In December of 2019, The Royal Society Publishing, a science publication, published an article claiming Anthropod fossils discovered containing what may be preserved brain tissue and nervous system structures.
Paleo-biologist Javier Ortega Hernandez wrote that the abundance of preserved soft tissue that would otherwise have disintegrated very quickly "unusual" stating that the discovery of the fossilized brain and central nervous systems were another addition to many other examples of fossilized soft tissues which have included "limbs, eyes, guts, muscles, and circulatory systems". [1]
The indicator of the presence of a preserved brain and nervous system inside the anthropod fossils were what appeared to be symmetrical inky stains which also resemble the nervous systems of living creatures such as horseshoe crabs, spiders, and scorpions. [2]
The stains in the fossils also contained carbon which is also not expected to be found in fossils that are supposed to be millions of years old. [3] But as compelling as the find may be, the discoveries are not without their critics and skeptics. As Live Science explains:
Although Ortega-Hernández and his colleagues checked and double-checked their work, the authors "generally have to be cautious about claiming to have found a genuine fossil brain," Jianni Liu, a professor at the Early Life Institute in the Department of Geology at Northwest University in Xi'an, China, told Live Science in an email. Liu argues that the blobby stains seen in Cambrian fossils might be a "slightly random effect of the decay process" rather than remnants of brain matter.
In a 2018 study, Liu and her colleagues examined about 800 fossilized specimens and found that nearly 10% contained inky stains in the head region. The authors reviewed previous studies of animal decay and found that nervous tissue tends to decay quickly, but gut bacteria can stick around and "produce these so-called biofilms as radiating [stains] which look a bit like parts of a nervous system," Liu wrote. [4]
But many paleontologists who believe the finds do contain remnants of brain and nervous system tissue say the critics like Liu did not examine the fossils for themselves and what they did examine were fossils with asymmetrical stains, rather than ones with the symmetrical stains found in the fossils containing remnants brain and nervous system material. [5]
Of the biofilm hypothesis posed by skeptics, Hernandez said:
Although the microbial film hypothesis offers a plausible alternative to the interpretation of problematic internal features observed in exceptionally preserved fossils, its ability to closely replicate delicate and complex structures should not be overestimated. In taphonomic experiments of ecdysozoans, decay microbes propagate within the cavities of the carcass, ultimately filling most of the loosened cuticular sac. The only documented mechanism in which microbes have been involved in the fine replication of a labile tissue or organ is by directly and indirectly triggering the precipitation of authigenic minerals. The decay products observed during taphonomic experiments argue against the biofilm origin of the internal structures preserved in Alalcomenaeus, as the latter is highly symmetrical, replicate the morphology with high fidelity and is too delicate compared to the size of the body cavity to be the result of an amorphous microbial mass. This conclusion is further strengthened when considering the spatial relationships of the internal structures relative to other anatomical features.
The axial dark compression of Alalcomenaeus does not fill the whole cephalic region like a biofilm would be expected to do, given its non-specific propagation. Instead, the compressions in Alalcomenaeus branch anteriorly to connect with the stalked eyes, which are fundamental components of the euarthropod CNS and form a foramen more posteriorly that would allow the passage of the foregut (figures 1–3; electronic supplementary material, figure S2). No known internal or exoskeletal structures or cavities in the euarthropod head could have guided the propagation of microbes in a way that would fortuitously replicate the complex shape and precise relationships of the anterior CNS. The presence of thread-like connectives in the posterior third of the trunk in two Alalcomenaeus specimens (figure 1a,d) is also difficult to reconcile with the microbial film hypothesis for the same reason, especially because decay microbes first invade and proliferate indiscriminately in the posterior region of the body in Artemia. Ultimately, the morphological organization, carbonaceous composition, topographical position and relationship to other body parts can be used as criteria to confidently rule out a microbial origin for organic dark compressions in Burgess Shale-type fossils and instead support their interpretation as remains of the internal anatomy.
