Lamprey Found
I read an interesting article, that earlier this mouth there was an eel-like creature that was found in ancient South Africa. It is considered to be a living fossil. A lamprey, is what this species is called, is stated to be a 1.7 inch creature, that hasn't changed for the past 360 million years. These creatures would connect their sharp teeth to prehistoric sharks. Most of the previous lamprey had gone extinct or evolved, however some lampreys just became another lamprey. It's said that the lampreys backbone is built exactly as the humans, with the same type of cartilage. This discovery of the lamprey can help us easily study the lampreys mouth. This is one of the few jaw less mouths of a species with a backbone. The study also believes that they were the first vertebrates, and then were visible later then 540 million years ago. I even found this more interesting, that humans and lampreys could share an ancient comment ancestor. If you would like to research more on the lampreys click on the underlined site.
posted by Anonymous @ 11/04/2006 10:15:00 AM
25 Comments:
This brings up themes such as evolution...considering how lampreys don't seem to have evolved at all while other creatures, which are not lampreys, have evolved into entirely different organisms. Ancient lampreys seem to be about the same as modern lampreys are now, as far as lampreys go, although the article pointed out a few variations between the prehistoric lamprey and the present-day lamprey. For instance, lamprey fossils show that lampreys long ago were much smaller in overall size than lampreys today.
I was beginning to wonder if you know what pronouns are, but now I realize 'lamprey' is rather fun to type. Lamprey. Lamprey lamprey lamprey. Lampreylampreylampreylampreylampreylamprey...ha.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Or maybe evolution is a completely inaccuarate theory? Maybe if you expand on your thoughts, Optimus prime, we can get some interesting discussion going. I wonder what everyones opinion on evolution is here?
BTW, whoever posted first. It isn't necessary to be so rude when trying to make your point. You could have posted in a much more polite manner and still could have explained that llcool's post would have flowed much better if she/he would have used pronouns.
Didn't mean to be rude and I'm sorry if you took it that way; it just amused me.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Sorry yz, but you are mistaken, not ALL evidence supports it. In fact, there are large gaps in the theory of evolution, and there are scientists who would back me up on this statement. Also, I did not say that the theory evolution is completely inaccurate, I just stated this as a possibility in regards to Optimus' post.
So you are admitting to the fact that the theory is incomplete? If so, how can you prove it to be 100% true, if that is in fact what you are trying to do?
You say "it only makes sense" this way. Can you lay some more foundation before you post your opinion?
At this point, the discussion has nothing to do with intelligent design. Even if someone did bring it up, it isn't necessary that it turn into a shout...ummm....ranting fest.
I am very happy that you wanted to get an intelligent discussion started. But now that you have started it, you should let it continue and not assume that I am trying to defend creationism before I've even revealed my beliefs.
Cleary I'm skilled at this sort of thing? You don't know anything about me, so I question how you can even make this assumption.
Moral of the story: Stop assuming things!
I agree with everything that yz has said. I think that the Lampreys could very well support the theory of evolution.
I am just curious to know your thoughts about evolution veritas. I have heard some but it seems like you just say that this isn't an example of evolution and that you don't believe in evolution but what evidence is there that supports what you think because I seem to find more that supports evolution.
They could support evolution, or they could refute it. Yz hasn’t given me any evidence in either direction as far as lampreys go.
I don’t believe in evolution because there are far too many gaps as I said before. Invalidity of vestigial organs, embryology, the theory of punctuated equilibrium, etc. Since yz is the one doing the supporting, he/she should first present evidence that is in favor of the evolutionary theory. Then I will respond with the evidence that is on my side and share my beliefs.
You make it sound like I’m just trying to avoid presenting any evidence and just flat out say that you are wrong, but that is an incorrect notion. I am just waiting for someone supporting evolution to give me something, with foundational evidence, that I can argue. yz has tried to do so, but I can not respond to his/her statements because he/she has't shared their bases with us.
http://www.creation-museum.net/index.php
Interesting website that contains pictures of fossils whose living counterparts have remained completely unchanged for millions of years. There's even a lamprey on there! ^___^
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Wow. Thanks for clearing that up for me pudgy poof. You said exactly what I was trying to insinuate in my past few posts. And you are also right in saying that I should have shared my beliefs earlier. I just thought that maybe if I prodded yz to post his/her thoughts first, he/she might have. Obviously that did't work....I did give a reason in my previous post for not giving my beliefs, but whatever. I'll just throw some of them out there since yz apparently isn't going to be the one to start. Oh by the way, I'm sorry I made you assume things, I feel your pain. <(''<)sorry!
Well, I'll guess I'll start with vestigial organs since that's first on my list ^_^
. For those of you who may not know what vestigial organs are, they are supposedly organs in the body that have no function. This concept has had widespread acceptance, but recently scientists have found that these organs do in fact have a use. I'll make a list here of some organs that have been labeled as "vestigial" and their actual uses.
Appendix
This organ creates antibodies, protects the intestines from infection and lessens the chance of various cancers. So yes, taking it out won't necessarily kill you, but nonetheless, it does have a function.
Tonsils
Simply, they help prevent infection in the throat.
