What Troubled Darwin?

What Troubled Darwin?
Charles Walcott with Wife and Son examine Burgess Shale

In 1831, Charles Darwin, a recent Cambridge University graduate, helped experienced geologist Adam Sedgwick excavate rock layers in northern Wales. They discovered fossils in shale rocks dating to the Cambrian period of Earth’s history. At age 22, Darwin didn’t realize how significant their findings were. It wasn’t until many years later, when he published his book On the Origin of Species, that he was troubled by the “explosion” of Cambrian fossils. What exactly troubled Darwin about these fossils?

Scientists call the sudden appearance of Cambrian fossils the “Cambrian explosion.” These fossils come from a time when Earth’s first major animal groups appeared abruptly, with no clear predecessors. This challenges the idea of gradual evolution. That’s what troubled Darwin. The Cambrian explosion was a rapid appearance of most of the major animal groups that ever lived on Earth.

Darwin published his famous book On the Origin of Species in 1859, twenty-eight years after helping find the first Cambrian fossils. He believed life’s history would look like a branching tree, starting with single-celled organisms and each branch gradually becoming more complex. He thought that life evolved in small steps over long periods through natural selection. What troubled Darwin was the sudden appearance of Cambrian fossils without ancestors, but he expected future fossil discoveries to show gradual evolutionary changes.

However, things didn’t go as Darwin expected. In 1886, during the construction of the Canadian Pacific railroad across Canada, new Cambrian fossils were found in the Rocky Mountains. In 1909, Charles Walcott discovered fossils of soft-bodied Cambrian animals without predecessors in the Burgess Shale of British Columbia. These new animal forms were more complex than the ones Darwin knew, yet they still appeared suddenly without showing gradual evolution.

In 2014, another site in British Columbia, called Marble Canyon, revealed more troublesome fossils. In 1988, paleontologists uncovered exceptionally well-preserved specimens in Chengjiang, China. Now, another site in Huayuan, China, has revealed even more soft-bodied fossils with remarkable soft tissue preservation. Researchers have collected over 50,000 fossils and identified 153 animal species, 59% of which were previously unknown. These fossils span 16 animal phyla.

Some evolutionists suggest that missing links are hard to find because soft animal tissues don’t fossilize well. But this new discovery at Huayuan preserved delicate soft tissues in detail, from worms to jellyfish, showing gills, guts, and even nerves. They were preserved because they were buried quickly in a muddy slurry that turned into shale.

The key point is that many animals from the Cambrian period appear suddenly on opposite sides of the planet, with no signs of gradual change. They show no clear evolution over time. Darwinism cannot fully explain this puzzle, but those who believe in an intelligent divine Creator see these discoveries as making perfect sense. What troubled Darwin in 1859 would trouble him even more today.

— Roland Earnst © 2026

Reference: scienceandculture.com

Does Naturalistic Evolution Explain Life?

Human Cell - Does Naturalistic Evolution Explain Life?
Simplified Illustration of Human Cell

George Gaylord Simpson wrote in his book The Meaning of Evolution (1949), “It is already evident that all the objective phenomena of the history of life can be explained by purely naturalistic…materialistic factors.” In other words, neo-Darwinism explains life. With that in mind, he writes, “Therefore, man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind.” Despite Simpson’s confidence, does naturalistic evolution explain life?

It is worth noting that Simpson began the paragraph from which I took the above quotes with these words, “Although many details remain to be worked out…” That is an understatement! Those who insist that naturalistic, materialistic evolution explains life completely are purposely overlooking “many details.” Does naturalistic evolution explain life? Here are a few of the problems with that explanation:

The Origin of Life- How did non-living matter become alive?

The Origin of the Genetic Code- DNA contains a massive amount of information, and information originates from intelligent sources.

The Origin of Sexual Reproduction- Most plants and animals reproduce sexually, requiring both male and female gametes. How did this complex process originate and continue?

The Lack of Transitional Fossils– If the evolution of all life has been a gradual process, why don’t we see an abundance of fossils showing transitional stages between life forms? How can you explain the sudden appearance of life forms, such as in the “Cambrian Explosion,” which Darwin admitted was a mystery?

The Development of Complex Organ Systems How could they happen by gradual changes?

The Development of Irreducibly Complex Molecular Machines– They exist within every living cell and require every part to be in place for them to function. Therefore, explaining their origin through a step-by-step process seems impossible.

Mathematical Difficulties- Mathematicians have calculated that the number of gradual changes required to go from unicellular life to all of the diverse life forms, including humans, would be mathematically impossible within the span of Earth’s 4.5 billion years of existence.

Barriers Between the Types of Life Forms- It is possible with intelligent breeding to produce new varieties of dogs, cows, or roses. However, they are still dogs, cows, or roses. The evidence for one type of living creature evolving into another life form is lacking.

Those are just a few of the details that “remain to be worked out.” Darwin recognized some of them, such as the biological big bang of the Cambrian era and the lack of intermediate fossils. He expected those details would be resolved in the future. More than a century and a half later, there is still no resolution to those problems, and many more have been added to the list.

Does naturalistic evolution explain life? Many scientists accept it because the scientific community would shun them if they didn’t. Others accept it not because of its explanatory power but because they see no acceptable alternative. So when someone says that evolution has disproven the need for God, remind them that these are only a few of the reasons why naturalistic evolution falls short of explaining why we are here.

— Roland Earnst © 2023

Quingiang Biota and the Cambrian Explosion

Quingiang Biota and the Cambrian Explosion

Paleontologists who study the earliest fossils of life on Earth refer to an event they call the “Cambrian Explosion.” The fossils from that event are unique because they have advanced body plans and no previous ancestors. A vast range of marine species that lived in an ancient sea suddenly appeared in the fossil record. A new discovery of fossils from the Cambrian Explosion is known as the Quingiang biota. Scientists are calling it one of the most significant fossil discoveries in the last 100 years.

Scientists made the find near the Danshui River in the Hubei province of China. It appears to be an ancient mudslide that buried a vast range of fossils. The site contains at least 20,000 individual specimens. At last report, 4,351 fossils have been examined, and they represent 101 different species. Fifty-three of those are new to science meaning that fossils of those species have not been found before. Because they were buried so quickly, not just shells, but even some soft parts have been preserved including muscles, guts, etc.

This find gives further support to the Cambrian Explosion model that says marine life suddenly appeared on planet Earth. This conflicts with the Darwinian concept that life evolved over a long time with one form gradually changing into another. The biblical narrative tells us “God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life” (Genesis 1:20). That is what the Quingiang biota shows.
— John N. Clayton ©2019

Data from The Week, April 12, 2019, page 21 and wikipedia.org.