What is “doe snot”? Is it green and stinky?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why the Theory of Evolution is True. Part 1: What is Science?
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
*yawn*
Not exactly. The evidence reveals possibly billions of years for only single-celled organisms. But multicellular organisms appear in the Record only a little over 600 mya. Comparing 3,800 M to 600 M — quite a big difference!
I keep hearing similar statements expressed in various ways....but these are inaccurate & misleading.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
This is actually not quite correct.
Multicellular organism - Wikipedia
Life has a history of quite a few "experiments" with multi-cellularity. Some of them being some 3 billion years old.
600mya is the oldest known trace of multi-cellular animals.
Which means that the cells that came together to form those first multi-cellular "colonies", had been evolving for over 3 billion years already.
Multicellular “colonies”! Lol.
You’ll grasp at anything, wontchya?
Reminds me of an article,
Pleiotropy: Watching multicellularity evolve before our eyes
...and the discussion that ensued between a poster and the article’s author.
The poster asked:
“Is a colony considered a multi-cellular organism?”
The author replied:
“Good question. I would not think so. Rather, the colonies could be imagined to be the first step towards evolving real multicellularity ('an organism that reproduces by making a copy of the whole, and consists of different types of cells').”
Read the rest of the dialogue between them!
Imagination, an over-used tool of the biological sciences!
As I said: you’ll “imagine” anything to be a precursor!
Your standard for accepting evidence for evolution is very lax.
So “actually”, what I posted is correct.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
??
Was this an attempt at being clever?
Why would I care about some comment section on the internet concerning high level science topics?
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
"actually", what you posted, is what I posted.
You said multi-cellular life is 600 million years old.
I corrected you. What is 600 million years old is multicellular ANIMALS.
Multicellular LIFE, is much older.
And I'm the one who's "grasping", ha?
No, I did not. I said “multicellular organisms”.
Lol! You probably can’t even see how misleading your statement is. “Colonies” — what you are calling multicellular life — back then were still made up of the same single celled organisms! It was probably for protective measures.... they didn’t become a new species, did they?
Uhh, yeah.
Yeah, why would you?
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Which is a synonym for "life". Yes.
And you said it was 600 million years old.
This is wrong. It's multi-cellular animals that are that age. Or at least, that's the oldest evidence we have. It might be older.
Not all multi-cellular life/organisms are animals.
You are still made up of the same single celled organisms.
They are eukaryotic cells.
All multi-celled organisms are colonies of cells that act as a single entity.
You're into a meaningless semantic argument now.
Call it what you will, it doesn't change the reality of the biology that underpins multi-cellular life.
For the same reason that I wouldn't care about the chatter in the waiting room of the oncologist.