The headline proclaimed "Ancient Fossils Shed New Light on Evolution of Sea Worms" But the text of the article tells a different story.
The report is about finding fossils of an ancient sea worm in formations 515 million years old. Since it was doubtful that these were the first such worms in existence which just happened to be fossilized, scientists concluded that these worms were a part of the Cambrian Explosion, which occurred about 543 million years ago according to current scientific consensus. This find lopped off an astounding 200 million years off the supposed diversification of annelids. As the piece puts it...The fossilized remains included evidence of the worms' guts and kidneys and revealed they had an unexpectedly complex structure similar to that of other annelid worms.
The researchers say this means that annelids—or segmented worms—diversified into different lineages some 200 million years earlier than previously thought and were part of the evolutionary leap known as the Cambrian explosion.and
Study co-author Dr. Martin R. Smith, in the Department of Earth Sciences, Durham University, said, "We know that the main animal lines we see today emerged during the Cambrian explosion, but we always thought annelid worms were late to the party, and their major subgroups didn't begin to diversify until nearly 200 million years later.
"But the amazingly preserved fossils we have studied and the structure of these amazing little creatures challenge this picture, and show that annelid worms—including Iotuba chengjiangensis—seemed to follow the pattern of events initiated by the Cambrian explosion
The report goes on in this vein, with Dr. Smith declaring "there must have been a dramatic unseen origin of modern annelid diversity in the heat of the Cambrian explosion.". He is basing this on finding worms that already have stomachs and livers that far back. Now these are worms, and we have just found some this far back, so it is possible there was "dramatic, unseen evolution" that produced this early diversification. I mean, it isn't like they have shells or something that is commonly preserved.
Still, this phenomenon is not restricted to segmented worms. The origin of complex features so early in so many things should give pause to the fair-minded truth-seeker, if indeed there are any of those left out there. I recently reported on how amazed they were to find that vertebrates had complex stomachs from the start - about 450 million years ago anyway- and that all the current forms without them must have lost them rather than being a holdover from a "more primitive stage of evolution". Now we find the same of worms. Well, if these complex features show up at the start of the group, then where is the evolution? Oh, sure it fiddles with the limbs and edges, but why are so many things showing up complex in their basic body plan so early?
It isn't just with stomachs/diversification in segmented worms. It happened in comb jellies. It happened in chordates. It happened in vertebrates. It is the norm for new forms to appear complex at their start and later some members of the group lose complexity over time. This repeated finding is not what one would expect, indeed not even be a reasonable possibility, under naturalistic evolution. Instead of continuing to shrug it off and just claiming "evolution must be stronger than we thought", how about someone on the other side at least be honest enough to admit there is a problem? How else can you find the answer to the problem, if such an answer exists?
The way I see it, they really only have one alternative. That is to connect the extinct Ediacaran forms to Cambrian forms. So far, with one or two possible exceptions (and take away one of those because it appears that sponges didn't come early, they showed up with the crowd around the Cambrian), this has not been fruitful. They don't seem to fit. But the very fact those forms existed and fossilized puts to bed the idea that this missing evolution is missing because things didn't fossilize before shells came along. We've found too many exceptions for this to be the case. That was the other excuse and it has been undermined. So all that's left is "they came from the pre-existing forms in the Ediacaran". But that's not working either. I say the only alternative, but I meant the only alternative which permits them to cling to naturalistic origins. Divine Creation fits the facts just fine. See this link for where I think the Ediacaran forms fit rather elegantly and specifically in under the Christ-centered model. Of course such thinking is anathema to many. I can't help how they feel about it, these ideas fit the facts better than naturalism.
I do wish some of the advocates for naturalistic evolution would consider altering their origins beliefs to take into account the facts of the broader picture. At the very least, quit dismissing a position which accounts for the known facts better than their own as unreasonable or silly. So far, a few have, but way too few. For most, it is tied to their identify and humans are very resistant to accept information which conflicts with the way they self-identify. My experience has been mere facts are not enough. It pretty much takes a miracle to get someone to change their mind when they think their identity is threatened, so Lord God, send many such miracles, I beseech Thee!
.
This book is mostly not about evolution issues, it is about something much more important- how Early Genesis points to Christ. Obviously this could not be true unless He really were who scripture says that He is and that scripture is Divinely inspired. But those things are true, so it can say it. And if they are true, it would be a shame to go your whole life never knowing it. 
