This is from discovery institute about Cambrian:
Rapid appearance of the primary animal types in the fossil record is very consistent with an Intelligent Design model. Ã¢â‚¬Â
First, let me address the comment by the discovery institute. Clearly, if I just said that the fossil record of the Cambrian was very consistent with evolutionary theory and just stopped there, you would rightly argue that more needs to be said regarding exactly how the theory predicts the specific results.
All theories need to be specific - and intelligent design 'theorists' do not get any exceptions if they want to throw their hat in the ring. Consider the basic facts.
1. There are thousands of feet of rock with nothing but single cell life forms
2. Complex Ediacaran fossils appear, possibly go through some transitions then disappear
3. After (higher up) the Ediacaran fossils disappear, we see a number of new phyla. Scientists trace most of the current life to these phyla, but there is nothing modern about these. There are no teeth, or bones or seeds or pollen etc. No evidence of fish or land life.
4. Higher up, most of these specific species are gone - but higher up we find animals with similar large scale properties (similar phyla).
So what is the Intelligent Design theory that explains these facts?? The only design theory that seems to make sense is one where the intelligent designer did the following.
1. Created single celled algae
2. Waited a long long time while algae spread across the plant and layers upon layers of sediment built up
3. Created the Ediacaran animals - then let them die
4. Created the Cambrian animals - then let them die
5. Created fish - let most all of the early ones die
6. Waited a while, then created land plants but no flowering plants
7. Waited a while then created land animals ....
Ok, you get the picture. I think I could create a theory like this to explain the fossil record, but it certainly doesn't sound like a literal interpretation of Genesis. And I never hear the Intelligent Design people proposing sequential creation. But you need to have a sequential account to explain the fossil record.
The other approach is to argue that life is evolving. Yes, this approach argues that there must have been transitional species. But the theory provides no guarantees that they will ever be found. We are extremely lucky that we even have the both the Ediacaran and Cambrian animals.
Assuming the evolutionary point of view, we might ask, where on the planet did they evolve? Suppose they first evolved in some place equivalent to the Amazon river and the fossils are now buried under 5000 feet of sediment. How long will it take to find them?
Personally, I think the evidence is compelling that at least two of the phyla in the Cambrian evolved from the animals in Vendian (i.e., Ediacaran), but we need to wait for more research on these fossils.
Suppose we find no precursors or decendents to one of the phyla like this odd one
Should we conclude that the Intelligent Designer was trying out a few animals?
The following is a timeline. If one doesn't like the notions of millions of years, then just consider that this is the relative depth of different types of fossils. Was the intellgent designer an experimenter with different types of animals? Did he/she give up on the Ediacara animals?