- History of paleontology
The history of
paleontology traces the effort to understand the history of life on Earth by studying thefossil record left behind by living organisms. Paleontology is a field of biology, but its development has been closely tied togeology and the effort to understand the history of Earth itself. In ancient timesXenophanes (570-480 BC) wrote about fossil sea shells indicating that land was once under water. During theMiddle Ages , fossils were discussed by the Persian naturalist, Ibn Sina (known as "Avicenna" in Europe), in "The Book of Healing " (1027), which proposed a theory of petrifying fluids thatAlbert of Saxony would elaborate on in the 14th century. The Chinese naturalistShen Kuo (1031-1095) would propose a theory of climate change based on evidence from petrified bamboo.In
early modern Europe , the systematic study of fossils emerged as an integral part of the changes innatural philosophy that occurred during theAge of Reason . The nature of fossils and their relationship to life in the past became better understood during the 17th and 18th centuries, and at the end of the 18th century the work ofGeorges Cuvier established the reality ofextinction and led to the emergence ofpaleontology , in association withcomparative anatomy , as a scientific discipline. The expanding knowledge of the fossil record also played an increasing role in the development of geology, particularlystratigraphy .The first half of the 19th century saw geological and paleontological activity become increasingly well organized with the growth of geologic societies and museums and an increasing number of professional geologists and fossil specialists. This contributed to a rapid increase in knowledge about the past history of life on Earth, and progress towards definition of the
geologic time scale largely based on fossil evidence. In 1822 the word "paleontology" was invented by the editor of a French scientific journal to refer to the study of ancient living organisms through fossils. As knowledge of life's past history continued to improve, it became increasingly obvious that there had been some kind of successive order to the development of life. This would encourage early evolutionary theories on thetransmutation of species .cite book|author=Buckland W & Gould SJ|title=Geology and Mineralogy Considered With Reference to Natural Theology (History of Paleontology)|year=1980|publisher=Ayer Company Publishing|isbn=978-0405127069] AfterCharles Darwin published "Origin of Species " in 1859, much of the focus of paleontology shifted to understandingevolution ary paths, includinghuman evolution , and evolutionary theory.The last half of the 19th century saw a tremendous expansion in paleontological activity, especially in
North America . The trend continued in the 20th century with additional regions of the Earth being opened to systematic fossil collection, as demonstrated by a series of important discoveries inChina near the end of the century. The last few decades of the 20th century saw a renewed interest inmass extinction s and their role in the evolution of life on Earth. [ Bowler Evolution: The History of an Idea pp. 351-352] There was also a renewed interest in the Cambrian explosion that saw the development of the body plans of most animal phyla. The discovery of fossils of theEdiacaran biota and developments inpaleobiology extended knowledge about the history of life back far before the Cambrian.Prior to the 17th century
As early as the 6th century BC, the Greek philosopher
Xenophanes of Colophon (570-480 BC) recognized that somefossil shells were remains of shellfish, which he used to argue that what was at the time dry land was once under the sea.Desmond p. 692-697.]Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519), in an unpublished notebook, also concluded that some fossil sea shells were the remains of shellfish. However, in both cases, the fossils were complete remains of shellfish species that closely resembled living species, and were therefore easy to classify. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" p. 39]In 1027, the Persian naturalist, Ibn Sina (known as "Avicenna" in Europe), proposed an explanation of how the stoniness of
fossil s was caused in "The Book of Healing ". He modified an idea ofAristotle 's, which explained it in terms ofvapor ousexhalation s. Ibn Sina modified this into the theory of petrifying fluids ("succus lapidificatus"), which was elaborated on by Albert of Saxony in the 14th century and was accepted in some form by mostnaturalist s by the 16th century.Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" p. 24] Ibn Sina gave the following explanation for the origin of fossils from thepetrifaction of plants and animals:Shen Kuo ( _zh. 沈括) (1031 -1095 ) of theSong Dynasty used marine fossils found in theTaihang Mountains to infer the existence of geologicalprocesses ofgeomorphology and the shifting of seashores over time. [Shen Kuo ,"Mengxi Bitan" (梦溪笔谈; "Dream Pool Essays ") (1088 )] Using his observation of preservedpetrified bamboo s found underground inYan'an ,Shanbei region,Shaanxi province, he argued for a theory of gradualclimate change , since Shaanxi was part of a dry climate zone that did not support a habitat for the growth of bamboos.Needham, Volume 3, p. 614.]As a result of a new emphasis on observing, classifying and cataloging nature, 16th century natural philosophers in Europe began to establish extensive collections of fossil objects (as well as collections of plant and animal specimens), which were often stored in specially built cabinets to help organize them.
