Science

This Microorganism Doesn‘t Fit Into the ’Tree of Life’ and May Become Founder of a New Kingdom

Microorganism Doesnt Fit Traditional Phylogenic Tree | Could Found New Kingdom

Collodictyon (Photo: UiO/MERG)

Scientists are trying to find out just where this newly discovered microorganism found in mud from a Norwegian lake fits into the tree of life.

Time for a quick biology lesson. We know that in taxonomic classification we follow something called the phylogenetic tree (think: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species). Where scientists are struggling with this organism’s classification according to Popular Science is at nearly the highest level: kingdom.

So let’s start with what we do know. It’s eukaryotic, meaning it has cell membranes and nuclei. This also means under the current system, it would need to be classified in the kingdom Animalia, Plantae, Fungi or Protista. Popular Science states this organism, known more specifically as Collodictyon, most closely resembles an “algae-eating protozoan” but it doesn’t fit exactly into that category. Here’s why:

The organism is weird in several key ways. It has four flagella, for instance, which makes it different from bacteria and eukaryotes. Mammals, fungi and amoebae only have one flagellum — that’s the propeller-like feature that helps cells move (think of the “tail” of a sperm cell). Algae, plants and single-celled parasites called excavates are thought to have had two flagella. Collodictyon is somewhere between an excavate and an amoeba.

Also, the organism has the same internal structure as a parasite, but it uses amoeba-like protuberances to catch its food, which are blue-green algae. So again, it combines features from two branches of the eukaryotes, further evidence that it’s a primordial creature, the researchers say.

The research on this organism’s genetic makeup is being led by Kamran Shalchian-Tabrizi with the Microbial Evolution Research Group (MERG) at the University of Oslo. It wasn’t that long ago, 1990, that a brand new branch was added to the phylogenetic tree to include the new Domain and Kingdom Archaea, so Popular Science notes it is not out of the realm of possibilty as research on this organism continues for it to be found of a new branch.

“We have found an unknown branch of the tree of life that lives in this lake. It is unique! So far we know of no other group of organisms that descend from closer to the roots of the tree of life than this species. It can be used as a telescope into the primordial micro-cosmos,” Shalchian-Tabrizi said in a statement on the research.

The researchers consider it among one of the oldest, most primitive types of eukaryotic organisms living. Considering it primordial, the team will continue to conduct gene sequencing on the organism to see how it could relate to other organisms.

Comments (238)

1 2 3 4
  • callmeherb
    Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:22am

    Creationism and evolution can and do actually work on the same argument, although I do NOT believe that we evolved from some lesser life form, I would say that anyone who has not seen that mankind itself has grown bigger, faster, stonger even in the last 100 years, is in denial. God put man on earth and told him to get better, smarter, and more proficient, and we have done so.

    Report Post » callmeherb  
    • redgypsy
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 1:40am

      Bigger, Faster, and Stronger.

      The Six Million Dollar Man! (Well, with inflation, it might be a bit more)

      (Not pretending to be thinking deeply–just playin’) : )

      Report Post »  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 1:57am

      “Time for a quick biology lesson.”

      I got a quick lesson for ya, it’s called the Theory of Evolution. Until you accept that, you have no leg to stand on in an intelligent discussion of anything Biological, Chemical, Physical, or otherwise Scientific in nature.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • weremoose
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 2:48am

      Bush, if that were true, it would be the LAW of evolution. But until it is conclusively proven, people with differing view points do, indeed, have a proverbial leg.
      (I personally fall into the inspired evolution category)

      Report Post » weremoose  
    • spikebu
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 3:10am

      It’s been nearly three decades since I took a Microbiology class. Seeing the “tail” on this thing stopped me on the picture. My daughter came in and I explained the significance of the flagella. You know what she said? “So why is God revealing this now?” I gave her a blank stare. She said, “Maybe the cure for cancer is in there”. I felt total shame. Rightly so. All I saw was this thing that hadn’t been seen before. My daughter saw God.

      Report Post »  
    • spikebu
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 3:38am

      @votebush…you need to examine the word theory. So, you are standing on a “guess”? Is that your final answer? Education does not change the fact. Evolution is still a guess.

      Report Post »  
    • TH30PH1LUS
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 4:06am

      “closer to the roots of the tree of life”

      And yet here it is alive and unchanged. Sort of embarrassing for those who demand that life “evolve”.

      (Irish setters, pugs, great danes, and poodles are NOT examples of “evolution”. They are examples of human intervention in the breeding process of canines. ALL dogs are still dogs – decendants of the grey wolf)

      OTHER embarrasing life forms that currently exist that (according to your Darwinist teacher) should have been extinct for billions of years:

      Laotian Rock Rats, The Mountain Pygmy Possum, The Coelacanth, Gracilidris, Hagfish, Arowana, Frilled Shark, etc…

      Report Post » TH30PH1LUS  
    • spikebu
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 4:11am

      @votebush…It takes faith to believe in evolution. Just like believing in God. Believing in evolution is what you would call a religion. Believing in God is not a religion. Religion is man’s interpretation of how to worship God. As evolution is a thought promulgated by man, it can’t go any higher. Without proof, you believe in the theory of evolution. Welcome to the world of faith, brother.

      Report Post »  
    • spikebu
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 4:21am

      I’m sorry. The “brother” was deeply sarcastic. My apologies.

      Report Post »  
    • RiggerMan
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 5:52am

      @Herb What you are describing is Micro-Evolution. Those on the side of Intelligent design will not dispute that micro-evolution happens. The problem is when we extrapolate this fact into a theory of macro-evolution.

      Report Post »  
    • Thomas
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 6:29am

      Evolution does not disprove the bible or God but only someones theological interpretation. On the idea of whether there is a God or not, good science yet remains neutral. Since God is tracing genes in the bible, doesn’t that mean that God new about evolution before science? Does Genesis 30:39 where Jacob is dealing with the flocks of sheep reveals that God had taught him something about genes and how they are passed from generation to generation? It doesn’t say that Cain went out to a land and named it Nod but that he went out to the land of Nod. Nod was already named before Cain went there and also so were all the regions surrounding the garden of Eden. God made sure that this evidence remained in the bible not just for a good story but to point out the existence of other human like creatures that were here before the Adamites.

