[SunkenCiv]

GI,GO.

[SunkenCiv]

Early life on Earth - no predators, plenty of sex
Reuters on Yahoo | 3/20/08 | Reuters
Posted on 03/20/2008 2:10:20 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1989010/posts

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Thanks Renfield. To all: I won't be standing by with a mop to clean up after any bloodbath. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are Blam, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
· Google · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology magazine · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·

[2banana]

It just evolved out of chemicals???

[doc1019]

Yes, I would consider Adam a complex entity. ;-)

[Onelifetogive]

Earth's first animal was the ocean-drifting comb jelly, not the simple sponge, according to a new find that has shocked scientists who didn't imagine the earliest critter could be so complex...

Said one scientist, "It's weird, it's like someone made it that way."

[deuteronlmy232]

And so the theory of evolution changes once again. Ho Hum. boring.

What really happend: In six days the LORD GOD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day!

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

OH my!

More complexities.....

How could it be?

Before this is new “discovery” is tossed aside....let those who would say - complexity does not disprove evolution....please note this is a “shock” to the evolutionists.....finding this more complex animal branching off....first....total shock.

Had they been following the discoveries of recent years .....it would not have been a “shock” at all. Oh but all those discoveries were in the “banned” category. Too bad. Maybe this shock will spur some more investigations in to the fallacy that complexity was not there at the very beginning of creation....which even more significantly indicates a CREATOR being necessary to START this process....from the very beginning....(but this is not an endorsement of theistic evolution...noter topic for another day).

From the article:
“Earth’s first animal was the ocean-drifting comb jelly, not the simple sponge, according to a new find that has shocked scientists who didn’t imagine the earliest critter could be so complex... scientists analyzed massive volumes of genetic data to define the earliest splits at the base of the animal tree of life... The new study surprisingly found that the comb jelly was the first animal to diverge from the base of the tree, not the less complex sponge, which had previously been given the honor...”

[abishai]

Is it related to the ooze that Q almost destroyed with an expanding time-space anomaly?

[CharlesWayneCT]

"evolution is not necessarily just a march towards increased complexity," Dunn said.

I think if it goes the other way they call it "devolution".

And anybody watching humanity would have to agree we are going the wrong way.

[Hoplite]

"Jellyfish disinformation."

[driftdiver]

Its supposed to be established fact and yet time after time some new study radically changes the facts. Amazing what you can figure out if you stack enough assumptions together.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

The new study surprisingly found that the comb jelly was the first animal to diverge from the base of the tree, not the less complex sponge

Comb jelly? Honeycomb! I mean, Horsefeathers! What a hive mind. I'd bee in a jam if this was the best I could do to brush away competing theories. Some of us actually work and don't sponge off taxpayers by publishing such calumnies.




Pun for All and All for Pun....
Funners & Punners
ping list PING! (see keyword FReePun)
If you want either on or off
this family-safe occasional ping list,
you must be out of your minds....


Let me know of any appropriate candidate threads. I don't ping the list to threads that are sacreligious or tacky or seem likely to become so.
(on or off requests, just FReepmail, enclosing a nominal $217.95 list processing fee).

[TexasNative2000]

“Mr. Stein, Mr. Ben Stein, please pick up the white paging phone.”

[tacticalogic]

We might have learned something new we didn't know before.

It contradicts what we thought we knew before.

It probably happened yesterday, too.

It could very well happen again tomorrow.

Maybe to this.

[LiteKeeper]

Out of curiosity, how do they know what the first animal was?

[Know et al]

Why didn’t all monkeys evolve into human beings?

Answer:
Obviously, some of those monkeys didn’t read Darwin’s book.

[fr_freak]

...a new find that has shocked scientists who didn't imagine the earliest critter could be so complex...

What's the big mystery? You shoot a lightning bolt through a primordial soup and - BAM - you get an ocean-drifting comb jelly. Shoot the lightning bolt another way and - BAM - you get a platypus. Shoot it sideways and - BAM - you get a wicker basket. I love science!

[dr_lew]

Dawkins book, The Ancestor's Tale, is based on just this sort of analysis. He follows the ancestors of humans back in time and talks about the points of divergence ( rejoining as you go back ) with other taxonomical groups. He has the whole thing charted out. At "rendevous 16" the Mammals rejoin with their dinosaur progenitors. 17 - amphibians ... 24 - sea squirts. See, some sort of sea squirt was the common ancestors of all the "higher animals". This division, between "Deuterostomes" and "Protostomes" is discerned only through molecular study.

At the end of the section on "rendevous 27" where flatworms diverge from the line ancestral to all familar animals, including insects etc. He remarks that the order of the next few rendevous is uncertain - "All this will be resolved definitively when more molecular data become available. This will be soon but, I fear, not soon enough for this book." ( 2004 ) He goes on, "Be warned that Rendevous 28 and 29, as well as 30 and 31, could turn out to be in the wrong order."

Well, 29 are the Ctenophores, and 31 are the sponges, so the re-ordering was slightly more radical than he warned of, but really! I think you have to remember what is being averred. It is not that the Ctentophores were created before the sponges! It is that their common ancestor with e.g. sea squirts is older than the common ancestor of sea squirts with sponges. Note that this was a split, and the other branch, the "main trunk" comprised a group of living animals as well.

No doubt it's all very interesting and obviously surprising to the cognesceti, but I don't see any reason for hysteria. If you think of the sponges as the main branch, then ctenophores branched from it, followed by a branch which was the progenitor of jellyfish, coral, sea squirts, and everything else, and the proliferation of this branch crowded out any new branches from the sponge line.

BTW, I bought this book after I saw Dawkins in Expelled, which renewed my interest in theories of the origin of life.

[potlatch]

The first drifting comb jelly actually came from a sunspot. [because when I made the gif I forgot the earth part!!] Lol Thanks for the ping Spirit!

[ApplegateRanch]

GI,GO.

And I might add, Occam's Razor.