Burgess Shale-type fossils that contain features produced by microbial activity also reveal fundamental differences with legitimate internal anatomical structures. For example, the axial dark compression of Opabinia is restricted to the vicinity of the gut tract and the ventral limbs and terminates at the approximate level of the mouth opening (figure 6), whereas that of Alalcomenaeus is directly connected with the stalked eyes anteriorly (figures 1–3; electronic supplementary material, figure S4). Opabinia fossils do not show a continuation of the axial tract with the anterior head, and similar observations also hold true for other Burgess Shale taxa with preserved guts and eyes but no direct connection between them. Furthermore, Opabinia demonstrates that even a fossilized microbe-filled gut tract retains an important degree of morphological fidelity, for example, the presence of a J-shaped anterior curvature (figure 6), which rules out the potential misinterpretation with neurological features such as the oesophageal foramen. These comparisons strengthen the interpretation that Alalcomenaeus from the Pioche and Marjum Formations, and by inference also Chengjiang, contain legitimate remains of the CNS whose complex morphology cannot be explained as the result of microbial activity within the body cavity.
…it is also time to gravitate away from the preconception that nervous tissues are too labile to become fossilized, as evidence keeps accumulating that neurological preservation is possible through carbonaceous compressions, as well as authigenic mineralization, and even in laboratory conditions. Our data demonstrate that by applying the criteria of bilateral symmetry, morphological fidelity, carbonaceous preservation, position relative to other anatomical features and congruence between multiple specimens and even localities, it is possible to identify with increasing confidence remains of the nervous system in Cambrian fossils and continue to explore their profound implications for the early evolutionary history of animals.
Contrary to recent claims that the preservation of neurological tissues may require alternative taphonomic models, early and middle Cambrian Konservat-Lagerstätten from South China, North Greenland and North America…consistently show CNS expressed as carbonaceous films (figure 5), in accordance with the proposed mechanism of Burgess Shale-type preservation of labile tissues. Instead, we may seek to further refine our knowledge of how the conditions that produce Burgess Shale-type fossils contribute to the stabilization of non-biomineralizing tissues in Cambrian deposits in order to better understand the limits of exceptional preservation. [6]
Paleo-biologist Ortega Hernandez also said that according to some studies, soft tissues can be fossilized by a combination of clay and water which he says can jump-start a chemical-tanning process which can toughen soft tissue; [7] a scenario consistent with a catastrophic model such as a global flood as described in Genesis chapters 6-8. Fossils do require rapid burial in order to be preserved, especially soft tissues, and this discovery is just another of an ever growing list of examples of fossil discoveries that testify against the doctrine of uniformitarianism, a major tenet of evolution, which teaches that the geologic strata and formations that we see today were laid down and formed very slowly over a long period of time and that in the process, fossils were also formed over a period of eons.
It has also been used by evolutionists to attempt to discredit the Genesis account of the global flood which destroyed every living land and air-breathing creature on the face of the earth except for Noah, his family, and all animals that were aboard the ark which preserved them through the flood, but many discoveries have been unearthed that testify of the flood and lend credence to the authority of scripture and the Gospel message but cannot be explained by the evolutionists. As Ken Ham of Answers In Genesis notes:
More and more scientists and researchers are shocked by the discovery of fossilized soft tissue (or, even more incredibly, unfossilized soft tissue!) in creatures thought to have died millions of years ago. These findings don’t fit the narrative most of us learned in school: a creature is slowly buried by sediments, gradually becoming fossilized. Instead, such fossils point to rapid, catastrophic burial. And a new find points, yet again, to catastrophic burial. Fossilization is a catastrophic process, as something has to be buried quickly. [8]
Discoveries like this may be a shock to those who have believed the lie that the earth is billions of years old, but it is no surprise to those who believe the biblical account of the flood that destroyed the world except for a man named Noah and all who were with him on the ark that he was told by God to build.
Because fossils of various kinds are found all over the world, it would only make sense to believe that a worldwide catastrophe at some time in history was responsible for their formation, but a worldwide catastrophe that was an act of judgment against an incredibly wicked and persistently unrepentant generation to which the fossil record serves as a testimony but which has been twisted by wicked people in an attempt to deny the reality of a Creator who has punished and will once again punish the world for its evil.
