Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,249 Year: 5,506/9,624 Month: 531/323 Week: 28/143 Day: 1/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does Chen's work pose a problem for ToE?
Belfry
Member (Idle past 5202 days)
Posts: 177
From: Ocala, FL
Joined: 11-05-2005


Message 53 of 84 (290222)
02-24-2006 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by randman
02-24-2006 7:45 PM


Re: Absolutely no big deal.
Randman, you seem to be missing the point. Chen's own findings later falsified the points he was making in your quotes from an earlier year. As the article Jar posted discusses, Bilateria can be found in the fossil record long before the Cambrian - although finding them is a matter of significant technical difficulty, for some of the reasons already discussed.
Here's a more recent abstract from Chen et al.:
Science | AAAS
quote:
Ten phosphatized specimens of a small (Vernanimalcula guizhouena gen. et sp. nov.) had paired coeloms extending the length of the gut; paired external pits that could be sense organs; bilateral, anterior-posterior organization; a ventrally directed anterior mouth with thick walled pharynx; and a triploblastic structure. The structural complexity is that of an adult rather than a larval form. These fossils provide the first evidence confirming the phylogenetic inference that Bilateria arose well before the Cambrian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by randman, posted 02-24-2006 7:45 PM randman has not replied

  
Belfry
Member (Idle past 5202 days)
Posts: 177
From: Ocala, FL
Joined: 11-05-2005


Message 81 of 84 (290877)
02-27-2006 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Modulous
02-27-2006 9:45 AM


Re: incidentally
Modulous writes:
quote:
Western scientists would have none of it. “It doesn’t matter if you find it or not!” declared German biologist Dieter Walossek, rallying his Western colleagues around him. “It’s there! It’s by law! All of the major taxa should have been there in the Precambrian, whether proved or not!”
As arrogant as Walossek comes off in this quote, it turns out he has a point. The bilaterals were there.
Just to drive this point home a little further, Chen et al. make direct reference to this in the abstract to their 2004 article I cited earlier, in which they announced the precambrian find:
quote:
These fossils provide the first evidence confirming the phylogenetic inference that Bilateria arose well before the Cambrian.
In other words, these fossils confirm a prediction that was based on evolutionary theory. That Chen himself is/was skeptical of the explanatory power of the modern synthesis should add some extra credibility to his find, for those who believe that there is a self-deluded conspiracy afoot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2006 9:45 AM Modulous has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024