[VadeRetro]

You have it backwards. The post did not address my refutation.

Your refutation does not address the article. I suggest reading it to see if any further objections on your part have been anticipated before making them.

In an ice covered sea, the life we know existed before the Cambrian would have been impossible.

What do you know about the viable temperature range of Spriggina? How about Cyclomedusa? What kind of animal is this?

If you know, please tell somebody, because nobody else does!

Could not have lasted a year. The whole article by unScientific American is thus utter nonsense.

Funny how they fool so many.

[gore3000]

You have it backwards. The post did not address my refutation.-me-

Your refutation does not address the article.

As usual trying to put the burden of proof on the other person. It is up to you to show that life can continue to exist for hundreds of millions of years under ice. It cannot. Life needs sunlight to produce the food which all life needs. And do not talk to me about chemosynthesis, because the life that existed before the Cambrian was photosynthetic bacteria.