Coccyx (tailbone)
This part of the body was once thought to be the remnant of a tail that had no use whatsoever. It has been found that without the coccyx, bowel movements would be impossible and because certain muscles are held by it, your organs wouldn’t be able to sustain their position.
The Thymus
This organ helps in the development of the immune system and without it this system wouldn’t survive.
Pineal Gland
Produces horomones and aids in the functions of other endocrine organs.
Thyroid Gland
It produces a horomone that controls metabolism and growth. People born with a deficiency of this hormone have cretinism.
Pituitary Gland
It stimulates the endocrine system, allows proper growth of the skeletal system. When something is wrong with this gland it causes dwarfism, gigantism, diabetes insipidus, etc.
Eye fold
Lubricates and cleanses the eyeball.
In the 1800’s the list of “vestigial organs” contained more than 100 parts; as of 1999, there are 0 organs left on that list. Anyway, I'm sure you see my point, I don't have to continue with the other 92 or however many more there are.
Now to respond to pudgy poof. (thanks for actually giving me something to argue!)
Again, for those of you who aren’t aware of the theory of punctuated equilibrium, I will briefly describe it. The theory of punctuated equilibrium states, contrary to Darwin’s beliefs, that organisms that sexually reproduce maintain a stasis, or a long period of equilibrium, in which no changes occur, and then at one point a large, sudden macromutation takes place.
According to evolutionists, because the process occurs so quickly, no intermediate fossils are left behind. But, how can a period of evolution happen so quickly that no fossils are left behind from the intermediate stages? Darwin himself stated,
“If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed. Consequently, evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.”
All fossils that have found, contrary to what evolutionists would like to believe, indicate that life appeared on this earth not through evolution, but fully formed.
Sorry I didn’t completely reply to your beliefs on punctuated equilibrium Pudgy Poof, but I am speaking in terms of evolution.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
No problem Pudgy Poof ^_^ Yeah, I was pretty sure that you already knew what vestigial organs are, you sound quite knowledgable to me. The reason I say they are contrary to evolution is because some scientists thought they were useless because they came from organs used by our "predecessors" and were, through the process of a macroevolution, left in our bodies. Apparently, they are supposed to shrink into nothing! Now though, as I presented, they have been found to have several uses. So, I guess it really isn't contrary to evolution, but evolutionists can no longer use this as an argument. Correct?
By the way, thanks for the suggested reading. I have heard good things about all of those books, but unfortunately I haven't picked them up yet. I will definately try though, they sound really interesting.
Oh, sorry for the long posts....hehe....I can't help it -\^_^/-
"I don't KNOW what happened; I wasn't there. Neither were you. All we can really do is speculate, and even if we really found out how it works, would that change anything?"
That's where one's faith comes into play. I personally do believe in God, but if we "really found out" I think it would change everything. People's perspectives would be completely different, don't you think?
Why would it be impossible for us not to believe in evolution?
You believe in a religion too, no? Buddhism is a religion after all. I don't believe it is religion that causes these genocides, it is the mindset of people who extremists. I think there are few religions that encourage violence.
You know, it's funny that no one else has shared their opinions on religion and evolution. People usually have a strong opinion.....nevermind.
I'm sorry you don't feel that I'm posting my opinions. Looking back to some of my posts, you're right, my opinions aren't always straight forward, but I like it that way :) I also like to express my opinions through questioning others...you in this case.
Yes, we do believe that OUR WORLD was created in one instant. How is that contradictory to the UNIVERSE being infinite? We believe that God has been in existence for an infinite amount of tie. Maybe your idea of the universe is completely different than ours. Nonetheless, I don't believe that there is anything that is hippicritical abour believing in an infinite universe and one of the religions you listed. In fact, if you are a part of them, with the exception of Hinduism(I'm not sure about their beliefs), believing in that religion requires you also to believe in an infinite universe.
Are you Theravada Buddhist? Can you describe a few of your fundamental beliefs? I think it would be interesting to learn more about your religion ^-^
Who is Nicky Schneider?? Is she some famous and insane pop singer like Britney Spears or something? Sorry, I really don't follow that type of music.....hmm...I might be completely off target though....Who is she?
Thanks for your explanation. I'll have to study up on Buddhism, I must say I'm quite ignorant when it comes to this religion. Your explanation sparked my interest.
Anyway, I think the simple response to that would be, God can do anything. Don't you think that is what the obvious response would be?
oh no! My comments are getting shorter....I don't know if that's good or bad.
BTW, what happened to the person who started this post??? And what about...what was his/her name...oh yeah...yz? He/She added a different perspective.
haha, I suppose. I could respond to you again, but let's see if anyone else joins in. If not....oh well.
I was just thinking, the majority of Americans don't know anything except Christianity. And many of the people who do call themselves Christians are not practicing. I don't know how people can call themselves something, but not know anything about it! I can't say I know EVERYTHING about my religion, but I am learning and I know why I am who I am. I guess many people here, unfortunately, don't have the time to spend on religion. Though you'd think that would be the most important part of someone's life if they really believed....
Well, I just threw some more stuff out there for ANYONE to give their opinions on ^__________^
you are probably right....
Take care! maybe we will debate and discuss again some day.....some day.....@_@
40 posts, woot!
Post a Comment
<< Home