Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Common ancestor was a mega-organism “like none seen since”?

arroba Email

In “Life began with a planetary mega-organism” (New Scientist, 25 November 2011) Michael Marshall reports,

ONCE upon a time, 3 billion years ago, there lived a single organism called LUCA. It was enormous: a mega-organism like none seen since, it filled the planet’s oceans before splitting into three and giving birth to the ancestors of all living things on Earth today.

This strange picture is emerging from efforts to pin down the last universal common ancestor – not the first life that emerged on Earth but the life form that gave rise to all others.

The latest results suggest LUCA was the result of early life’s fight to survive, attempts at which turned the ocean into a global genetic swap shop for hundreds of millions of years. Cells struggling to survive on their own exchanged useful parts with each other without competition – effectively creating a global mega-organism.

It was, of course, an RNA world, in which error control for proteins was poor. Nevertheless, it all worked because “It was more important to keep the living system in place than to compete with other systems.” So the last universal common ancestor knew what was important and had goals?

Behold the increasing velocity of the tailspin of current attempts to find/describe the last universal common ancestor

And tell us again: Why is James [Margulis collaborator] Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis off the wall if this supposedly mainstream one isn’t?

Darwin’s pressure groups keep blaming doubters for their problems convincing people. The truth is, they are doing it to themselves.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

The evidence of line of descent that scientists find in biological and 'evolutionary' theories, comes from Creative Patterns. The idea that as one life was created then other was created from that DNA with vestiges, of history of the preceding animal.This shows the efficiency of creation. This example is from the account of Eve being created, from Adam, by removing DNA, bone,blood and muscle tissue. This same technique if used on populations of animals, would retain history, of that animal, af populations over time. This also means that neither common descent nor uncommon descent are totally accurate, but it really a combination of both. We see in fossil records, and in biology, a similar line of descent. But 'evolution' is impossible from the evidence we have. 'Evolutionary ' scientists assumed that one came from another naturally. But from the example of the Creator,with Adam and Eve, we have the president of building new life from existing life. Think of the consequences of that. MrDunsapy
...and it contained the genetic blueprints for wings, teeth, feet, feathers, scales, fur, eyeballs- the list is pretty much endless. Davem
We wouldn’t mind so much here, if they would just STOP persecuting James Lovelock and Gaia. It’s the H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y that gets to us.
Yip, that's what I was hinting at :) Stu7
We wouldn't mind so much here, if they would just STOP persecuting James Lovelock and Gaia. It's the H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y that gets to us. News
Stu7, It ain't "speculation upon assumption" if it supports "their" position. Geez ain't you learnt nuthin' yet? :) Joe
This is getting amusing now. They pile speculation upon assumption that reads like something from a child's bedtime story, and yet get all in a huff at the suggestion of a design inference... come now. Stu7

Leave a Reply