Re: [asa] Fossil Discovery Is Heralded

From: David Campbell <pleuronaia@gmail.com>
Date: Tue May 26 2009 - 15:04:22 EDT

>> Now if the fossil had been found in 10000 year old glacial till or in the
>> Cambrian then "evolution" would be wrong

If it was found in younger deposits, that's no problem-forms retaining
ancestral conditions can survive after new types arise. There might
be a problem if a very good fossil record only showed the supposed
ancestor more recent than some of the supposed descendants, but
primates have a bad habit of living in trees and falling apart after
death instead of burrowing into the bottom of shallow oceans and
having only one or two shells, a much better way to have a good fossil
record.

A mammal turning up in the Cambrian would be problematic for
evolution. Although it would not prove that everything else didn't
evolve, we might start speculating about a lost alien pet or the like
in the particular case (or misdated rocks, like the "Carboniferous"
Physa snail that turned out to be Cretaceous.)

-- 
Dr. David Campbell
425 Scientific Collections
University of Alabama
"I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue May 26 15:04:31 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 26 2009 - 15:04:31 EDT