Conrad Gesner published a 1565 work on fossils that contained one of the first detailed descriptions of such a cabinet and collection. The collection belonged to a member of the extensive network of correspondents that Gesner drew on for his works. Such informal correspondence networks among natural philosophers and collectors became increasingly important during the course of the 16th century and were direct forerunners of the scientific societies that would begin to form in the 17th century. These cabinet collections and correspondence networks played an important role in the development of natural philosophy. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 9-17]However, most 16th century Europeans did not recognize that
fossil s were the remains of living organisms. The etymology of the word fossil comes from the Latin for things having been dug up. As this indicates, the term was applied to wide variety of stone and stone-like objects without regard to whether they might have an organic origin. Sixteenth century writers such as Gesner andGeorg Agricola were more interested in classifying such objects by their physical and mystical properties than they were in determining the objects' origins. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 23-33 ] Also the natural philosophy of the period encouraged alternative explanations for the origin of fossils. Both theAristotelian andNeoplatonic schools of philosophy provided support for the idea that stony objects might grow within the earth to resemble living things. Neoplatonic philosophy maintained that there could be affinities between living and non-living objects that could cause one to resemble the other. The Aristotelian school maintained that the seeds of living organisms could enter the ground and generate objects resembling those organisms. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 33-36 ]17th century
During the
Age of Reason , fundamental changes in natural philosophy were reflected in the analysis of fossils. In 1665Athanasius Kircher attributed giant bones to extinct races of giant humans in his "Mundus subterraneus". In the same yearRobert Hooke publishedMicrographia , an illustrated collection of his observations with a microscope. One of these observations was entitled "Of Petrify'd wood, and other Petrify'd bodies", which included a comparison between petrified and ordinary wood. He concluded that petrified wood was ordinary wood that had been soaked with "water impregnated with stony and earthy particles". He then suggested that several kinds of fossil sea shells were formed from ordinary shells by a similar process. He argued against the prevalent view that such objects were "Stones form'd by some extraordinary Plastick virtue latent in the Earth itself". [Hooke Micrographia observation XVII ] In 1667Nicholas Steno wrote a paper about a shark head he had dissected. He compared the teeth of the shark with the common fossil objects known as tongue stones. He concluded that the fossils must have been shark teeth. Steno then took an interest in the question of fossils, and to address some of the objections to their organic origin he began studying rock strata. The result of this work was published in 1669 as "Forerunner to a Dissertation on a solid naturally enclosed in a solid". In this book, Steno drew a clear distinction between objects such as rock crystals that really were formed within rocks and those such as fossil shells and shark teeth that were formed outside of those rocks. Steno realized that certain kinds of rock had been formed by the successive deposition of horizontal layers of sediment and that fossils were the remains of living organisms that had become buried in that sediment. Steno who, like almost all 17th century natural philosophers, believed that the earth was only a few thousand years old, resorted to theBiblical flood as a possible explanation for fossils of marine organisms that were far from the sea. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp 72-73 ]Despite the considerable influence of "Forerunner", naturalists such as
Martin Lister (1638-1712) andJohn Ray (1627-1705) continued to question the organic origin of some fossils. They were particularly concerned about objects such as fossilAmmonites , which Hooke claimed were organic in origin, that did not resemble any known living species. This raised the possibility ofextinction , which they found difficult to accept for philosophical and theological reasons. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp 61-65 ]18th century
In his 1778 work "Epochs of Nature"
Georges Buffon referred to fossils, in particular the discovery of fossils of tropical species such aselephants andrhinoceros in northern Europe, as evidence for the theory that the earth had started out much warmer than it currently was and had been gradually cooling.In 1796
