then these scientists aren't saying much.
"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt
™ Version 4.2
