Can Evolutionists explain the sudden appearance of complex life forms in the "lowest" fossil strata?
Synopsis of Part I Even staunch evolutionists acknowledge that "little or nothing is known about the origin of life." But they offer three alternatives:
1) That life has always existed; 2) that life came into being by some slow, natural process (the evolution of life from dead matter); 3) the correct solution to the problem — life forms were suddenly created by a Being having life inherent in Himself.
This last theory they list as a "possibility," but their united efforts are to present the second one — evolution — in a "plausible manner." However, it is the universal opinion of those scientists working in the field that "there is no evidence that" the emergence of life from dead matter — the very basis of evolution — "has ever taken place or does at this time."
That is quite an admission!
The first alternative — that of organic life having always existed — is completely untenable to atheist, agnostic, and Christian alike. But the second explanation to account for the origin of life — the theory of evolution — is equally untenable! Notice:
The first fossil remains are in many instances IDENTICAL TO LIVING FORMS In many cases these creatures were buried alive as if by some great catastrophe. Instead of a few simple primitive forms, myriads of complex creatures are found at the very bottom of the Cambrian strata. In the pre-Cambrian below, nothing or next to nothing is to be found. The few fragments found, even after the most thorough world-wide search, are identical with Cambrian fossils. They could more properly be called Cambrian fossils.
The problem for the evolutionist remains: Why has it been impossible to find a fossil layer with but a few simple primitive organisms?
An immense period of time is suggested between the pre-Cambrian and Cambrian strata. The "supposed" record is supposedly destroyed. But complex life forms appear suddenly in this Cambrian strata all over the world.
Was there ever an earlier record? How could such a world-wide record be destroyed?
Five Rejected Theories Evolutionists claim their record is destroyed. Yet, true men of science among them have inadvertently given us the following facts. They list FIVE THEORIES for the lack of preservation of the life which they believe existed in the Precambrian — then they take each in its turn and disprove it.
We ask: Why are there no fossils in the pre-Cambrian rocks? They answer with a theory and then give objections which disprove the theory.
Here are their theories and their objections.
THEORY NO. 1) All life was destroyed by the metamorphism of the rocks in which they occurred. Objection: 90% of pre-Cambrian rocks are schists, gneiss and marble, distorted by heat and pressure, but the remaining 10% are not. The remaining 10% should contain fossils if evolution were true.
THEORY NO. 2) Life only existed in those areas which were metamorphosed. Objections: This would be very fortunate for the theory of evolution but is most improbable due to the widespread occurrence of the unmetamorphosed areas which were certainly accessible to ocean life and thus ought to contain fossils.
THEORY NO. 3) The oceans were too acid for calcium to be used for shells and thus no trace of the animal was preserved. Objections: The oceans were more likely fresh to begin with. Also, siliceous and chitinous skeletons could have been formed and preserved apart from the calcium requirement. Such types are found in the Cambrian rocks.
THEORY NO. 4) There wasn't enough calcium in the ocean for the animals to have shells. Objection: Limestone layers 50,000 feet (?) thick were deposited in this early strata showing an abundance of calcium.
THEORY NO. 5) Life forms lived only in the upper zones of the ocean at first and had no hard parts. Either they became lazy, grew hard parts, and being heavier settled to the bottom, or else they found the ocean bottom first, then became lazy in their new environment and grew hard parts. Thus the sudden appearance of fossils. Objections: For life to spend many millions of years in the uppermost portions of the ocean without finding shore, shallow water or ocean bottom is nothing short of ridiculous. Even after accepting such an idea the problem remains as to why suddenly many forms of life should take on complete skeletons with no intermediate "evolutionary steps."
No transitional forms are found. Each species thus learned to develop its hard shell suddenly!
A great number of species occur together with hard shells in the lower Cambrian. All must have "learned" the secret of hard shell development simultaneously.
Thus this fifth theory is also completely lacking in facts, logic and plain good judgment.
Why Men Can't See Thus at present scientists have left themselves without m explanation for the complex, numerous "advanced" life forms of the Cambrian rocks and the complete absence of life in the layer usually beneath it. In rejecting the Scriptural account (Genesis 1) as evidence they find themselves without any explanation.
THE CORRECT CONCLUSION you ought to have drawn from the evidence presented is that in the beginning life forms were created complex as we find them; then at a later date they were buried in the rocks by catastrophic upheavals of earth and water. They did not evolve to that complex stage as the evolutionary theory demands.
Since the days of Darwin, men have clung tenaciously to the theory he published but never proved, even to himself. Why? Because to believe otherwise would in the end lead to the acknowledgement of the Creator revealed in the Bible. To acknowledge this Creator would be to consent that certain obligations might be due Him. It would also put these educated men in the rather uncomfortable place of having a rival whose knowledge was as far superior to theirs as wisdom is to foolishness. Intellectual pride would have to vanish.
Man's mind, the carnal mind he is born with, is enmity against God (Romans 8:7). It will not think rationally when faced with the Biblical facts proving the existence of the Creator who has revealed himself to man through the Scriptures.
It is quite possible that bad no Bible ewer been written proclaiming the existence of our Creator, that the efforts of scientists in every field would have quickly discovered the facts of creation Had no Foods ever been described in the Scriptures, historians and archeologists alike would have discovered the evidence, reasoned correctly with it and arrived at the correct historical account of the earth. Geologists would have studied the fossil strata and held forth the truth to the world with fervor equal to that with which they now propagate the godless doctrine of evolution.
But the human mind is rebellious against God; it will not willingly subject itself to the law of God; neither will it acknowledge that a revealed history of the earth and life forms is correct.
Evolution thus becomes the opiate of the atheist to distort his vision and keep him from seeing his God.
The carnal mind cannot accept God. It must cling to this "favorite belief" that life came into being by some slow natural process.
Where Is the Evolutionary Tree? The roots from the tree of evolution disappear in our search for the evolution of life from dead matter. The stump vanishes when we ask for those "few, simple, primitive" life forms. The thirteen great branches, the 13 phyla into which all animals are classified, fade away when we find all represented in the earliest fossil strata. Even the smaller branches vanish when we see this Cambrian life "already evolved" into classes, orders, genera, and species.
It's about time to ask where is the tree? The roots, trunk and branches are gone. Only the twigs remain.
Blood relation between individuals and many so called species of the Cambrian strata is certain. Further speculation is in the realm of philosophy, not true science.
This tree of evolution is thus shown to be but a dream in the minds of men and like a dream it will disappear for them when their eyes are opened.