Georges Cuvier presented a paper on living and fossil elephants comparing skeletal remains of Indian and Africanelephant s to fossils ofmammoths and of an animal he would later namemastodon utilizingcomparative anatomy . He established for the first time that Indian and African elephants were different species, and that mammoths differed from both and must beextinct . He further concluded that the mastodon was another extinct species that also differed from Indian or African elephants, more so than mammoths. Cuvier made another powerful demonstration of the power of comparative anatomy in paleontology when he presented a second paper in 1796 on a large fossil skeleton from Paraguay, which he named "Megatherium " and identified as agiant sloth by comparing its skull to those of two living species of tree sloth. Cuvier’s ground-breaking work in paleontology and comparative anatomy lead to the widespread acceptance of extinction. [McGowan the dragon seekers pp. 3-4] It also lead Cuvier to advocate the geological theory ofcatastrophism to explain the succession of organisms revealed by the fossil record. He also pointed out that since mammoths andwooly rhinoceros were not the same species as the elephants and rhinoceros currently living in the tropics, their fossils could not be used as evidence for a cooling earth. In a pioneering application ofstratigraphy , William Smith, a surveyor and mining engineer, made extensive use of fossils to help correlate rock strata in different locations. He created the firstgeological map of England during the late 1790s and early 1800s. He established theprinciple of faunal succession , the idea that each strata of sedimentary rock would contain particular types of fossils, and that these would succeed one another in a predictable way even in widely separated geologic formations. At the same time, Cuvier andAlexandre Brongniart , an instructor at the Paris school of mine engineering, used similar methods in an influential study of the geology of the region around Paris.19th century before Darwin
The age of reptiles
In 1808, Cuvier identified a fossil found in
Maastricht as a giant marine reptile that he named "Mosasaurus ". He also identified, from a drawing, another fossil found inBavaria as a flying reptile and named it "Pterodactylus ". He speculated that an age of reptiles had preceded the first mammals. [Rudwick "Georges Cuvier, Fossil Bones and Geological Catastrophes" p. 158] Cuvier's speculation would be supported by a series of finds that would be made in Great Britain over the course of the next two decades.Mary Anning , a professional fossil collector since age 11, collected the fossils of a number of marine reptiles from theJurassic marine strata atLyme Regis . These included the firstichthyosaur skeleton to be recognized as such, which was collected in 1811, and the firstplesiosaur collected in 1821. Many of her discoveries would be described scientifically by the geologistsWilliam Conybeare ,Henry De la Beche andWilliam Buckland . [McGowan pp. 11-27]In 1824, Buckland found and described a lower jaw from
Jurassic deposits fromStonesfield . He determined that the bone belonged to a carnivorous land-dwelling reptile he called "Megalosaurus ". That same yearGideon Mantell realized that some large teeth he had found in 1822, inCretaceous rocks from Tilgate, belonged to a giant herbivorous land-dwelling reptile. He called it "Iguanodon ", because the teeth resembled those of aniguana . In 1832 Mantell would find, in Tilgate, a partial skeleton of an armoured reptile he would callHylaeosaurus . In 1842 the English anatomistRichard Owen would create a new order of reptiles, that he calledDinosauria for "Megalosaurus", "Iguanodon" and "Hylaeosaurus". [McGowan p. 176 ]This evidence that giant reptiles had lived on Earth in the past caused great excitement in scientific circles, [McGowan pp. 70-87] and even among some segments of the general public. [McGowan p. 109] Buckland did describe the jaw of a small primitive mammal, "Phascolotherium", that was found in the same strata as "Megalosaurus". This discovery, known as the Stonesfield mammal, was a much discussed anomaly. Cuvier at first thought it was a
marsupial , but Buckland later realized it was a primitiveplacental mammal . Due to its small size and primitive nature, Buckland did not believe it invalidated the overall pattern of a time named "the age of reptiles", when the largest and most conspicuous animals had been reptiles rather than mammals. [ McGowan pp. 78-79 ]Paleobotany
In 1828
