Nevermore Posted February 19, 2005 Posted February 19, 2005 Wasn't there a study that showed that all modern fauna is descended from the sea sponge?
Hellbender Posted February 19, 2005 Posted February 19, 2005 Wasn't there a study that showed that all modern fauna is descended from the sea sponge? Thats ludicrous.
Nevermore Posted February 19, 2005 Posted February 19, 2005 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/04/0401_0401_shapeoflife1.html
Mokele Posted February 20, 2005 Posted February 20, 2005 It'd be far more accurate to say that all animals descend from the common ancestor of sponges and, well, everything else. The question is "How derived are sponges?" Are they quite different from the first animal, a highly specialized descendant, or are they barely modified? While I don't know much of the details on the subject, the existence of the ampiblastula (sponge larval form, more or less) seems to indicate to me that there might well be more to the story than just "sponges have always been sponges". Mokele
zahizahi Posted February 22, 2005 Author Posted February 22, 2005 I didn't know there was a first living organism to explain. Maybe it's turtles all the way down. its like you donot follow the subject
zahizahi Posted February 22, 2005 Author Posted February 22, 2005 . http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/ .
zahizahi Posted February 22, 2005 Author Posted February 22, 2005 I was going to ask the same thing. I don't see any way around it' date=' I am taking an Anthropology/Arcaeology class and learning about all the different fossils of all the seperate species found in Africa. There is no "missing link" it makes perfect scientifical sense, evolution explains better than anything how we got here.[/quote'] there is no fossil example that supports evolution.
Ophiolite Posted February 22, 2005 Posted February 22, 2005 Thats ludicrous. This in response to Nevermore's question "Wasn't there a study that showed that all modern fauna is descended from the sea sponge?" Hellbender, what is ludicrous about it? I take fauna to refer in this context to vertebrates. What do you think our phyla descended from then? Edit: I just read Nevermore's later link. We don't need to restrict it to vertebrates.. Interesting.
Ophiolite Posted February 22, 2005 Posted February 22, 2005 there is no fossil example that supports evolution. Please thoroughly study the development of complexity of suture lines in the ammonoids and then repeat your assertion without feeling foolish.
Aardvark Posted February 22, 2005 Posted February 22, 2005 Zahizahi, have you read your own link? It bases its critic of Darwinism on 3 main points. 1) Darwinism is dependent on the theory of 'spontanteous origin of life' 2) Darwinism is dependent on Lamarkism and Mendelian genetics refutes it. 3) All mutations are negative. 1) This is simply incorrect. Darwin did not know how life first formed and his theory was not concerned with how life originated, only with how it developed. 2) This is simply incorrect. Darwin did not know how herditary traits were passed down through the generations but he knew that they did. Mendelian genetics explains how, thereby supporting his theory. 3) This is simply incorrect, it is repeated several times that no positive mutation has ever been observed. A 30 second check on Google proves that wrong. http://www.redrival.com/evolusi/evolmec2.htm It is clear that your link is not only factually inaccurate, but wilfully so. It is dishonest and wrong. Perhaps you'd like to present some real evidence against evolution?
Malachy Posted February 22, 2005 Posted February 22, 2005 there is no fossil example that supports evolution. See pg. 32 of March's issue of Scientific American.
Hellbender Posted February 24, 2005 Posted February 24, 2005 Hellbender, what is ludicrous about it? I take fauna to refer in this context to vertebrates. What do you think our phyla descended from then? sorry, that was a knee-jerk post, and I apologize, I didn't understand the question, or topic. I kinda thought he was joking. I don't think its ludicrous.
Hellbender Posted February 24, 2005 Posted February 24, 2005 there is no fossil example that supports evolution. well the ball's in your court, why don't you present fossil examples that only and indistuputably support biblical creation? PS are the names Ambulocetus natans, Archaeopteryx, Australopithecus and Ichthyostega familiar to you?
-Demosthenes- Posted February 25, 2005 Posted February 25, 2005 Actually, if you take the bible literally as well as put it together, you'll find that evolution caused by God is not consistent with his nature How so?
Deified Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 I actually found that link posted by zahizahi to be one of the funnier reads I have had in a long time. It very directly stated that ALL evidence presented by Darwinists is "imaginary" and simply propoganda designed to foster a materialistic world in which selfishness and evil rule supreme. It actually made out evolutionary biologists, zoologists, botanists, etc. to be evil masterminds in some kind of huge world domination conspiracy that has lasted 200 years. I laughed so hard. Of course after stating these things, they said that it PROVED that God had created all species.
Hellbender Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 .......It actually made out evolutionary biologists' date=' zoologists, botanists, etc. to be evil masterminds in some kind of huge world domination conspiracy that has lasted 200 years.....QUOTE'] its quite funny. This is the most extreme form of ad hominem attack biblical creationists use. You gotta just learn to laugh it off.
Mokele Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 It actually made out evolutionary biologists, zoologists, botanists, etc. to be evil masterminds in some kind of huge world domination conspiracy that has lasted 200 years. Sounds like a great idea to me! I've always wanted to be part of a vast secret society with goals of global domination! C'mon, it'd be fun!
Hellbender Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 yeah really, I'm in! Lets suppress all the "truth" creation science has been finding so we can RULE THE WORLD!
Ophiolite Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 You mean you guys aren't already members of this global conspiracy? I'm shocked. Membership is simple. Send me a thousand page essay and a cheque for £1,500. If you're pushed for time you can forego the essay.
Newtonian Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Hellbender,they really is no need for the essay.No Really:-)
swansont Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Sounds like a great idea to me! I've always wanted to be part of a vast secret society with goals of global domination! C'mon' date=' it'd be fun![/quote'] I'm already part of one. Apparently there are a bunch of people who think that a rogue planet exists and is slowing the earth's rotation by a macroscopic amount, but the timekeepers of the world are adjusting all the official clocks to compensate and make the day "seem" like it's 24 hours long. Of course, I categorically deny that his is happening, but then, what would you expect me to do?
Hellbender Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Hellbender,they really is no need for the essay.No Really:-) but I like essays...
Hellbender Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 For everyone out there who thinks there is a global conspiracy: we are joking.
Recommended Posts