ICR article image.
Posted on 06/11/2014 12:28:07 PM PDT by fishtank
Comb Jelly Genome Gums Up Evolution
by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D. *
Comb jellies (ctenophores) look like disco balls with flashing lights that dance and spin as they float around the ocean. These creatures are so fascinating that one neuroscientist likened them to "aliens who've come to earth."1,2 The genome of comb jellies has been sequenced, and it's as alien as the creature looks—utterly defying all predictions about its evolutionary origins.3
Even prior to recent advances in genome sequencing, comb jellies perplexed evolutionists. While they resemble a jelly fish in some ways, they have complex nervous systems that detect light, sense prey, flash a colorful spectrum of bioluminescence, and move with unique musculature and tentacles. Scientists first placed them as evolving from animals without nervous systems such as sea sponges and flattened pancake-like creatures called placozoans. Others placed them earlier in the evolutionary tree—claiming that their spectacular nervous systems were later "lost" during animal evolution and then magically reappeared again. Now with the new wealth of genomics data, scientists are placing them at the very earliest stage of animal life—branching off into their own evolutionary lineage.
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
ICR article image.
One doesn’t have to be a 6K creationist to be put off by the hubris of the people who proselyltize science and evolution as something it is not.
Even an atheist can see the sophomoric nature of the science zealots, who are really not particularly scientific in outlook and philosphy.
Biology is still so nascent as a science that the know it all hubris is laughable, but also irritating, even disgusting.
We will know something about evolution in 10-20 years when many many more genomes are fully sequenced.
Until then pretty much nothing is known about it.
Oops. I was thinking of another king of “comb jelly.”
Whoever wrote this article assumes he knows enough to be able to declare that evolution cannot possibly account for the comb jelly genome.
“Whoever wrote this article assumes he knows enough to be able to declare that evolution cannot possibly account for the comb jelly genome.”
And?
Yes, he assumes that he knows enough about both evolution and comb jellies to assert that the two are irreconcilable with each other.
Regards,
Creationists are never perplexed.
God did it.
I have no idea why scientists even bother. We already know the answer.
God did it.
The three hardest words for modern scientists to say is “we don’t know” or “we’re not sure”. I’d give ‘em more credit is they just admitted it every once in a while. But then, the government grants might start drying up if they do.
CC
Cilia of Gold.........................(Okay who knows what I’m talking about?).................
JMO
CC
There are, however, seven basic assumptions that are often
not mentioned during discussions of Evolution. Many evolutionists ignore the first six assumptions and only consider the seventh.
These are as follows.
(1) The first assumption is that non-living things gave rise to living material, i.e. spontaneous generation occurred.
(2) The second assumption is that spontaneous generation
occurred only once.
The other assumptions all follow from the second one.
(3) The third assumption is that viruses, bacteria, plants and animals are all interrelated.
(4) The fourth assumption is that the Protozoa gave rise to the Metazoa.
(5) The fifth assumption is that the various invertebrate phyla are interrelated.
(6) The sixth assumption is that the invertebrates gave rise to the vertebrates.
(7) The seventh assumption is that within the vertebrates the fish gave rise to the amphibia, the amphibia to the reptiles, and the reptiles to the birds and mammals. Sometimes this is expressed in other words, i.e. that the modern amphibia and reptiles had a common ancestral stock, and so on.
For the initial purposes of this discussion on Evolution I shall consider that the supporters of the theory of Evolution hold that all these seven assumptions are valid, and that these assumptions form the “ General Theory of Evolution.”
The first point that I should like to make is that these seven assumptions by their nature are not capable of experimental verification. They assume that a certain series of events has occurred in the past. Thus though it may be possible to mimic some of these events under present-day conditions, this does not mean that these events must therefore have taken place in the past. All that it shows is that it is possible for such a change to
take place. Thus to change a present-day reptile into a mammal,though of great interest, would not show the way in which the mammals did arise. Unfortunately we cannot bring about even this change; instead we have to depend upon limited circumstantial evidence for our assumptions, and it is now my intention to discuss the nature of this evidence.
IMPLICATIONS OF
EVOLUTION
By G. A. KERKUT
M.A., PH.D. 1960. Pergamon Press.
Did you need more?
So basically you're assuming they have these assumptions, and complaining that they won't question their assumptions.
Well, it was all ready obvious.
I thought maybe you were making a point rather than stating the obvious.
Another viewpoint:
I don’t see how this gums up evolution at all.
From the perspective of wondering how the whole process came about, that “answer” is unsatisfying.
The notion of “spoken, and it all came instantly into existence” does not rule out the proposition that He made everything about 20 minutes ago; any “evidence” to the contrary is likewise subject to the proposition that it was all made in that condition.
for the record, there is an implied /s at the end of my commentary.
The three hardest words for modern scientists to say is “we don’t know” or “we’re not sure”. I’d give ‘em more credit is they just admitted it every once in a while. But then, the government grants might start drying up if they do.
<><><><><
Read the article Moonman linked to in post 17 in this thread.
The scientist pretty much says exactly that ... we’re not sure, we don’t understand, but we’re still looking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.