Alexandre Brongniart 's son, the botanistAdolphe Brongniart , published the introduction to a longer work on the history of fossil plants. Adolphe Brongniart concluded that the history of plants could roughly be divided into four parts. The first period was characterized bycryptogams . The second period was characterized by the appearance of theconifers . The third period brought emergence of thecycads , and the forth by the development of theflowering plants (such as thedicotyledons ). The transitions between each of these periods was marked by sharp discontinuities in the fossil record, with more gradual changes within the periods. Brongniart's work is the foundation ofpaleobotany and reinforced the theory that life on earth had a long and complex history, and different groups of plants and animals made their appearances in successive order. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 145-147 ]The increasing attention being paid to fossil plants in the first decades of the 19th century also caused a significant change in the terminology for the study of past life. The editor of the influential french scientific journal, "Journal de Phisique", a student of Cuvier's named Henri Marie Ducrotay de Blanville, coined the term "paleozoologie" in 1817 to refer to the work Cuvier and others were doing to reconstruct extinct animals from fossil bones. However, Blanville began looking for a term that could refer to the study of both fossil animal and plant remains. After trying some unsuccessful alternatives, he hit on "paleontologie" in 1822. Blanville's term for the study of the living organisms of the past quickly became popular and was anglicized into "paleontology". [ Rudwick "Worlds before Adam" p. 48]
Catastrophism, uniformitarianism and the fossil record
In Cuvier's landmark 1796 paper on living and fossil elephants, he referred to a single catastrophe that destroyed life to be replaced by the current forms. As a result of his studies of extinct mammals, he realized that animals such as "
Palaeotherium " had lived before the time of the Mammoths, which lead him to write in terms of multiple geological catastrophes that had wiped out a series of successive faunas. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 124-125 ] By 1830, a scientific consensus had formed around his ideas as a result of paleobotany and the dinosaur and marine reptile discoveries in Britain. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 156-157 ] In Great Britain, wherenatural theology was very influential in the early 19th century, a group of geologists that included Buckland, andRobert Jameson insisted on explicitly linking the most recent of Cuvier's catastrophes to the biblical flood. Catastrophism had a religious overtone in Britain that was absent elsewhere. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 133-136 ]Partly in response to what he saw as unsound and unscientific speculations by
William Buckland and other practitioners of flood geology,Charles Lyell advocated the geological theory ofuniformitarianism in his influential work "Principles of Geology ". [ McGowan pp. 93-95 ] Lyell amassed evidence, both from his own field research and the work of others, that most geological features could be explained by the slow action of present day forces, such as vulcanism,earthquakes ,erosion , andsedimentation rather than past catastrophic events. [ McGowan pp. 100-103 ] Lyell also claimed that the apparent evidence for catastrophic changes in the fossil record, and even the appearance of directional succession in the history of life, were illusions caused by imperfections in that record. For instance he argued that the absence of birds and mammals from the earliest fossil strata was merely an imperfection in the fossil record attributable to the fact that marine organisms were more easily fossilized. [McGowan pp. 100-103] Also Lyell pointed to the Stonesfield mammal as evidence that mammals had not necessarily been preceded by reptiles, and to the fact that certainPleistocene strata showed a mixture of extinct and still surviving species, which he said showed that extinction occurred piecemeal rather than as a result of catastrophic events. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 178-184] Lyell was successful in convincing geologists of the idea that the geological features of the earth were largely due to the action of the same geologic forces that could be observed in the present day, acting over an extended period of time. He was not successful in gaining support for his view of the fossil record, which he believed did not support a theory of directional succession. [McGowan pp. 100]Transmutation of species and the fossil record
Jean Baptiste Lamarck used fossils in his arguments for his theory of the transmutation of species in the early 19th century. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" p. 119] Fossil finds, and the emerging evidence that life had changed over time, fueled speculation on this topic during the next few decades. [ McGowan p. 8]Robert Chambers used fossil evidence in his 1844 popular science book "Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation ", which advocated an evolutionary origin for the cosmos as well as for life on earth. Like Lamarck's theory it maintained that life had progressed from the simple to the complex [ McGowan pp. 188-191] These early evolutionary ideas were widely discussed in scientific circles but were not accepted into the scientific mainstream. [ Larson p. 73] Many of the critics of transmutational ideas used fossil evidence in their arguments. In the same paper that coined the term dinosaur Richard Owen pointed out that dinosaurs were at least as sophisticated and complex as modern reptiles, which he claimed contradicted transmutational theories. [ Larson p. 44]Hugh Miller would make a similar argument, pointing out that the fossil fish found in the Old Red Sandstone formation were fully as complex as any later fish, and not the primitive forms alleged by "Vestiges". [ Ruckwick "The Meaning of fossils pp. 206-207] While these early evolutionary theories failed to become accepted as mainstream science, the debates over them would help pave the way for the acceptance of Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection a few years later. [ Larson p. 51]Geological time scale and the history of life
