Audie
Veteran Member
Why do you rise to the bait?You know the answer to this. So why ask, if not to troll, stupidly?
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why do you rise to the bait?You know the answer to this. So why ask, if not to troll, stupidly?
Yes, we do.Ty for explaining about living organisms with no brains. So do you know if these were around (on the earth) before organisms with brains?
If someone is trolling excessively I liked to troll back a bit at times.Why do you rise to the bait?
Maybe it is because we share a common ancestry with fish. More evidence.Why do you rise to the bait?
No, not mermaids. Sea monkeys:I'm afraid you completely misunderstood. I did not and still do not imagine that fish gave birth to humans in the short run. Mermaids maybe?
What I was saying is that according to the theory, including that of floppy fish that manage to crawl out of water for a while and then apparently forever, stopped needing total aqueous environment after millions of years, some kind of fish apparently is said to evolve into humans. Somehow somewhere.
So do you know if these were around (on the earth) before organisms with brains?
Maybe it is because we share a common ancestry with fish. More evidence.
So then, according to the theory, did brains evolve later on perhaps after sponges?Fossils of sponges were dated as early as the Ediacaran period, before the Cambrian Explosion. Of course, there are more Cambrian fossils than there are in the Ediacaran fossils of sponges.
However, based on the molecular clock, sponges could even be older than the Ediacaran, plus they may have fossil of the sponge's spicules.
The spicules are made of either calcium carbonate or silica, which served as skeleton for sponges. If this fossil be confirmed as spicule, then sponges could exist as early as 750 million old.
(source: Reitner J, Wörheide G (2002). "Non-lithistid fossil Demospongiae – origins of their palaeobiodiversity and highlights in history of preservation". Here is a link for you, PDF)
Sponges are older than most of the marine invertebrates that exist in the Cambrian, including the famous Arthropod trilobites.
Not "according to the theory". That is a poorly framed question. It is according to the evidence. Sponges may have been some of the first animals. Do they have brains? In fact if you applied any rational thought to this problem you could have answered this for yourself. You should try to do so for just once in these threads.So then, according to the theory, did brains evolve later on perhaps after sponges?
No no kidding. Mermaids, no? How about mermen. Well fish men and fish women mixing together eventually developing into ... Apes.
Sorry but I'm still on mermen and merwomen. Why not?Not "according to the theory". That is a poorly framed question. It is according to the evidence. Sponges may have been some of the first animals. Do they have brains? In fact if you applied any rational thought to this problem you could have answered this for yourself. You should try to do so for just once in these threads.
Since you have been trolling the thread. I decided to troll you a bit. But, yes, if you claim to be a human being then you are also claiming to be an ape.No no kidding. Mermaids, no? How about mermen. Well fish men and fish women mixing together eventually developing into ... Apes.
Oh, I thought that you were done trolling.Sorry but I'm still on mermen and merwomen. Why not?
Why you can't squeeze a sponge brain? So let's be honest for a change. Sponges without brains came before substances with brains. Right? Not sponges with brains because it seems sponges are brainless.Not "according to the theory". That is a poorly framed question. It is according to the evidence. Sponges may have been some of the first animals. Do they have brains? In fact if you applied any rational thought to this problem you could have answered this for yourself. You should try to do so for just once in these threads.
Why can't you just answer the question. Did sponges without brains pop up, I mean evolve, and then become something with brains? I know you'd love to say more about brains ... Cmon...but little by little you think maybe or is it for certain that according to the evidence organisms with brains evolved from organisms with no brains. Right? C'mon be honest!Not "according to the theory". That is a poorly framed question. It is according to the evidence. Sponges may have been some of the first animals. Do they have brains? In fact if you applied any rational thought to this problem you could have answered this for yourself. You should try to do so for just once in these threads.
The challenge was for you to try to reason rationally for once. If you admit that you cannot do so I will run through an explanation for you.Why you can't squeeze a sponge brain? So let's be honest for a change. Sponges without brains came before substances with brains. Right? Not sponges with brains because it seems sponges are brainless.
The problem is you're going nowhere...but really deeper into the hole. Hiya! and have a good one.If someone is trolling excessively I liked to troll back a bit at times.
You cannot demand that others be honest when you have not been honest for a long long time.Why can't you just answer the question. Did sponges without brains pop up, I mean evolve, and then become something with brains? I know you'd love to say more about brains ... Cmon...but little by little you think maybe or is it for certain that according to the evidence organisms with brains evolved from organisms with no brains. Right? C'mon be honest!
And look at that, you make a false statement about others and run away.The problem is you're going nowhere...but really deeper into the hole. Hiya! and have a good one.
So again, brains evolved after sponges. Or maybe developed simultaneously in organisms along with sponges.Fossils of sponges were dated as early as the Ediacaran period, before the Cambrian Explosion. Of course, there are more Cambrian fossils than there are in the Ediacaran fossils of sponges.
However, based on the molecular clock, sponges could even be older than the Ediacaran, plus they may have fossil of the sponge's spicules.
The spicules are made of either calcium carbonate or silica, which served as skeleton for sponges. If this fossil be confirmed as spicule, then sponges could exist as early as 750 million old.
(source: Reitner J, Wörheide G (2002). "Non-lithistid fossil Demospongiae – origins of their palaeobiodiversity and highlights in history of preservation". Here is a link for you, PDF)
Sponges are older than most of the marine invertebrates that exist in the Cambrian, including the famous Arthropod trilobites.