      The things spoken about in Genesis 1 that God did in an instant mentally/Spiritually is still unraveling in the progress of time and Genesis 2:1-3 from the point of view of the physical has not yet happened. It doesn’t take time for God to create but time actually is part of the creation. Now Adam was the start of a new segment of time called the Adamic age (of which the bible deals with) within a much older segment of time that could be millions or billions of years old. Adam was something new introduced to this world. Time is actually insignificant to the God. Genesis 6 speaks about Adam’s offspring (called the Sons of God) being mixed with t

      Report Post » Thomas  
    • Thomas
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 7:10am

      Continued^

      Genesis 6 speaks about Adam’s offspring (called the Sons of God) being mixed with the humanoid evolved creatures, that were here before Adam, through their daughters. Noah was mixture and so are we. Adam’s offspring introduced language and objectivity to the purely subjective and emotional world of the animal. Adam is the missing link that science has yet to find because of his origin as an angelic genes that were placed in a physical body his bones dissolved after death and so did his descendants that were giant. Because the Giant were not able to breed with the smaller people they became more and more inbred which produces mental and physical problems. Since not all were physical giants though but some were mental and spiritual giants yet of a small size and could breed in a bigger gene pull their traits survived. Adam’s genes remain on this planet but only mentally and spiritually.

      Report Post » Thomas  
    • Stephen Markovich
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 8:26am

      cheers!

      Report Post »  
    • Favored93
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:17am

      Sorry Bushy but the THEORY of evolution is just that a THEORY! It is a theology that if any scientist DARE to disagree with he or she is branded a heretic and run out of business! The evidence just simply does not support the big bang in all is variations on the THEORY of evolution.
      There is however an ABUNDANCE of real tangible evidence to support the intelligent design THEORY. Every thing your eyeballs have ever seen are far to complex for evolution.
      I do not have room here to go into the many proofs but let me give you this to think about….
      The odds of dropping a nuclear bomb into a junk yard and the explosion produces a running shiny new Lamborghini are the same odds that we evolved from some kind of acids into cells then fish apes ect. The math just does not support it. Use your brain! Look around! We are not a cosmic accident!!!
      Do you have ANY idea just how complex our own solar system is? How perfectly we were placed in our orbits? Just a degree or two off and we burn or freeze.
      Our ecosystems perfectly intertwined to maintain the balance of life so that we could have this conversation. Forgive me Bush but I just don’t have enough faith to buy the THEORY that I am not loved just randomly showed up. To believe this takes more faith then I have.

      Report Post » Favored93  
    • Favored93
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:27am

      @spikebu
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 3:10am
      It’s been nearly three decades since I took a Microbiology class. Seeing the “tail” on this thing stopped me on the picture. My daughter came in and I explained the significance of the flagella. You know what she said? “So why is God revealing this now?” I gave her a blank stare. She said, “Maybe the cure for cancer is in there”. I felt total shame. Rightly so. All I saw was this thing that hadn’t been seen before. My daughter saw God.
      ——–
      WOW!!! That is absolutely PRICELESS!!!!
      What a sweet daughter you have there! You guys are obviously doing or have done (because I do not know her age from your post) a good job teaching that young lady about who she is and were she comes from!
      Congratulations sir/madam on the obvious success with her! :)

      Report Post » Favored93  
    • FoeHammer865
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:43am

      All of you need to read “The Case for A Creator” Can’t remember the author. It is great and really tears the whole “we evolved from amoebas” theory to shreds and uses current science to do it.

      Report Post »  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:50am

      Yo Herb:
      I would say that on the whole people are dumber, (ever work with teenagers)? Larger does not mean stronger (ever shake the hand of a 12 hr. a day working farmer)?, and we certainly are NOT better. (ever read the blaze)?
      I do however, understand you’re point .

      Report Post »  
    • G-WHIZ
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:54am

      Whydo you think that all those houses built before180 yrs(orso) ago have such short door openings? Why do think that the majority of the passages in the pirimids are so short(about5′ tall)? How tall was King Tutt? He was extreemely tall…5′6″. Because of diet and disease, they maybe lasted 15-35yrs before death. Kings were about 12years old..not even through puberty before assasination. The more mature they are before the first-sex, the taller they are ginettically and their succesive children will be taller…and taller… .Unnecessary wars(most) and plagues(etc) kept them from maturing for centuries. Humans did not start to “grow” past about 5′ until the “conveniances of life” improved drastically with more free time to mature before being killed(various ways). Cheep Transportation(not having to walk thousands of miles a year or more) and other improvements didn’t wear-out our muscles and bone-joints after a few years, etc… . I betcha you went to pne of those many progressive collages which gave you propaganda and terror tactics instead of how to think out of your small box.

      Report Post »  
    • Better Dead Than Red
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:05am

      FOE, I did read Lee Strobel’s book “Case for a Creator. Sure he disproves the fact that we all came from amoebas, very well. Too bad he didn’t tackle the right argument. We didn’t evolve from amoebas, we share a common ancestor.

      Creationists have this botched argument engrained from the get-go (I did). It isn’t the right question. It didn’t happen “by chance”. We didn’t evolve from monkeys- we share a common ancestor. It would be the same reason why England still exists after the foundation on the US.

      Report Post » Better Dead Than Red  
    • ConservDadASD
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:15am

      @ Thomas

      First of all… who said that Nod was a person’s name. Was Eden named after a person as well? Nod could have meant an area of a certain geological feature or a forest of a specific kind of tree. Their language was different from today’s modern day English. So Nod could have been a tree or a mountain.
      But even if Nod were a person, it would not necessitate that it was a different line of humanity. He was probably another son of Adam who not mentioned anywhere previously in Genesis since he was not a principle character. (In fact, the Bible in various places says that all are descendants of Adam) Cain was the first born… that grants him significance, especially in ancient cultures. Abel was 2nd born AND was murdered by Cain in the first murder ever committed by a human being against another. Seth, who replaced his slain “righteous” brother and through whom other characters like Noah, Abraham, and ultimately Christ, was therefore important, and therefore, God inspired the writer to include him as well. And while the other sons and daughters of Adam and Eve (produced through the 900+ yrs of their parent’s lives) had value as human beings, they did not have the relevance that Cain, Abel, or Seth had.
      All were descendants of Adam. I can’t stress that enough. In addition, Eve was named so by Adam because she was the mother of all living human beings. It’s written in black in white, there in Genesis. Therefore, there was NO OTHER line in

      Report Post »  
    • ConservDadASD
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:16am

      (Continued)

      Aditionally, to try to merge our Biblical origins with evolution would be to call Jesus a liar or an uninformed ignoramus with no inherent diety. He said, when addressing marriage, that it was established in the beginning of time. If mankind was created after millions of years of earthly existence, then He could not say that marriage existed from the beginning of time, and that would mean that Jesus (the Word) was not with God in the beginning, and was not intimately involved in Creation.

      Finally, the word day as used in Genesis 1, was meant to describe 24 hr periods. This fact was used in Exodus for the commandment re. the Sabbath being a day of rest.

      Report Post »  
    • SquidVetOhio
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:20am

      Macro-evolution is not even a theory a defined by science. In fact, it’s not even a hypothesis. There are 4 steps to the scientifics process.

      1. Idea – An educated guess base on scientific principle. ( Macro evolution stops here. )
      2. Hypothesis – The idea is successfully observed in an expriment
      3. Theory – The idea is repeatable almost every time is tried or observed
      4. Law – The idea will always repeat, 100% of the time.

      Micro – evolution is a theory but it is only variaitions within kinds. Creationists have no problem believeing all canine have a common ancestor but it was a dog, not a cat or horse or amoeba.

      Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
    • SquidVetOhio
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:28am

      @THOMAS

      Sorry, but your dead wrong. Creation was a literal 6 day process and that is the only intellectual interpretation you can come to both by studying the original language and the scientific logic involved. Or else you don’t believe the Bible. First of all, God created the plants before He created the Sun. If Genesis chp. 1 took millions of years of evolution to get to Adam. How did the plants survive without sunlight? Secondly, and more importantly, evolution requires death. The Bible clearly states repeatedly that death was a result of sin. “By one man sin entered the world and death by sin”, “For the wages of sin is death…” You cannot have death occuring before Adam sinned and claim to believe the Bible. There’s no need to equivocate. Macro-evolution is a religion, not science. Don’t capitulate. Study what creationist and intelligent design scientists believe. Not what you’ve been told they believe. They will alway provide more scientific fact than any evolutionist does. They resort to name-calling within the first 5 minutes of debate.

      Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
    • jzs
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:51am

      I am always amazed at the argument that evolution is called a “theory” and, is therefore, unproven. I suppose Einstein’s “theory” of gravity is called a “theory” because it’s unproven that gravity exists? Or that it‘s unproven that gravity behaves pretty much as Einstein’s equations describe?

      Sorry, that’s not how it works. Scientists have become too smart to claim they’ve discovered a “law” of nature anymore. Newton called his ideas about gravity “laws” and we know how that turned out. His “laws” were actually only approximations, and were supplanted by Einstein “theory.”

      All science is “theory.” If you want certainty, you’ll only find that in religion.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • AmazingGrace8
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:52am

      @spike

      You are one lucky parent to have a daughter that “sees”. God’s timeline is revealed to each generation.

      Report Post »  
    • Lonescrapper
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:56am

      The “THEORY” of evolution hasn’t changed at all in a hundred years, which I find disturbing as a fan of science. The theory of black holes is much younger and has changed several times. The theory of relativity is being challenged. Even gravity (which is a law, not a theory) is being adjusted. Why isn’t evolution? That is what bothers me about it.

      Report Post » Lonescrapper  
    • encinom
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:57am

      Okay, for the Christian idiots here is the actual definition of Theory:

      scientific principle to explain phenomena: a set of facts, propositions, or principles analyzed in their relation to one another and used, especially in science, to explain phenomena

      Inteeligent Design and Creationism are fairty tales, there is zero science behind them, they do not have testable theories. They are a blight on americna education and do not belong in school.

      Report Post »  
    • Liberalismsamentaldisorder
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:30am

      @VoteBushin12

      While I agree that the THEORY of evolution is likely largely correct. It is still a theory and may yet be modified or proven utterly false.

      Report Post »  
    • Liberalismsamentaldisorder
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:38am

      @encinom

      There’s zero facts behind the arts, I suppose they have no place in schools either?

      Report Post »  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:42am

      @LONESCRAPPER
      Theory of Evolution is constantly “evolving” (pun intended).
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#History_of_evolutionary_thought
      There is a portion on “History” and it explains some things – references included therein.

      @SPIKEBU
      “It takes faith to believe in evolution.”
      I’ll agree with that. The only difference is you are putting faith in a proven scientific process that has given us things like Electricity, put man on the moon, and produced modern medicine. As opposed to faith in religion which is essentially putting your faith into some three thousand year old book written by a handful of people and proven wrong on many, many, many occasions.

      Also, your story of your daughter was adorable. But, forgive me for saying, I don’t exactly trust her scientific opinion.

      @THOMAS
      Theory of Evolution does disprove parts of the bible – namely everything in Genesis. If you want to warp the argument that God created life via evolution, that’s fine – whatever floats your boat I guess. But I would like to hear you justify how the proposed 6,000 year timeline of life could have been misconstrued from the actual 3.7 Billion year history.

      @EVERYONE ELSE
      Concepts become Theory when they have been observed and repeated, it doesn’t mean “a guess”. Macro Biology included – it’s call the domesticated Dog.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:45am

      @LIBERALISMSAMENTALDISORDER
      There are plenty of proposed facts about Art.

      Color Theory, for instance, which I studied briefly in undergrad, has a lot of evidence to suggest the psychological and physiological effects of different colors on human perception. Contained therein are also strongly supported claims of “beautiful” color combinations (complimentary vs contrasting) which actually exist in some of the greatest paintings.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • encinom
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:52am

      Liberalismsamentaldisorder
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:38am
      @encinom

      There’s zero facts behind the arts, I suppose they have no place in schools either?
      ____________________
      The arts aren’t religious lies parading around as scientific truths.

      Report Post »  
    • NickyLouse
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:03pm

      Day 6 of Genesis along with 1Corinthians15:21 or romans 5:12 exclude the possibility that macroevolution is true. Death began after The Fall according to the Bible. You cannot believe the Bible in its entirety and believe Darwinian evolution.

      If you claim to be a Christian who believes the Bible is inspired of the Holy Spirit and you also believe in evolution, what other parts of the Bible do you dismiss? Can you dismiss The Resurrection, the deity of Jesus, grace through faith alone… ?

      Report Post » NickyLouse  
    • jiggasparks
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:35pm

      We also got better at killing each other on a massive scale as well. Why dont people just say that gods 7 days, are not ours. And that evolution is the how it was done, but it does not address why or what causes it. God could use it as his tool to make us. Just sayin.

      Report Post »  
    • UnGreen
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 1:09pm

      @Bush12… Did you say “Theory” of evolution? Humm, isn’t that like the “Theory” of Anthropogenic Global Warming?
      “Until you accept that, you have no leg to stand on in an intelligent discussion of anything Biological, Chemical, Physical, or otherwise Scientific in nature.

      Report Post » UnGreen  
    • Thomas
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 2:33pm

      Adam was introduced. The only problem you have with what I am saying is that you simply dogmatically stick with theology. Genesis 1 was not a physical creation but simply a blue print. Adam was created no in God’s image but in His reflection in Genesis 1 and was both male and female in one Spiritual unit and then placed into a physical body in Genesis 2 and then divided in 2. God’s reflection was both male and female, Elohim. Science ends up making theologians look like idiots because of their dogmatic stances. The reason you stick to your theology is because you actually worship it rather than the Living God.

      Report Post » Thomas  
    • Thomas
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 2:36pm

      Animals don’t know sin so those humanlike evolved creatures did not sin. Only what God calls man (Adam) was Adam not the other people. The other people were not human although we share many of their genes because we are mixed with them. Not everyone is from Adam and Jesus said you will know them by their fruits.

      Report Post » Thomas  
    • VanceUppercut
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 2:40pm

      @callmeherb
      “although I do NOT believe that we evolved from some lesser life form” Yes, it’s much more believable that mankind was created out of dirt, and womankind out of a spare rib.

      “I would say that anyone who has not seen that mankind itself has grown bigger, faster, stonger even in the last 100 years, is in denial.”

      Evolution doesn’t happen over a one hundred year time span. Logical failure.

      Report Post »  
    • Hollywood
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 3:24pm

      Steroids have certainly attributed to this.[Kidding] Course, legally, things like better nutrition and training programs have been responsible for most of it. Too bad “mans” spiritual condition hasn’t changed[since the Garden Of Eden] There is a remedy for that though I John 3:24

      Report Post » Hollywood  
    • 4truth2all
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 3:24pm

      NO TRUTH TO THE SCIENCE BEHIND CREATION …

      This is the statement of a bigot against God, totally untrue, and completely ignorant, and it is something an intelligent person could say …yeah well …

      Report Post »  
    • F.O.S. DIAPERHEAD
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 3:36pm

      @ CALLMEHERB

      Not to disagree so much but, man has only gotten better at manipulating things and, to put it simply, the more you manipulate things, the more you must manipulate things, in order to keep manipulating things. Somewhere down the line nature must/ will take it’s course. Instead of man evolving or adapting to his environment and coexisting thus, man has self conciously decided to change the environment to the degree that he has severed his ties to that relationship/ continuum (i.e., we have decided to, out of a lack of “respect” for our surroundings, grow beyond our environment’s capacity to support us). Too much demand and not enough supply. We support or try to maintain systems (general) that are not supported by nature and should therefore have died. We “enhance” our lives at cost to our descendants. We are taking the place of God (like Obama and govnmnt beaurocracy) wich will require a buttload more work. Instead of evolving we are manipulating.

      Bigger, faster, stronger, is good only if it is supported by the “natural” environment/ continuum. Otherwise we are setting ourselves up for collapse.

      Side note: Free markets evolve/adapt. Centralized governments manipulate.

      Report Post » F.O.S. DIAPERHEAD  
    • F.O.S. DIAPERHEAD
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 3:43pm

      @ CALLMEHERB

      Not to disagree so much but, man has only gotten better at manipulating things and, to put it simply, the more you manipulate things, the more you must manipulate things, in order to keep manipulating things. Somewhere down the line nature must/ will take it’s course. Instead of man evolving or adapting to his environment and coexisting thus, man has self conciously decided to change the environment to the degree that he has severed his ties to that relationship/ continuum (i.e., we have decided to, out of a lack of “respect” for our surroundings, grow beyond our environment’s capacity to support us). Too much demand and not enough supply. We support or try to maintain systems (general) that are not supported by nature and should therefore have died. We “enhance” our lives at cost to our descendants. We are taking the place of God (like Obama and govnmnt beaurocracy) wich will require a buttload more work. Instead of evolving we are manipulating.

      Bigger, faster, stronger, is good only if it is supported by the “natural” environment/ continuum. Otherwise we are setting ourselves up for collapse.

      Note: Free markets evolve/adapt. Centralized governments manipulate. (see General Motors)

      Report Post » F.O.S. DIAPERHEAD  
    • disenlightened
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 4:24pm

      @JZS
      …join the modern world…it was Newtons “Law of Gravity”, and he proposed it in 1686…it left the theory stage over 300 years ago…in your inept way you might be talking about Einstein’s “Theory of Relativity” and it is indeed still a theory…not proven…not a Law.

      Report Post » disenlightened  
    • ObliviouslyAware
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 5:37pm

      I just had to reply to this… Please look up “endosymbiotic organelles” and with that you understand evolution a little better. More than just a theory, something that’s actually been observed, for example Amoebae observed integrating chloroplasts from digested algae into their cells.

      Report Post » ObliviouslyAware  
    • do_it_all_again
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 5:54pm

      to the evolutionist, this is great great great great grandpa!!!!!!

      Report Post »  
    • FoxholeAtheist
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 6:01pm

      Oh look. There doesn’t seem to be any “kinds” in that list.

      Report Post » FoxholeAtheist  
    • F.O.S. DIAPERHEAD
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 7:22pm

      The mind and theories (like arguments) are just tools we use to get us what we “want”. Theories are as maps that help us find our way to where we want to go on an everchanging landscape.

      Report Post » F.O.S. DIAPERHEAD  
    • NarnianWarrior
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 7:27pm

      VoteBushIn12 – You’ve got to be kidding! You make that assertion with so much confidence, as if you were 100% certainity. That’s the problem with you Evolutionary Know-It-Alls, you can’t see beyond that flawed and often debunked Theory you attach all your science to. I think it is you that needs to accept that fact that Evolution, or more specifically Darwinian Evolution, is really a non-starter a real intelligent discussion. Once we rid ourselves of such obstacles, we be better equipped to allow the real process of science to lead us to truth. The Darwinian model is rubbish. Just accep that!

      Report Post » NarnianWarrior  
    • Belovedsword
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 8:49pm

      @spikebu: beautiful :-) Thank you for relating that story and thank you to your sweet girl for her vision and, of course, to God for the revelation. Great question!

      Report Post »  
    • Mother of JZS
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 8:51pm

      @jzs

      Dagnabit… you silly son of mine. Your daddy, that you never met, had a theory about pulling out but I ended up with you. Now that’s evolution.

      Now turn off that puter, clean you room, take a bath and do your own laundry for a change.

      Love,
      Your Mother

      Report Post » Mother of JZS  
    • JQCitizen
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 9:13am

      Votebushin12:

      So is Evolution YOUR RELIGION? It is built on so much speculation and hypothesis that a gentle breeze of Actual Scientific Reasoning could blow it over. Just listen to any explaination of how it works and you will hear , “may have”, “might have”, “could have”, “we think”, …. THAT’S SCIENCE??????

      WHAT A STUPID COMMENT! You’re into dogma on that one!

      Report Post »  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 2:03pm

      @JQCITIZEN

      Can you present me with some “scientific reasoning” that would blow it over?

      Evolution is not a religion. Religion is self proclaimed to be founded on blind faith whereas the theory of evolution is built on evidence.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • babylonvi
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 3:15pm

      Herb, sorry but you can’t continue to “….NOT believe that we evolved from some lesser life form” because a casual look at TV or or the OWS locations will prove you wrong.

      Report Post » babylonvi  
    • Favored93
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 10:01pm

      @ Thomas
      Adam and eve lived how long? 900+years? So that being the case let me pose this thought to you….Most couples get married around 20 years old today and their reproductive possibilities are only until MAX 50 years old so that leaves them with only 30 years to have as many children as they can assuming that couple were the only 2 people on earth. Adam and eve were MADE adults how many children do you think they had in 900 years? The bible only records a few that were relevant to the story God wanted told. If God had all 900 years of their lives recorded can you imagine how boring that read would be…. How many daughters and sons did they have in 900 years? or do you want to say the last 100 was retirement? We do not know and the point is neither do you and your entire argument goes out the window.
      Why do you “free thinkers” not use a little commonsense?

      Report Post » Favored93  
    • Favored93
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 10:28pm

      @VoteBushIn12
      First of all you are as ignorant as eunicom…. The Bible has not EVER been proven wrong! People for thousands of years now have been trying and met either only failure or God. You can’t prove truth wrong. But please keep trying I am sure you are smarter then the hundred’s of men that came before you.
      Guys really do a little bit of study before you say things about the God who MADE and loves you.
      What arrogance!!!!!! You still know everything…. And here I was thinking you guys were older then 12…. silly me.

      Report Post » Favored93  
    • K G
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 11:39pm

      PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO! ABSOULTELY AMAZING! 100 reasons why evolution is STUPID! even you evolutionist need to watch this to see what your opponent (creationist) are going to counter-debate with you.

      http://freehovind.com/watch-_6814048597272982882

      Report Post »  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on May 3, 2012 at 9:49am

      @Favored93
      Please tell me you are joking. Your comment above referenced how little you actually understand about the Bible. Adam lived for 900 years, it says so pretty explicitly.
      Gensis 5:5
      “Thus all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, and he died”
      In fact, almost everyone in Genesis lived over 300 years.
      Does “Common Sense” tell you a human should be able to live that long?

      And as for the bible never being proven wrong… HA!

      Bible Fact:
      Earth is 6,000 years old.
      Not…. even…. close. We not only have evidence it is over 4 billion years old, we have evidence of Humans having lived longer ago than that.

      I believe Religion has its place. Unfortunately (or rather fortunately), science is not one of them.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • tajloc
      Posted on May 8, 2012 at 8:34am

      Uh Food makes man grow bigger faster and stronger. Wind probably makes the eyes select for protective folds. Height from ancestors (even hidden) will exhibit in a population. We have only one race here… The Human Race. Get it!

      Report Post »  
    • lmao@dems
      Posted on May 8, 2012 at 6:47pm

      VoteBushIn12,
      Reading your comments, Do you even understand what Theory means? lmbo Your Evolution has us and Monkeys show me the ones between the Monkeys and us or even the ones before the Monkeys or has evolution stopped? There is NO evidence of Evolution only Theory. And evolution is based off of men‘s judgement and theory’s and it is also a religion based off of the US Supreme court ruling in the early 1960′s. Also Again timelines of the earth are based off of mans judgement what did they use as a control for dating?

      Report Post »  
    • Liberal Basher
      Posted on June 10, 2012 at 3:28pm

      You clearly don’t understand how evolution works.

      Report Post » Liberal Basher  
  • blazingaway
    Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:21am

    Do you think the creature has stopped creating?
    Does the creator not have the right to create whatever the earth needs?
    Do you think mankind is omniscient?
    Do you think we even have a clue to the breath, depth, height and length of God’s plan and purpose.

    Report Post » blazingaway  
    • VoteRightDammit
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:42am

      We, yes of COURSE mankind is omniscient!

      Why, I have created several solar systems just this afternoon. Haven’t you? Hasn’t EVERYBODY ???

      Report Post » VoteRightDammit  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 1:59am

      Do you think anything is Omniscient?

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • spikebu
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 3:24am

      Uummmmmm….God. Yep. He is omniscient.

      Report Post »  
    • mdeputy7
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:26am

      @voteright…

      HAHA…You mean omnipotent my friend. All-powerful. Omniscient is all-knowing…that being said, your point got across :).

      Report Post »  
  • callmeherb
    Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:12am

    All these geniuses who find the need not just to deny GOD, but to denigrate anyone who has a belief other than your “superior” view, just slay me. Here is the test for all of you that “know” about the universe, Let us start out on a slightly smaller scale “so that those unenlightened among us can keep up” …. ready ….. just baby steps ….. I give you a whole pasture full of the finest grass and clover … your job …. turn it into a single gallon of milk …….. now tell me again about your “knowledge” of how the universe was formed and how “primortial soup” created all life from a single bacteria …… I will wait while you get that report together and get back to me.

    Report Post » callmeherb  
    • spikebu
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 4:53am

      Can my cows graze on it? If it’s good grass, guarantee way more than a gallon of milk.

      Report Post »  
    • Calm Voice of Reason
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:11am

      If you want to know how the primordial soup generated the first organic molecule, Herb, put on your lab coat and help those who are working on the problem. As far as learning how single-celled organisms gradually became the complex life we know today, read a book; there are several hundred available, some with pictures, some without, general and specific for all reading levels.

      Report Post » Calm Voice of Reason  
    • SquidVetOhio
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:39am

      Which book exactly. Surely not a book on DNA science where he will learn that it if a DNA strain has any significant alterations, it dies. Surely not a book on information science that states no intelligent information can be produced by non-intelligent matter. The only book he can learn this is Origins of Species by means of Natural Selection among the Favoured Races (complete title) where he will also learn such beliefs of Darwing as:
      ” Meeting the simple Indians of Tierra del Fuego, Darwin wrote: “I could not have believed how wide was the difference between savage and civilized man; it is greater than between a wild and domesticated animal . . . Viewing such a man, one can hardly make oneself believe that they are fellow creatures and inhabitants of the same world.”

      Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
    • Calm Voice of Reason
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:59am

      @Squid: It would depend on how familiar you are with the Theory. If you haven’t heard anything about it, I would suggest any basic college textbook on biology. If you already have a little understanding about biology, I highly recommend “The Selfish Gene” by Dawkins. It has had a major effect on how we look at the evolutionary process and the importance of individual genes. I’m pretty sure all books on the subject talk about the limits of change within DNA, as you pointed out. That isn’t a weakness of the theory of evolution by means of natural selection, it’s part of the process and integral to how it works. Intelligent information from non-intelligent matter? I’m not sure what you mean by this, please elaborate. If I had to guess, I would say that you are referring to the 2nd law of thermodynamics, or entropic systems. In which case there really isn’t a problem when we have a constant input of energy. But, I think you might be talking about something else, please explain.

      Report Post » Calm Voice of Reason  
    • K G
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 11:41pm

      100 reasons why evolution is stupid! This is a must see for EVERYONE!.

      http://freehovind.com/watch-_6814048597272982882

      Report Post »  
  • blaaaaackwoman
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:23pm

    That’s not so weird. I’ve seen plenty weirder when I put one of my turds on the examination table and take a good close look.

    Report Post »  
    • oldguy49
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:54pm

      need to get your cable fixed………lol

      Report Post »  
    • disenlightened
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 7:18am

      two things we know for sure…gays will use it to prove they were born that way, and liberals will use it as proof of global warming.

      Report Post » disenlightened  
  • Rayblue
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:21pm

    It’s an anomaly touted as a new standard of reference. More research money please…

    Report Post » Rayblue  
    • asybot12
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 1:04am

      I have been saying that for years. Some of the best brains of people are reduced to be grant seekers for the very things they discovered only to find that they are seemingly not important anymore. If these Norwegian scientist don not find funds gonzo!

      Report Post »  
  • lukerw
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:16pm

    Intrastellar seeding via Meteorites (the real sense of Aliens)!

    Report Post » lukerw  
  • DARIVS
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:13pm

    Maybe God looked at the Obama administration and the where the world is going and decided to start over without the drama of a world wide flood and a boatload of animals.

    Report Post » DARIVS  
  • smokey888x2
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:09pm

    I wonder loudly, does it eat dog?

    Report Post » smokey888x2  
  • MrObvious
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:00pm

    Who knows, this thing could lead to new technologies. Ideas have sprouted from oddities of nature many times.

    Report Post »  
  • jaxson
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:52pm

    this may be how Dan Savage came into existence?

    Report Post »  
  • bjdeverell
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:46pm

    I’m sure in a month or so the history channel will just say the aliens did it.

    Report Post »  
  • Goldenyears22
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:10pm

    Ho Hum!

    Report Post »  
  • ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:02pm

    @P C BE DAMNED
    Scientists are such ignorant fools, hm? Is that why they feed and save the lives of billions through agricultural and medicinal techniques they developed, or develop technologies for communication and travel across a planet?

    Report Post » ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY  
    • ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:17pm

      Oh dear, it seems I’ve botched my reply.

      Report Post » ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY  
    • hidden_lion
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:57pm

      They save millions with medical advances only to kill billions with new weapons, deadly super virus’s and possibly (according to them) climate change. All the people saved overpopulate and pollute their environments. We were better off with subsistence farming and medicine men. Science is the root of all modern problems, and it will be the thing that destroys everything on the planet.

      Report Post » hidden_lion  
    • ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:32am

      Then instead of fighting with heat-seeking missiles, we’d be fighting amongst ourselves with arrows. As technology marches on, new weapons of war are the unavoidable consequence. Climate change is currently a debate within the scientific community. Once one side has presented overwhelming evidence and has absolutely crushed the opposing theories, then that will become accepted as truth. You would really tell me that you would rather exist in an age of 30-40 year life expectancies filled with pain and suffering? You would rather exist there than in an age where the entire world is at your fingertips, where travel to our moon is possible, and to other worlds soon to come? You would not want to live in a world with life-saving vaccination, labour-saving mechanisation, or time-saving travel methods to take you across the entirety of our beautiful planet?

      Report Post » ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY  
    • DoseofReality
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 11:00am

      Anotherconservative. There is a very strong theme in the convservative movement, especially on this site where they long for a past that didnt exist. I’m not really sure what it is, but Im sure there is some physcological explanation to this. I think it has to do with unhappiness in their own lives, longing for a time when life was simple and you didnt have to be a learned man to succeed in life. It stems from the same mindset of Santorum and the anti-intellectual movement, I think its a jealousy, an anger that they are intellectually incapable of understanding and studying the vast amount of advancement we have made in the last few decades. They are anti-science, anti-intelligence, are incapable of seeing how much easier our lives have become due to the same people they claim to hate. They have a feeling their lives would be better if they were born in a different time, but in actuality trhey would be the same unhappy people they are now.

      Report Post »  
  • OhSnappage
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:51pm

    Just when we thought we have something figured out, another curveball, that’s life.

    Report Post » OhSnappage  
  • JohnLarson
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:44pm

    The devil hid that microorganism in that Norwegian lake mud to trick us!!!

    Evolution doesn’t exist, just look at Alabama.

    Report Post »  
    • hidden_lion
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:59pm

      Just look at all human culture…We haven’t advanced one lick since neanderthal man. WE have better toys, but other than that we are exactly the same. We fight for the same reasons and kill just as readily.

      Report Post » hidden_lion  
    • disenlightened
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 7:22am

      johnlarson…putting down a stereotyped group of people while at the same time asking that others not do the same…bad kitty bad kitty…you’re in for it now

      Report Post » disenlightened  
  • The-Monk
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:41pm

    If we can learn how it swims in mud maybe we can fix our economy. It’s stuck in the mud right now…

    Report Post » The-Monk  
  • qzz
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:41pm

    “Closest to the tree of life.” What a crock… These sorts of “scientists” set their life goal as looking at evidence of God’s existence and denying it. Evolution is the most pernicious doctrine the world has ever heard. It is the foundation of genocide because if a man and a cockroach are both born of algae, what’s to stop me from spraying you with poison. The real headline should be: Evidence of God’s Greatness Found at Bottom of Lake.

    Report Post »  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:45pm

      @qzz
      My homemade and original bumper sticker reads, “Evolution IS an Intelligent Design”

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:58pm

      I wouldn’t be too quick to bash these “scientists” you speak of. There’s no doubt in my mind that many of us are alive today solely because of these “scientists” devoting their lives to the advancement of human knowledge, something you seem to have little appreciation for.

      Report Post » ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY  
    • thriceconcussed
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:07pm

      Oh, man, that’s rich. You young earth creationists are completely insane, you can’t even read your own bible correctly. Did you graduate high-school? Despite your pastor’s propaganda there exists much evidence in support of evolution. Go ahead and explain the whole world from the context of one book, just don’t expect to be taken seriously.

      Report Post »  
    • qzz
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:46pm

      There is ZERO proof of evolution. I appreciate science’s advances for human health, none of which are attributable to the hoax called evolution. They will use THIS DISCOVERY as proof of evolution to prop up their backwards untenable theory. It is all lies and speculation. God created the world so that man should recognize him.

      Also, it doesn’t have to do with the bible, it is just common sense. If the sun were any closer to the earth, all plant life would die from drought. If it were any farther the planet would freeze. If gravity were any stronger the rain would rip through the leave of plants and kill them. But it all works!

      Report Post »  
    • ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:08pm

      If the theory of evolution is so untenable, write your paper, get it peer-edited, and collect your Nobel Prize. Now, I am no great expert on evolution, but I’ve seen overwhelming evidence in support of the theory of evolution. It’s not called a theory for nothing. To ignore this evidence is willful ignorance.

      Yes, if the Earth was several dozen million miles closer to the Sun, life would not be possible. If it was several dozen million miles more distant, then life would not be possible. If gravity randomly became more powerful of a force, then yes, life as we know it would be changed.

      Also… Why should scientists have an agenda to disprove a religion?

      Report Post » ANOTHERCONSERVATIVEBRONY  
    • SgtB
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 11:33pm

      I guess you never thought to look on a farm for signs of evolution have you? Do you think that chickens in their current form wandered the plains and forests? Do you believe that the corn you eat at dinner was always a 10″ ear with hundreds of perfectly shaded kernels? Do you believe that Irish setters have always existed in their current form or that all of the fossils of hominids and dinosaurs are just made up? You are a complete and utter R-tard if you believe that change is not the way of the world and that speciation can happen. Just because you know that life has evolved through different stages over billions of years does not mean that you think a roach and a human carry the same value. Oh, and just because someone believes in evolution does not mean that they cannot see the miracle and wonder of creation. In fact, I believe that I an more in awe of life than you are. Did you know that your DNA is basically a modified sugar and that if you added one little oxygen in your DNA at the right spot on every nucleotide, you would only be stable for a matter of a few hours before serious mutation and most probably loss of homeostasis and death would occur? All of the minute details that have to occur in order for life to exist and thrive are amazing and really make you realize just how fragile life is. And then if you learn more, you realize just how amazingly robust this fragile world is and you are even more awestruck. I feel sorry for you and your ignorance.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • ZeitgeistBuster
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:01am

      ANOTHERCONSERVATIVE, You will recall that Germany had top notch scientists, but because of their own “values free” education, their brilliance was easily used to justify a hubris about racial superiority, as well as to support a deadly war machine, and to experiment on helpless captives.

      Here in the US, where a desire to be free to worship according to our own conscience and to speak your mind without threat of government sanction, OUR Scientists urged restraint with the use of the new power they unleashed with the Bomb.

      Report Post » ZeitgeistBuster  
    • Calm Voice of Reason
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:06am

      @QZZ: I would submit to you that religion has been the world’s most pernicious doctrine. It seems to have given you the idea that if man and cockroach share a common ancestor millions of millions of years ago, there would be no reason to refrain from killing.

      Report Post » Calm Voice of Reason  
    • qzz
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:41am

      I love how I am attacked for being ignorant because I am denying the evidence for evolution. One person said, “I’ve seen overwhelming evidence in support of the theory of evolution. It’s not called a theory for nothing.” First, its designation as a theory as opposed to a law indicates its lack of evidence. Second, regarding this overwhelming evidence… the most anyone here as been able to provide me is rhetorical questions regarding the size of ears of corn. Why should I have difficulty believing that, yes, non-genetically modified corn has always been the same size?

      Further, regarding the bones of hominids… I can cite you numerous instances where the bones of apes were praised as “the missing link” only to be later acknowledged as a hoax. But more importantly, why isn’t the earth littered with such bones? And how do dinosaur bones in any way support evolution? This relatively new theory began propounding slow changes over millions of years, but when that proved unworkable, it became rapid mutations (which we have never seen occur). Why don’t we find fossils of hooved or winged humans?

      Scientists can be religious. But these scientists, almost by definition, cannot propound a theory that includes God. They MUST present a theory that discludes God at any cost. Evolution simply makes no sense. Animals like bees and plants like flowers exist in a symbiotic relationship; neither could survive without the other: how do they co-evolve complimentary functions?

      Report Post »  
    • qzz
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:43am

      You should be critical of your own views before attacking mine. People accept this 60 year old, evidence free, theory as absolute and unquestionable. I am just trying to be reasonable here. Please provide me the evidence for this theory without simply saying: you think corn was 10 inches back then? You really think there were chickens? What about dinosaurs?

      Report Post »  
    • Calm Voice of Reason
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:20pm

      QZZ, certainly you do not need us to provide evidence for something when you are perfectly able to use Google yourself. Of all the nonsense that evolution deniers throw out there to dismiss the theory, claiming there is a lack of evidence really takes the cake. Here’s something for you to chew on: http://www.dnatube.com/video/5013/Facts-Of-Evolution—Retroviruses-And-Pseudogenes
      Pretty much ends the debate about common descent. If there weren’t a single fossil to be found anywhere on Earth–not a one, anywhere–there would still be a solid basis for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection.

      Report Post » Calm Voice of Reason  
    • qzz
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:33pm

      Again, common building blocks is not evidence of evolution. Cars are made out of metal. So are shopping carts. Therefore, cars were once shopping carts? No. That our DNA is closely related in no way shows that we have evolved. When I say evidence, I don’t mean facts which can fit the evolutionary narrative or at least do not contradict it.

      Report Post »  
    • Calm Voice of Reason
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:43pm

      Cars and shopping carts do not reproduce. Your analogy is fundamentally flawed.

      Report Post » Calm Voice of Reason  
    • qzz
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 4:59pm

      That is an irrelevant distinction. They also both have wheels. The point is that there is a big leap from saying 2 things are made out of the same parts to saying that, because they are made out of the same parts, they must have a common ancestor. That one must have evolved from the other.

      Report Post »  
    • ChristianM
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:22pm

      We actually witness evolution quite frequently. Disease causing Bacteria is a perfect example. How do you explain their constant increase of resistance to more and more medicines and drugs.

      Report Post »  
    • qzz
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 11:02pm

      Yeah, because we have to get a new polio vaccine every year, right? Just because we don’t understand how to make an effective vaccine against the flu is evidence of nothing.

      Report Post »  
    • beckwasfox
      Posted on May 3, 2012 at 3:35pm

      chritianm-bacteria become resistant to drugs by losing information not gaining.

      Qzz-you present your arguments in a reasoned and measured tone. Well done.

      Report Post » beckwasfox  
  • Godzgrl247
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:34pm

    This is your brain. This is your brain on drugs. I’m ready for my next PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT, please!

    Report Post » Godzgrl247  
  • The-Monk
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:30pm

    “…it uses amoeba-like protuberances to catch its food, which are blue-green algae…”

    Don’t let it near our blue-green algae gasoline reserves! Obama will be PO’d….

    Report Post » The-Monk  
    • P C BE DAMNED
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:43pm

      Scientists are such ignorant fools. Each class of scientists have there own specialty and the big picture is given to them by fools. They have to make what they discover fit the big picture or be black balled. This earth is around 6000 years old and there was a flood about 4500 years ago which was devastating to this planet. So I am the fool. Where is the fossil record showing any creature becoming something else. All the monkeys that were called as evolving were either deformed or put together fakes. FOOLS

      Report Post » P C BE DAMNED  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:49pm

      @P C BE DAMNED
      Love what you did with your icon…. : )

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:01pm

      @P C BE DAMNED
      I like yours so much I changed mine. : )

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • DoseofReality
      Posted on May 2, 2012 at 11:16am

      PC – please dont attempt to get into any sort of intelligent discussions on this matter with adults – it only makes you appear stupid and uneducated. You should limit your discussions to things you might have the ability to comprehend….you know, finger painting and the like. Remember it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

      Report Post »  
  • hi
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:28pm

    The findt threw evolutionists for a loop. Now they have to make up something else to support their idiotic theory.

    Report Post » hi  
    • TheJeffersonian
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:59pm

      I sincerely hope you realize this has no bearing on the theory of evolution, nor does it contradict it in any way.

      Report Post » TheJeffersonian  
    • nelbert
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 6:35am

      @HI

      No, no. This not only does not throw evolution for a loop, but it fits in with much of what has been learned about evolution over the past 50 or so years.
      Consider the myriad creatures found in the Burgess Shale that didn’t fit into known taxonomies (Marrella, Opabinia, Anomalocaris, …) In fact, this little guy might go a good way towards clearing up the picture about the evolution of pre-ediacaran biota.
      The whole thing’s actually quite an exciting discovery for science.

      Report Post » nelbert  
    • hi
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 9:40am

      It’s not a straight line of evolution butis a hodge podge of parts similar to the Ducktail Platypus.

      Report Post » hi  
    • VanceUppercut
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 2:45pm

      @hi

      Idiotic theory? Like man being created from dirt, woman being created from a rib, a talking snake, a man surviving inside of a whale, etc.?

      Report Post »  
    • Rayblue
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 10:15pm

      vancelowerbrow….Science doesn’t contradict the Bibles succinct, dry reporting of facts at all. A comparative study of religions brings the same elements together even faster. Mankind was made from the only elements that would have been possible and sustainable as a part of the universally existing elements. Tell me what else could we be composed of if not these earthly compounds. Fluid in our veins, wind in our lungs, fire in our bellies and the earth to which we will return. The other chapters you mentioned can be shown to be realistic even to the most ardent non-believer in just as much common sense detail if you wish to continue with this discussion.

      Report Post » Rayblue  
  • ZaphodsPlanet
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:25pm

    Get a bowl full of them and ask BO if it tastes like dog or chicken.

    Report Post » ZaphodsPlanet  
  • The-Monk
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:24pm

    Looks like an Angry Bird swimming upsidedown….

    Report Post » The-Monk  
  • possom
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:16pm

    It’s a prehistoric herpy, next story please.

    Report Post » possom  
  • vtxphantom
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:14pm

    Humans, meet your new lord and master. Maybe in 50 million years.

    Report Post »  
  • KangarooJack
    Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:06pm

    So this unique and puzzling “thing” from frigid Norwegian waters-has absolutely NOTHING to do with the cow that tested positive for Mad Cow Disease {atypical} that displayed no symptoms…right??? lol

    Actually a ‘thing’ that is a parasite AND independent predator. Interesting.

    Report Post » KangarooJack  
    • InversionTheory
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 9:21pm

      Things always tend to be more complicated than we humans first imagine. Perhaps we’ll come to see life as a continuum rather than the strict way we see things today.

      Report Post »  
    • KangarooJack
      Posted on April 30, 2012 at 10:22pm

      I read a book the other day. Great Book! ‘Black Order’ by James Rollins.

      Something that has really stuck with me is this question. What are we to become. I’m a History buff, so I tend to look into the Past-yet, WHAT a question? WHAT are we to become?

      Somehow, I think Rod Sterling would be able to give his insight-imagine if he were alive today? What kind of stories would HE write?

      Report Post » KangarooJack  
    • lukerw
      Posted on May 1, 2012 at 12:03am

      A new… Socialist!

      Report Post » lukerw  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love