Geologists such as
Adam Sedgwick , andRoderick Murchison continued, despite disputes such asThe Great Devonian Controversy , to make advances in stratigraphy. They described new geological epochs such as theCambrian , theSilurian , theDevonian , and thePermian . Increasingly, such progress in stratigraphy depended on the opinions of experts with specialized knowledge of particular types of fossils such asWilliam Lonsdale (fossil corals), andJohn Lindley (fossil plants) who both played a role in the Devonian controversy and its resolution. [ Rudwick "The Great Devonian Controversy" p. 94] By the early 1840s much of the geologic time scale had been developed. In 1841, John Phillips formally divided the geologic column into three major eras, thePaleozoic ,Mesozoic , andCenozoic , based on sharp breaks in the fossil record. [ Larson pp. 36-37] He identified the three periods of the Mesozoic era and all the periods of the Paleozoic era except theOrdovician . His definition of the geological time scale is still used today. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" p. 213 ] It remained a relative time scale with no method of assigning any of the periods' absolute dates. It was understood that not only had there been an "age of reptiles" preceding the current "age of mammals", but there had a time (during the Cambrian and the Silurian) when life had been restricted to the sea, and a time (prior to the Devonian) when invertebrates had been the largest and most complex forms of animal life.Expansion and professionalization of geology and paleontology
This rapid progress in geology and paleontology during the 1830s and 1840s was aided by a growing international network of geologists and fossil specialists whose work was organized and reviewed by an increasing number of geological societies. Many of these geologists and paleontolgists were now paid professionals working for universities, museums and government geological surveys. The relatively high level of public support for the earth sciences was due to their cultural impact, and their proven economic value in helping to exploit mineral resources such as coal. [ Rudwick "The Meaning of Fossils" pp. 200-201]
Another important factor was the development in the late 18th and early 19th centuries of museums with large natural history collections. These museums received specimens from collectors around the world and served as centers for the study of comparative anatomy and morphology. These disciplines played key roles in the development of a more technically sophisticated form of natural history. One of the first and most important examples was the Museum of Natural History in Paris, which was at the center of many of the developments in natural history during the first decades of the 19th century. It was founded in 1793 by an act of the French National Assembly, and was based on an extensive royal collection plus the private collections of aristocrats confiscated during the
French revolution , and expanded by material seized during French military conquests. The Paris museum was the professional base for Cuvier, and his professional rival Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire. The English anatomistsRobert Grant andRichard Owen both spent time studying there. Owen would go on to become the leading British morphologist while working at the museum of the Royal College of Surgeons. [ Greene and Depew "The Philosophy of Biology" pp. 128-130] [ Bowler and Morus "Making Modern Science" pp. 168-169]19th century after Darwin
Evolution
Charles Darwin 's publication of theOrigin of Species in 1859 was a watershed event in all the life sciences, especially paleontology. Fossils had played a role in the development of Darwin's theory. In particular he had been impressed by fossils he had collected inSouth America during thevoyage of the Beagle of giant armadillos,giant sloth s, and what at the time he thought wereThere was also great interest in human evolution. Neanderthal fossils were discovered in 1856, but at the time it was not clear that they represented a different species from modern humans. Eugene Dubois created a sensation with his discovery of
Java Man , the first fossil evidence of a species that seemed clearly intermediate between humans and apes, in 1891.Developments in North America
