RE: Cambrian Explosion

From: Glenn Morton (glennmorton@entouch.net)
Date: Sun Jul 20 2003 - 21:09:44 EDT

  • Next message: Don Winterstein: "Re: MWH experimental test"

    >-----Original Message-----
    >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
    >Behalf Of Dr. Blake Nelson
    >Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 6:26 PM
    >To: Denyse O'Leary
    >Cc: ASA
    >Subject: Re: Cambrian Explosion
    >
    >
    >It is true that Morris does deserve a hearing and his
    >comment is not an extraordinary claim in the way that
    >Andrew Parker's is. It is certainly true as Morris
    >points out that often explanations are complex, and it
    >is likely true that Parker oversimplifies.

    I would agree with the comments about Conway Morris (his last name is Conway
    Morris not Morris). I have had the pleasure of meeting and discussing the
    cambrian explosion with this most interesting of individuals. That being
    said, I will still say that while several have pointed out obvious problems
    with some of the reasoning Parker engaged in (things I missed), the novelty
    and ingenuity of adding vision into the mix as a possible explanation for
    some aspects of the explosion is quite interesting. I am amazed that no one
    ever thought of it before. Vision had to begin some time. It is there at
    the Early Cambrian. To me, it is not likely that the evolution of the first
    seeing animal would go unnoticed in the geologic record. It would change the
    entire ecosystem. Thus, I am still intrigued by the concept/hypothesis.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jul 20 2003 - 21:09:49 EDT