Spacenoology

Wow!!!

Giant Unicellular organisms

Traces of the giant single-celled organisms

Euglena green eyes: vacuole-lens, a light sensor and a dark pigment background!

However, it is a fact. The fact is - a very stubborn thing! As the eyes of jellyfish.

A hypothesis may be different. Well, I’m inclined to think that eyes have been created in the early Vendian or earlier reasonable unicellular “Protists”, which established their own civilization and social production technologies “multicellular” - a super-myxomycetes. This is my working hypothesis! And then, when their civilization survived the collapse, lost wisdom, tried and tested by them “memes”, enshrined in the genome, are the very same “selfish genes” … Started in the macro-devolution under the pressure of natural selection.

Haikouichthys

Eyes, gills, caudal fin. 530 mln Years ego. It seems to Pikaia Gracilens, but then proved his eyes! Very good. And if it is only the larva?

David, I just quoted the link: “… early Cambrian, about 530 million years ago … … One of the creatures, Myllokunmingia, recognized a common precursor of all the cranial than myxines. Another creature, Haikouichthys, defined as a close relative of the lamprey … Jawless: Wikipedia

…”eyes of some terrestrial planarian have a complex structure, equipped with the lens, and possibly allow us to see things. It is usually one pair of eyes on the cerebral ganglion, but some (many planarians and most poliklad) may be dozens of eyes, situated in the area of ​​the brain or bordering the entire front end of the body. Few of Representatives is four eyes or one unpaired eye. Pigment cup eyes turned to the concave part of the body surface, immersed in a long curved receptor (retinal) visual cells, the extended ends of which are light-sensitive structures. Light first passes through the body of the visual cells, and only then gets in their light-sensitive part. Retinal cells in their origin are nervous, so they have processes (axons) that form in its entirety the optic nerve, which is sent to the cerebral ganglion, which analyzes the information received.”
Turbellaria - Wikipedia

So, we know that cnidarians evolved from the Bilateria in late Vendian (judging by the findings of jellyfish-like prints and judging by bilateral larvae of bryozoans), and PAX6 appeared earlier, so eyes of jellyfish - from Turbellaria. The brain and the eyes with the lens in the Turbellaria is, as you see! Even those that survived to our time! And what to speak of the Turbellaria Vendian and Cambrian cnidarians, when they both dominated the fauna? Wow!

“Recently (1999) found in China, two fossils were the oldest known forms of cranial - these finds date from the early Cambrian, about 530 million years ago. These early forms are directly or indirectly almost all precursors of all vertebrates, and their finding suggests that vertebrates have participated in the “explosion” of biodiversity of organisms (Metazoa) in the Cambrian. Both fossils are small in size (25 and 28 millimeters) and a cartilaginous skull, from five to nine pairs of gill bubbles, big heart behind the last pair of gill bubbles, chord, zigzag-like blocks of muscle (miomery) and the dorsal fin (one findings of the two), supported by fin rays. One of the creatures, Myllokunmingia, recognized a common precursor of all the cranial than myxines. Another creature, Haikouichthys, defined as a close relative of the lamprey. Unlike most other Agnatha, these early forms had no scales or bony plates of protection.”

Jawless: Wikipedia

In the middle of the Cambrian, when these creatures were formed, as I recall from the literature, the continents were at the equator and the icing was not!

Nervous system Cubo-jellyfish includes nerve ring from 8 ganglia (clusters of nerve cells), four of which are associated with ropalyes and the other four innervate the tentacles. Each ropaly literally “hammered” by nerve cells and fibers.

http://elementy.ru/news/430356

And so, apparently, there is still a resemblance:
http://ufonauter.agro.name/markers/image01.gif
Turbellaria Vendian - the ancestors of plants and animals!
Vegetative and sexual phase in the life cycle of multicellular organisms

The devolutionary distance between jellyfish and vertebrates, however, allowed the jellyfish have great eyes with lenses chamber similar to ours. And laying their being under the influence of a common inductor. A esters Scyphozoa and siphonophores strikingly reminiscent of somites our “embryo.”