A major development in the 2nd half of the 19th century was a rapid expansion of paleontology in North America. In 1858
Joseph Leidy described a "Hadrosaurus " skeleton, which was the first North American dinosaur to be described from good remains. However, it was the massive westward expansion of railroads, military bases, and settlements into Kansas and other parts of the Western United States following theAmerican Civil War that really fueled the expansion of fossil collection. [ Everhart "Oceans of Kansas" p. 17 ] The result was an increased understanding of the natural history of north America, including the discovery of theWestern Interior Sea that had covered Kansas and much of the rest of the Midwestern United States during parts of theCretaceous , the discovery several important fossils of primitive birds and horses, and the discovery of a number of new dinosaur genera including "Allosaurus ", "Stegosaurus ", and "Triceratops ". Much of this activity was part of a fierce personal and professional rivalry between two men,Othniel Marsh , andEdward Cope , which has become known as theBone Wars .Overview of developments in the 20th century
Developments in geology
Two 20th century developments in geology had a big effect on paleontology. The first was the development of
radiometric dating , which allowed absolute dates to be assigned to thegeologic timescale . The second was the theory ofplate tectonics , which helped make sense of the geographical distribution of ancient life.Geographical expansion of paleontology
During the 20th century paleontological exploration intensified everywhere and ceased to be a largely European and North American activity. In the 135 years between Buckland's first discovery and 1969 a total of 170 dinosaur genera were known. In the 25 years after 1969 that number increased to 315. Much of this increase was due to the examination of new rock exposures, particularly in previously little-explored areas in
South America andAfrica . [ McGowan p. 105] Near the end of the century the opening ofChina to systematic exploration for fossils has yielded a wealth of material on dinosaurs and the origin of birds and mammals. [ Bowler p. 349]Mass extinctions
The 20th century saw a major renewal of interest in
mass extinction events and their effect on the course of the history of life. This was particularly true after 1980 when Luis and Walter Alvarez put forward theAlvarez hypothesis claiming that animpact event caused theCretaceous–Tertiary extinction event , which killed off the non-aviandinosaur s along with many other living things. Also in the early 1980sJack Sepkoski andDavid M. Raup published papers with statistical analysis of the fossil record of marine invertebrates that revealed a pattern (possibly cyclical) of repeated mass extinctions with significant implications for the evolutionary history of life.Evolutionary paths and theory
Throughout the 20th century new fossil finds continued to contribute to understanding the paths taken by evolution. Examples include major taxonomic transitions such as finds in Greenland, starting in the 1930’s (with more major finds in the 1980’s), of fossils illustrating the evolution of
tetrapods from fish, and fossils in China during the 1990s that shed light on the dinosaur-bird relationship. Other events that have attracted considerable attention have included the discovery of a series of fossils in Pakistan that have shed light onwhale evolution , and most famously of all a series of finds throughout the 20th century in Africa (starting withTaung child in 1924) and elsewhere have helped illuminate the course ofhuman evolution . Increasingly, at the end of the century, the results of paleontology andmolecular biology were being brought together to reveal detailedphylogenetic tree s.The results of paleontology have also contributed to the development of evolutionary theory. In 1944
George Gaylord Simpson published "Tempo and Mode in Evolution", which used quantitative analysis to show that the fossil record was consistent with the branching, non-directional, patterns predicted by the advocates of evolution driven bynatural selection andgenetic drift rather than the linnear trends predicted by earlier advocates of neo-Lamarckism andorthogenesis . This integrated paleontology into themodern evolutionary synthesis . [ Bowler p. 337] In 1972Niles Eldredge andStephen Jay Gould used fossil evidence to advocate the theory ofpunctuated equilibrium , which maintains that evolution is characterized by long periods of relative stasis and much shorter periods of relatively rapid change.Cambrian explosion
One area of paleontology that has seen a lot of activity during the 1980’s, 1990’s and beyond is the study of the
