They’re said to have appeared between 634 and 604 million years ago (Peterson and Butterfield, 2005) and figure in the Cambrian Explosion. Darwinians have been trying to Cancel the Cambrian Explosion since practically forever but it keeps coming back into the fact base:
Ctenophores Get Even More Complex
Comb jellies (ctenophores) are claimed by some evolutionists to be the first multicellular animals, emerging even before sponges! (See here for more.) But look at all the design features these small marine animals have: a nerve network, locomotion, digestion, and iridescent flashing lights in their eight “comb rows” of cilia. In 2018, Casey Luskin noted that over 1,200 homology groups (groups of genes that are similar and unique to a homologous group) would be required for the origin of the group that includes ctenophores. Now, the team that in 2019 brought to light one of the required genes for comb rows has doubled the complexity, and with it, multiplied the headaches for evolution.
In 2019, we described how Jokura et al. in Current Biology had identified a gene named CTEN064 that was “required to orient each cilium within the ‘compartmenting lamellae’ that hold the comb rows together.” Knockout experiments showed that without this gene, the comb jellies could not swim. Now, in a new follow-up study published in bioRxiv, Jokura’s team announced the discovery of another required gene they call CTEN189. Without this gene, the cilia become disoriented, out of sync, and disconnected from the compartmenting lamellae (CL). Of particular interest, this protein acts at the opposite end of the CL — the distal end — as opposed to CTEN064 which localizes to the proximal end. This struck the researchers as a kind of “two-story building” arrangement
David Coppedge, “Cambrian Explosion: More Woes and Dodges” at Evolution News and Science Today (David Coppedge)
You may also wish to read: Can the Cambrian Explosion be explained away by the earlier Ediacaran Explosion? David Klinghoffer: Lukas Ruegger is the personable new intelligent design “explainer” whose videos take an approach similar to Khan Academy’s. The latter’s offering on evolution is replete with junk science, as Casey Luskin has detailed. Ruegger’s treatment of the subject is much better, and I appreciate his clarity and brevity.