Here, look at the pictures, the reconstruction of the cartilaginous bescherepnyh armored fish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pteraspida . It is true that beauty! They have not had the skull and vertebrae around the chord, but what wonderful fins! Then they only had cartilage. Thanks to the plates of armor, paleontologists could these “fish” to reconstruct. In modern sturgeon also the same chord, but there is still cartilaginous skull and jaws.
Cartilaginous skeleton poorly maintained. If there is no hard shell and limestone skeleton - paleontologist will tell us nothing. But it could be amphibians, also had lungs! Dragons with cartilaginous skeletons! Flying? But paleontologists have found so far only aquatic forms, alas. I’m bad looking! It is a cartilaginous fish now are analog (or a homologue?) Light, pregnancy, and mammal-like. But in this case - armored fish were more versatile! They have not “are bent” in its static-stereotypical skeletons, as we now … They still had no solid skull, which limits the growth of the brain, the hypothalamus and was not separated from the cerebral cortex - and the creatures could adjust the metamorphosis! Well, this is, of course, is only a hypothesis … But this hypothesis is justified!

Well, the phylogeny of the fin - it’s easy. This is evident in the ontogeny of vertebrates. Initially increases strobilus of somites, and then laid two paired strobili on each side - of course, that branch - the fingers. This kind of Charnia himself, that tries to be symmetric. But still first somite is right (hander), the left (lefty) … This is a relic of metamerism!

There are old reports that the jellyfish Bougainvillia Platigaster no throwing an egg into the water. In the genital tract from the eggs - new polyps. Polyps are here separates esters - new jellyfish. I searched the literature that anything new about this creature no found. What eats this polyp? Perhaps there is a true placenta? Or equivalent milk?

Stegocephalia - Google translator is to blame! I just did not notice.

Here, Sacrifice familiar neotenia: http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/brokgauz_efron/34724/Двоякодышащие

But what if neoteny is not final? Sometimes develop an adult amphibian, which scientists have not yet seen, but it is in the legends of the local population? Stegotsefal! Or mermaid?!

Uh, excuse me, a joke, of course, but - theoretically sound!

I mean this: “absorption of prenatal milk”.
I have not seen in the literature of the HERV-W gene in coelacanth. But, in my opinion, coelacanth - is no exception, there are other examples. Yes, birds have a gland similar to “milk” in the craw, they feed the chicks. Here and there must search HERV-W gene! (Nobel Prize - in the case of HERV-W gene plus!?)

But we know that Finn cestodes produces compounds that are specific to placental mammals, so the host does not cut off from the parasite, but rather forms an semblance of the placenta. For this discovery, someone was given the Nobel Prize.

Until 1975, the Comorian coelacanth was considered to spawn, as in the body 163-cm female caught near the island of Anjouan in 1972, found 19 eggs, which resembled the shape and size of an orange. But later, another female, length 160 cm, which was caught near Anjouan in 1962 and are on display at the American Museum of Natural History (American Museum of Natural History, AMNH), was opened in 1975. Museum staff conducted a dissection of tissue sampling of internal organs, and identified with the five females in the oviducts of well-developed embryo length 30-33 cm, each with a large yolk bubble. This finding suggests that the coelacanth are viviparous.

Later, the researchers Vurms John and Jim have studied in detail ASTC embryos and oviducts, and proved that the yolk surface strongly vaskulyarizovanaya bubble is in very close contact with as much vascularized surface of the oviduct, forming a placenta-like structure. Thus, it is possible that in addition to the yolk of the egg embryos also feed and due to the diffusion of nutrients from the mother’s blood.

Further studies of the above unborn fetuses showed the presence of extremely large membranes that cover the gills, and contain multiple cells that are adapted to the absorption of prenatal milk (gistotrofy) secreted by the walls of the oviducts. This type of transfer of nutrients known in some other fishes.

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A6%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%82

Thus, an ancient fish - coelacanth was placental mammals!