Cambrian explosion during which many of the various phyla of animals with their distinctive body plans first appear. The well-knownBurgess Shale Cambrian fossil site was found in 1909 byCharles Doolittle Walcott , and another important site in Chengjiang China was found in 1912. However, new analysis in the 1980s byHarry B. Whittington ,Derek Briggs ,Simon Conway Morris and others sparked a renewed interest and a burst of activity including discovery of an important new fossil site,Sirius Passet , in Greenland, and the publication of a popular and controversial book, Wonderful Life byStephen Jay Gould in 1989.Pre-Cambrian fossils
Prior to 1950 there was no widely accepted fossil evidence of life before the Cambrian period. When
Charles Darwin wrote "The Origin of Species" he acknowledged that the lack of any fossil evidence of life prior to the relatively complex animals of the Cambrian was a potential argument against the theory of evolution, but expressed the hope that such fossils would be found in the future. In the 1860s there were claims of the discovery of pre-Cambrian fossils, but these would later be shown not to have an organic origin. In the late 19th century Charles Doolittle Walcott would discoverstromatolites and other fossil evidence of pre-Cambrian life, but at the time the organic origin of those fossils was also disputed. This would start to change in the 1950s with the discovery of more stromatolites along withmicrofossils of the bacteria that built them, and the publication of a series of papers by theSoviet scientist Boris Vasil'evich Timofeev announcing the discovery of microscopic fossil spores in pre-Cambrian sediments. A key breakthrough would come whenMartin Glaessner would show that fossils of soft bodied animals discovered byReginald Sprigg during the late 1940s in the Ediacaran hills of Australia were in fact pre-Cambrian not early Cambrian as Sprigg had originally believed, making theEdiacaran biota the oldest animals known. By the end of the 20th centurypaleobiology had established that the history of life extended back at least 3.5 billion years. [cite web|last=Schopf|first=J. William|title=Solution to Darwin's dilemma: Discovery of the missing Precambrian record of life|url=http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=34368|publisher=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|accessdate=2007-11-15]ee also
*
List of years in paleontology
*History of biology
*History of evolutionary thought
*History of geology
*History of science
*List of fossil sites "(with link directory)"Notes
References
*cite book|last=Bowler|first=Peter J.|authorlink=Peter J. Bowler|title="Evolution:The History of an Idea"|publisher=University of California Press|year=2003|isbn=0-52023693-9
*cite book|last=Bowler|first=Peter J.|coauthors=Iwan Rhys Morus|title=Making Modern Science|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|year=2005|isbn=0-226-06861-7
*Desmond, Adrian (1975). "The Discovery of Marine Transgressions and the Explanation of Fossils in Antiquity". American Journal of Science, Volume 275.
*cite book|last=Larson|first=Edward J.|authorlink=Edward Larson|title=Evolution: the remarkable history of scientific theory|publisher=Modern Library|year=2004|isbn=0-679-64288-9
*cite book|last=McGowan|first=Christopher|title="The Dragon Seekers"|publisher=Persus Publishing|year=2001|isbn=0-7382-0282-7
*cite book|last=Everhart|first=Michael J.|title="Oceans of Kansas: A Natural History of the Western Interior Sea"|publisher=Indiana University Press|year=2005|isbn=0-253-34547-2
*cite book|last=Greene|first=Marjorie|coauthors=David Depew|title=The Philosophy of Biology:An Episodic History|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2004|isbn=0-521-64371-6
*cite book|last=Needham|first=Joseph|authorlink=Joseph Needham|title="Science and Civilization in China: Volume 3, Mathematics and the Sciences of the Heavens and the Earth"|publisher=Caves Books Ltd|year=1986|isbn=0-253-34547-2
* Robert Hooke (1665) [http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/15491"Micrographia"] The Royal Society
* Palmer, Douglas (2005) Earth Time: Exploring the Deep Past from Victorian England to the Grand Canyon. Wiley, Chichester. ISBN 9780470022214
*cite book|last=Rudwick|first=Martin J.S.|authorlink=Martin J. S. Rudwick|title="Georges Cuvier, Fossil Bones, and Geological Catastrophes"|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|year=1997|isbn=0-226-73106-5
*cite book|last=Rudwick|first=Martin J.S.|authorlink=Martin J. S. Rudwick|title="The Meaning of Fossils"|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|year=1985|edition=2nd edition|isbn=0-226-73103-0
*cite book|last=Rudwick|first=Martin J.S.|authorlink=Martin J. S. Rudwick|title="The Great Devonian Controversy: The Shaping of Scientific Knowledge among Gentlemanly Specialists"|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|year=1985|isbn=0-226-73102-2
*cite book|last=Rudwick|first=Martin J.S.|authorlink=Martin J. S. Rudwick|title="Worlds Before Adam: The Reconstruction of Geohistory in the Age of Reform"|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|year=2008|isbn=0-226-73128-6External links
* [http://www.strangescience.net History of paleontology]
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.