nested heirarchies as evidence against darwinian evolution

This is fun, where it gets good. Rand, please tell which of the 33 extant animal phyla began during the Cambrian explosion. Which ones? A list would be awesome. You specified animal, but what about the fungi and plants?Before you try you will find all of the plant and fungi are post Cambrian, as well as a number of animal taxa. But I will accept evidence of all animal taxa at a phylum level. List would be great.

You said that all animal phyla appear during the Cambrian explosion. I am asking that you account this with a list of which phyla. You did not.
There are 33 currently recognized phyla, how many of those are found in the Cambrian explosion?ABE: I know the answer to this, you do notEdited by Lithodid-Man, : To be snarky

Sorry, I stupidly thought you would do better. Most animal phyla did not occur during the Cambrian explosion. In fact ~8 or so did out of the 33 recognized phyla. I was trying to be nice. Let you find this out. But anyway. False statement? Admit wrongness or stick to it like a good YEC?

---

Doctor Bashir: "Of all the stories you told me, which were true and which weren't?"
Elim Garak: "My dear Doctor, they're all true"
Doctor Bashir: "Even the lies?"
Elim Garak: "Especially the lies"

You are ignoring that if only 8 phyla are known from the 'Cambrian explosion' then then rest of the 33 must have originated after. Bryozoa are one that comes to mind, they are critical reef animals in the Ordovician that did not exist until after the Cambrian.

Sorry I teach all day until 7 PM our time on Tuesdays(Phyla known through entire Phanerozoic, i.e. those Rand are calling most phyla are bolded)
Acanthocephala No fossil record
Acoelomorpha No fossil record
Annelida Early Cambrian
Arthropoda Early Cambrian
Brachiopoda Early Cambrian
Bryozoa Ordovician
Chaetognatha Early Cambrian
Chordata Middle Cambrian
Cnidaria Ediacaran
Ctenophora Devonian
Cycliophora No fossil record
Echinodermata Precambrian
Echiura Upper Carboniferous
Entoprocta No fossil record
Gastrotricha No fossil record
Gnathostomulida No fossil record
Hemichordata Middle Cambrian
Kinorhyncha No fossil record
Loricifera No fossil record
Mesozoa No fossil record
Micrognathozoa No fossil record
Mollusca Early Cambrian
Myxozoa No fossil record
Nematoda Cretaceous
Nematomorpha Middle Cambrian
Nemertea Upper Carboniferous ('Tully monster', highly
disputed as nemertean)
Onychophora Middle Cambrian
Orthonectida No fossil record
Phoronida Devonian
Placozoa No fossil record
Platyhelmithes No fossil record
Porifera Late Precambrian
Priapulida Middle Cambrian
Rhombozoa No fossil record
Rotifera Eocene
Sipuncula No fossil record
Tardigrada Middle Cambrian
Xenoturbellida No fossil recordSorry rand, you were wrong. Out of the 38 extant currently accepted phyla only 8 are found from the lower Cambrian or before. A simple "okay, I was wrong" will suffice. I know of course that will not happen, and my work here will somehow prove you even more right.I have decided that I will refrain from posting for awhile, just going to enjoy the current chatter as it is.References:Boardman RS, Cheetham AH, and Rowell AJ (1987) Fossil Invertebrates. Blackwell Scientific Publications. Bostom MA. 713 pp.Brusca RC and Brusca GJ (2003) Invertebrates 2nd ed. Sinauer Associates Inc. Sunderland, MA. 936 pp.Valentine JW (2005) On the Origin of Phyla. University of Chicago
Press. 608 pp.

---

Doctor Bashir: "Of all the stories you told me, which were true and which weren't?"
Elim Garak: "My dear Doctor, they're all true"
Doctor Bashir: "Even the lies?"
Elim Garak: "Especially the lies"

I could not let these gross insults go by, so am posting this.First of all Rand, I do not owe fuck all of an apology to you or the board. Not one of your links showed me to be 'factually incorrect'. Like your past issues, you should probably actually read the sources you cite (by read I mean read and understand). A U-shaped burrow that resembles Echiuran burrows suggests the possibility that the phylum is Cambrian, but in no way proves it. Many other infauna make similar burrows. Also, the Chenjiang and Burgess fauna are not part of the Cambrian explosion, the former (barely) lower and the latter mid Cambrian. Understand the difference?I am a professor of invertebrate zoology, I am well aware of the evidence for a very early origin of phyla. In fact, I actually believe that most phyla did originate before or near the beginning of the Cambrian. My complaint was the blanket statement as fact that "all but one" are proven to be Cambrian. This is an extremely out of date popular belief that severely lacks evidence. The majority of extant phyla have no fossil record. For these we require the rapidly growing science of molecular taxonomy. But if you want to use that as proof of age it is married inextricably to the theory of common descent.

---

Doctor Bashir: "Of all the stories you told me, which were true and which weren't?"
Elim Garak: "My dear Doctor, they're all true"
Doctor Bashir: "Even the lies?"
Elim Garak: "Especially the lies"

Look Rand, as per Percy's warning I am not going to allow you to poke me into saying something to get me banned (I suspect is your intent), although there are many many such things that come to mind.You seem to be incapable of understanding that I BELIEVE that most if not all animal phyla originated before the Cambrian, but the actual fossil evidence is that only 8 did. See the difference? This is just outright slanderous. I hope you someday recognize how nasty this is. This is just outright slanderous. I hope you someday recognize how nasty this is. However, if you looked at my original post to you:

---

Doctor Bashir: "Of all the stories you told me, which were true and which weren't?"
Elim Garak: "My dear Doctor, they're all true"
Doctor Bashir: "Even the lies?"
Elim Garak: "Especially the lies"