A small percentage?
So we have gone from none to a small percentage?
When did I say none?
All the phyla should be in the Cambrian if evolution is true. Also, you have never shown that these precursors did not exist as you claim.
So not only do you dismiss fine tuning but the fact that life suddenly appearing in the fossil record containing all phyla alive today plus with complex eyes and brains holds no merit in your mind? It is not what was expected by Darwin or any evolutionary prediction. In fact, the fact that life's diversity appears in the fossil record with complex eyes and brains is not in line with evolution at all if there were no ancestral life forms from which all this came about. This just happens to be the case.
So in comes Punctuated Equilibrium to the rescue. The only problem is that it doesn't eliminate the problem of no ancestral forms containing the necessary complex eyes and brains in the fossil record.
To show you that this is a problem I will present a paper in which Professor Charles Marshall suggests a cause of it all.
Animal Interaction Behind Cambrian Explosion? 'Missing' Ancestors Of Today's Animals May Not Be Missing After All -- ScienceDaily
The Cambrian Explosion was unique, Marshall said, because, though there have been mass extinctions such as that of the dinosaurs and recoveries since, there has never been another event as sweeping as that which occurred in the Cambrian seas 500 million years ago. It was during that time when all the modern phyla of animals first arose. Phyla are major classifications of life that include broad groups of creatures. The phylum Chordata, for example, includes all vertebrates, such as mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and birds.
Prior to the Cambrian Explosion, life on land was unknown and life in the sea was made up of soft-bodied multicellular creatures that strained food from the seawater around them or fed on mats of bacteria on the ocean floor. Though these animals virtually disappeared at the beginning of the Cambrian, the ancestors of the new modern phyla that replaced them havent been found.
I must have missed the part where they searched the entire fossil record across the world and did not find any precursors. Can you point me to that paper?
In over 150 years they have not found any. They have found preCambrian fossils including larvae but nothing that is ancestral to the forms found in the Cambrian as shown in the paper above. Scientists once thought that the conditions were not right for fossilization but then they found fossils and then it was that the forms were too small or soft and then microscopic forms were found as well as soft bodied.
Again, please show that there were no precursors. Please show that all of the species from the Precambrian were preserved, and that we have searched every single inch of fossil bearing strata. Until you do, you have no place stating that they don't exist.
So you want me to believe they are there even though there is no evidence for them? Do you know what Double standard means?
A
double standard is the application of different sets of principles for similar situations.
[1] A double standard may take the form of an instance in which certain concepts (often, for example, a word, phrase, social norm, or rule) are perceived as acceptable to be applied by one group of people, but are considered unacceptable
taboowhen applied by another group.
Also, there are no sharks the Cambrian. There are no lizards, mammals, birds, bony fish, turtles, frogs, salamanders . . . entire groups of life are completely absent from the Cambrian. Your claim that all complexity was present is an absolute misrepresentation of the evidence.
The phyla are there.
Can you disprove that undetectinble pink fairies are involved in gravity?
You always fall back into this form of argumentation when you have no real argument to give. It is very telling.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If all you have is a God of the Gaps, then you really don't have an argument. You notice that you refuse to even discuss the mechanisms of design or any evidence for it. Rather, you expect everyone else to disprove design. Cosmic teapot.
So again, a double standard. You don't have the evidence but you expect me and others to accept it anyway.
Fine tuning is not a God of the Gaps situation. It is what we know that points to God.
You have never been inside of a car or a house? Do you think there are changes that can be scientifically measure that can be used to detect a human interacting with a house or car?
Like you said we are part of the natural world. However, that being admitted we are still not "part" of the created house, car or t.v.. You will not find a "part" of us in the created system.
Where is the evidence that a designer is responsible for the constants in our universe?
The fine tuning evidence supports design which supports a designer.