But the God who made Heaven and earth and all that is in them takes no pleasure in punishment and continuously offers His mercy and forgiveness to all who are willing to turn away from those things that displease Him because He is a God of love, but He is also a holy and righteous God who cannot allow evil to abide forever and therefore must punish the wickedness and rebellion of man if he persists therein.
A day is coming when we will all have to give an account for all things that we have done in this life, but we will not be judged by just our outward actions, but by the words of our mouths and our very thoughts which is why it is written that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:23) and it has been that way since the first man and woman from whom all mankind are descended sinned against God by eating the fruit of a tree called the Tree Of The Knowledge Of Good And Evil, from which they were told not to eat from, the consequence being death if they should disobey (Gen. 2:16-17 and chapter 3) and when they did eat of that fruit, they were cut off from the Tree of Life which would have enabled them to live forever (Gen. 3:22-24) and therefore were subject to an eventual bodily death and through them death came to all of man (Rom. 5:12) because all people were by their disobedience mad inherently sinful and therefore all who sin die because "the wages of sin is death" (Rom. 6:23) and with death came the curse upon the entire creation (Rom. 8:19-23) because of sin and due to man's sin resulting in death and the persistence of the curse, all of nature and the world have made to endure every kind of pain, suffering, sorrow, heartache, and grief that there could be, but what is worse than even all the evil, adversity, and hardship experienced in this world is that our sin has separated us from our Maker which will result in our eternal damnation if we do not repent therefrom and receive the offer of redemption that He has provided through Christ Jesus the Son who came to the earth to die on the cross for our sins and to be raised from the dead so that we who believe on Him would not have to suffer damnation, but have everlasting life.
Jesus did for us through His death and resurrection what we could not do for ourselves. No matter how much good we try to do, it will always fall short of God's standard of moral perfection because sin is always present within us corrupting even our motives and inward being, which is why it is written that we are saved by grace through faith in Christ and not of ourselves. (Eph. 2:8-9)
For it is in Christ that both the demanded penalty for our sin was paid and forgiveness is extended to the repentant sinner who places their trust in Him and Him only for the redemption of their soul making their place in Heaven and in the new and better world to come a sure thing, but a fearful and everlasting judgment of wrath and torment awaits those who continue to reject the forgiveness and grace offered by our Lord which is why I urge anyone who has not repented of their sins and placed their trust in Jesus who is the redeemer of our souls to do so.
If you are not sure what to say, here is an example of a prayer you can pray:
"Lord Jesus I need you.
I realize that I am a sinner
who has fallen short of the glory of God
and that my goodness falls short
of His standard of Moral perfection.
Please forgive me of all of my sins.
Come into my heart and into my life
to be the Savior and Lord of my life.
Make me into the servant and follower
that you want me to be.
In your name Lord Jesus, I pray.
Amen."
The Lord is not concerned with the words that you use but only with the attitude and sincerity within your heart and if you have, with all sincerity, have asked Him to forgive you of your sins and to be your Savior and Lord, you are already saved and will one day spend eternity with Him forever.
End Notes:
1. Javier Ortega-Hernández, Rudy Lerosey-Aubril, and Stephen Pates,
"Proclivity of nervous system preservation in Cambrian Burgess Shale-type deposits,"
Royal Society Publishing; Proceedings Of The Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, December 11, 2019
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2019.2370
2. Nicoletta Lanese, Staff Writer, "Fossilized Brains Found in Ancient Bug-Like Creatures,"
Live Science, December 16, 2019
https://www.livescience.com/new-athropod-fossil-brains-found.html
3. Ibid
4. Ibid
5. Ibid
6. Hernandez; Royal Society Publishing
7. Lanese; Live Science
8. Ken Ham, "Can Brains Be Fossilized? Bug-Like Brains Say, 'Yes!'" Answers In Genesis, January 9, 2020
https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/can-brains-be-fossilized-yes/
Scripture references:
1. Genesis 6-8
2. Romans 3:23
3. Genesis 2:17
4. Genesis 3
5. Genesis 3:22-24
6. Romans 5:12
7. Romans 6:23
8. Romans 8:19-23
9. Ephesians 2:8-9
No comments:
Post a Comment