Joined: Sep. 2002
I'm familiar with it. There have been several supposed finds of "precambrian" pollen: one in the Grand Canyon by a creationist named Burdick, one in the Salt Range of the Punjab, and the one discussed here, in the Roraima formation in South America.
The Burdick claim was shown to be modern contamination due to extremely sloppy technique. Contamination is the most likely explanation, since both sites are in some of the most complex geological formations in the world. It's interesting that no such finds ever occur in more normal, stable precambrian formations. Another possible explanation is misidentification. One popular creationist claim was that a paleozoic angiosperm fossil was found in 1923 (angiosperms didn't begin showing up until the Cretaceous). It was subsequently shown to be something else, after other experts took a look at it.
Color me skeptical
Edited by KCdgw on July 09 2011,22:45
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius