This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← "Walking Cactus" called missing link for insects

"Walking Cactus" called missing link for insects - Comments

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Comment 1 by Ignorant Amos

yikes....it's a fossil Christmas tree, never mind rabbits in the pre-Cambrian, this is proof positive that we've been so very wrong. The fairy on top is a bit blurred though.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 02:54:25 UTC | #595224

Michael Austin's Avatar Comment 2 by Michael Austin

I really wish that this were still alive. It would be cool to have in an aquarium.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 02:56:40 UTC | #595226

CleverCarbon's Avatar Comment 3 by CleverCarbon

I can almost make out the word "Hello"

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 03:18:58 UTC | #595233

Sample's Avatar Comment 4 by Sample

Comment 3 by CleverCarbon

I can almost make out the word "Hello"

That made me laugh out loud. Thank you for that.

It also reminded me of a marine mammalogy class. On a field outing many in our research team were convinced that an observed Steller sea lion had the numbers "319" tattooed on his flank. It was a real lesson in not blindly trusting your own perception.

As it turns out it was discovered that the "numbers" were not of any known tagging system and in fact were just wet hair/battle scar artifacts after closer examination.

Mike

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 03:33:30 UTC | #595237

Pom's Avatar Comment 5 by Pom

yikes....it's a fossil Christmas tree, never mind rabbits in the pre-Cambrian, this is proof positive that we've been so very wrong. The fairy on top is a bit blurred though.

Comment 1 by Ignorant Amos

No way is it a fossil christmas tree. Looks to me more like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, bless his cotton socks.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 03:47:36 UTC | #595241

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Comment 6 by Ignorant Amos

Comment 5 by Jollyroger

No way is it a fossil christmas tree. Looks to me more like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, bless his cotton socks.

Could well be right there....either way, it's proof of a deity at work in creation so we might just as well close up the stall and throw the towel in, cause it's all over for Darwin's dangerous idea.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 03:55:50 UTC | #595242

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 7 by Neodarwinian

Cool! China is really filling in transitional forms even if this turns out not to be a direct ancestor of arthropods. I wish that phrase " missing link " had not turned up in the article, but perhaps he was being facetious.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 04:05:51 UTC | #595243

rjohn19's Avatar Comment 8 by rjohn19

Neodarwinian- I no longer cringe over "missing links" because even if there were none, it would not sway any of the opposition. The more science learns about anything just makes their invisible bearded man even more waaay cool.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 06:36:16 UTC | #595259

Haymaker's Avatar Comment 9 by Haymaker

It is not a cactus it is a Monkey Puzzle Tree!

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 06:55:55 UTC | #595261

pekkaa's Avatar Comment 10 by pekkaa

Comment 3 by CleverCarbon :

I can almost make out the word "Hello"

No doubt about it! Must be a sign from God!

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:21:48 UTC | #595265

Raiko's Avatar Comment 11 by Raiko

Comment 3 by CleverCarbon :

I can almost make out the word "Hello"

More like "HELLOOO!" is it?

Oh, FSM, you funny bastard!

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:44:17 UTC | #595273

mixmastergaz's Avatar Comment 12 by mixmastergaz

But surely this means there are now twice as many gaps!

Just kidding.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:06:43 UTC | #595292

phodopus's Avatar Comment 13 by phodopus

Ok, in order to to some counterapologetics, let's call new fossils "Missing Mention" or something like that, in order to emphasize that none of this is even remotely mentioned in the bible ;)

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:39:52 UTC | #595299

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 14 by Steve Zara

This is very exciting. It really is. But it doesn't live up to the title, does it?

For a short while, I imagined this: "Walking cactus is a missing link between insects and plants". Then, the spider origin of the venus flytrap would perhaps have been clear!

But really, I do love this kind of finding. The 500-600 million year ago period is a time of such change and origins.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:43:02 UTC | #595301

phodopus's Avatar Comment 15 by phodopus

Attention: World-Shattering Comment below

This is very exciting. It really is. But it doesn't live up to the title, does it?

what ever does ...

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 13:29:06 UTC | #595372

crookedshoes's Avatar Comment 16 by crookedshoes

Which way does it face?

Has it started cephalization?

What are the points?

Every one of these brings up many (superficial) and many (deep) questions. I have asked a few superficial ones. What deep questions does this bring up????

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:32:25 UTC | #595458

Daman345's Avatar Comment 17 by Daman345

InB4 "This isn't a true missing link its 100% arthropod" Not that we'd get it here, but yet another "missing link" will mean nothing to creationists.

I had hoped for a second that actual movable cactuses had been discovered in some far off region of the world, when reading the title on the main page. It'd be cool if in a few billion years plants had made the leap to animal like behaviour, its probably possible given time and the right environment.

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:26:01 UTC | #595496

SomersetJohn's Avatar Comment 18 by SomersetJohn

Comment 5 by Jollyroger :

No way is it a fossil christmas tree. Looks to me more like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, bless his cotton socks.

Don't think they can be cotton, that hadn't evolved back then ;-)

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 18:42:04 UTC | #595580

Alan4discussion's Avatar Comment 19 by Alan4discussion

Comment 16 by crookedshoes

Has it started cephalization?

Was this what you had in mind?

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:09:30 UTC | #595711

Vorlund's Avatar Comment 20 by Vorlund

Comment 11 by Raiko :

Comment 3 by CleverCarbon :

I can almost make out the word "Hello"

More like "HELLOOO!" is it?

Oh, FSM, you funny bastard!

It might read something like 'Allah was here' in Arabic then we really would be fucked

Thu, 24 Feb 2011 23:08:08 UTC | #595741

phasmagigas's Avatar Comment 21 by phasmagigas

there's some horrid writing in that article:

'Clues to arthropod evolution are preserved in modern-day velvet worms, which are considered the only living relative to all arthropods'

im not quite sure what that is supposed to mean.

but thankfully it does have meaningful quotes:

" "But Budd is not convinced that, as the researchers argue, the walking cactus's hardened legs were passed directly down to modern arthropods.

"I am not persuaded that it is a direct ancestor or as closely related to living arthropods as they suggest," he told LiveScience. "I would like to see more evidence; the great thing is a lot more material keeps coming up." "

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:49:55 UTC | #596032

Alan4discussion's Avatar Comment 22 by Alan4discussion

Comment 19 by Alan4discussion

Comment 16 by crookedshoes

Has it started cephalization?

Sorry I could not resist the pun. Here's a better example!

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 15:08:05 UTC | #596036