Posts Tagged ‘Cambrian’

Teoria Darwiniana x Cambrian Explosion

Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019


Ha 540 milhões de anos atras apareceram grande quantidade de novas especies sem evidencias de terem vindo pela evolução das especies anteriores. No quadro abaixo se nota a diferença dos dados em fóssil record entre Cambrian e pre-cambrian. Isto esta sendo usado com insistência pelos contra-evolucionistas como “prova” de que evolução não existe. na teoria da Matrix/DNA, no entanto, isto não é problema para manter a teoria de que evolução existe. Senão vejamos:

– A Matrix/DNA sugere o modelo anatômico de LUCA, como building block de sistemas astronômicos;

– A Matrix/DNA sugere um mecanismo entropico pelo qual fragmentos de LUCA – que consistem nos bits-informação do corpo de LUCA – são espalhados no espaço sideral e por vários tempos diferentes:

– A Matrix/DNA, baseada no mecanismo genético, sugere o mecanismo pelo qual estes bits-informação caem nas superfícies de planetas e tentam reconstruir o mais próximo possível o sistema astronômico de onde vieram;

– A Matrix/DNA sugere como a entropia ataca inicialmente a periferia do corpo de LUCA. A partir da periferia vai se desprendendo bits cada vez mais internos ate alcançar o centro nuclear do sistema. isto implica que informações diferentes relacionadas a diferentes estágios da reconstrução de LUCA chegam aos planetas em pacotes em tempos e lugares diferentes.

– Assim a Matrix/DNA sugere todos os passos que seriam suficientes para provocar a explosão cambriana.

– A mesma explicação serve para elucidar as novas especies, como os primatas, que surgiram a 65 milhões de anos com a queda de meteoritos: meteoritos, por estarem no espaço sideral recebem em tempos e lugares diferentes, diferentes informações chegadas a Terra.

Vejamos como argumentam os anti-evolucionistas:

The Cambrian explosion of life has long been a major hurdle for the naturalistic theory. The fossil record shows the first three quarters of the earth’s history to have nothing but very simply structured organisms. Then all of the sudden, 542 million years ago, vast quantities of complex creatures emerged without any of the evolutionary precursors demanded from Darwin’s theory.

In fact Darwin himself was perplexed by this event and in his book stated; “It’s as though they were just planted there without any evolutionary history”. He concluded that the fossil record was incomplete and said “To the question of why we do not find rich fossil deposits belonging to these…periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer”. This fact caused great doubt in Darwin’s mind. He proposed that the fossil evidence was yet to be found and that without it his theory would collapse.

Since publishing his book, “The origin of species”, there have been new discoveries. Advanced life forms from the Cambrian era were discovered all around the world. However the findings only served to refute Darwin’s theory as there was no evolutionary species found for the Cambrian animals.

It is clear that the fossil record does not support Darwin’s theory of a common ancestor but in fact it undoubtedly refutes it. Yet the Cambrian explosion is not even mentioned in many text books and when it is mentioned it is not presented as evidence against Darwin’s theory but instead as an event that requires no further justification.

Similar situations also occur throughout time including the period after the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. This is where many modern animals, including primates, appear without any evolutionary evidence.

From observing the fossil data of the pre Cambrian period we should find evidence of evolution and a common ancestor as predicted by Darwin. We find no such evidence therefore, as Darwin himself knew, the theory is falsified. It also fails both criminal and civil legal standards of evidence.

But,… don~t forget that there are evolutionists, and they does not accept any assumption from the arguments above. Only as example, look haow they answer the text above:


I was impressed that you intend to use the ‘highest standard of evidence” in you arguments but you then spoiled it by immediately not using any standards of evidence at all.

Just taking your very first example of “A false representation of an evolutionary tree that would be typically presented as factual to young school kids“ you need to show, ‘with the highest standard of evidence’ where that diagram is used in schools, to whom and when, then show where it is wrong and why any errors might give a fatally false impression to its intended audience. Finally you have to show why it affects the ToE’s validity as settled science.

Maybe when you’ve done that to everyone’s satisfaction, you can move on to your second claim.