David

“In all vertebrates, some insects and mollusks in the blood protein is present ferric iron, but because their blood has a red color. Blood clam brachiopods contains hemerythrin - it contains iron to five times more than the hemoglobin. Oxygenated blood hemerythrin gives a purple hue, and gave oxygen to tissues, such blood turns pink. In polychaetes - the other iron-containing protein - hlorokruorin. The basis of it is not ferric iron, ferrous and which gives the blood and tissue fluid green. In ascidian blood is colorless, it is based - gemovanady containing vanadium ions. In octopus, spiders, scorpions, crabs, respiratory pigment of the blood is hemocyanin, in which iron is present instead of copper (Cu2 +). Combines with oxygen of air is blue hemocyanin, and by giving oxygen to tissues - a few discolored. As a result, the arteries flowing dark-blue blood and the veins blue. However, some shellfish oxygen transport of substances close to the hemoglobin, and other similar proteins contain manganese.” http://otvet.mail.ru/question/16010365/

That’s because, as interesting! As soon as mutations, which were immediately fixed in emerging forms in the Cambrian explosion! Okay. Some evolutionists, created a series of painful anthropocentrism taboo. For example, some evolutionists reject even the thought of which created a strong di-polivergence of species of amphibians-Turbellarians in the Cambrian paleo-civilization, who had blood all at once these blood pigments! And always poking us this gnarled idea - about the evolution “of primary replicator to the crown of the evolutionary creation”! ;))

David

Ascidians have instead of hemoglobin - hemo-vanadium. Salps in one of metegenez-generations have the true placenta! Now, among the Turbellaria are species having oral and anal openings. Somites of vertebrate bear a striking resemblance to growth of strobilus; the body of the same Charnia - a typical branching strobilus. Higher plants bear a striking resemblance, oddly early embryo of placental mammals:
http://ufonauter.agro.name/markers/image01.gif
Perhaps the stage was divided from Charnia of Vend? Paired and alternating knots of plants - that’s you and two types of symmetry, mirror and metameric (moving reflection).
Lancelet, incidentally, has a metameric symmetry as the Vendian organisms! Among cestodes also it happens. Redia of trematodes like cestodes and adolescariae - floats, as vertebrate …

Wow! Yes, it’s me. :)) And then: http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/about14351-252.html

The word “degradation” I understand the degeneration - loss of ancestral form of universalism. Eyes become smaller, worse seeing decreases brain, etc. But the size depends on habitat conditions! Changing the size of the degradation is not connected. “On land” I understand how “on land”.

Sorry, “Wind” - Vendian

Not from clams, but from the Turbellaria! Although … Pikaia Gracilens suspiciously like clam with fin … In embryogenesis of clams embryologists find like chords, but it can also be interpreted as a strobila of proto-Charnia…
Sorry David, I decided to simulate the situation in the Wind and Cambrai in the sci-fi opus, too entered into the role of some of the characters who have fallen out of our time, which began to break too glaring errors of evolutionism. http://spacenoology.agro.name/?page_id=4912

Now, when there is no real representatives of those universal things Vendian amphibians, which have created the diversity of Cambria, you can try to judge on vision and nervous system of these creatures on the specifics of the nervous system and some tropical marine and terrestrial Turbellaria, which have relatively large brains, and chamber eyes with lenses. Land Turbellaria - is also a special amphibious, and there is every reason to believe that these were in the Vendian. That is, the “landfall” of some ancient fish with fins and legs - is a myth. Coelacanth, ihtiostega, stegotsefal, in this sense - the stage of metamorphosis of one creature - stegotsefal. That’s why there is an idea that the ancient clams were also special amphibians, and the first arthropods, and the first vertebrates. And these fish evolved from amphibians through neotenia later.

Yes, in a sea of ​​clams retained by degradation of larger forms, available as early as Cambrian than on land. But, however, even on land: “Marine molluscs perednezhabernye Littorina punctata (Evans, 1961), L. irrorata, Tectarius muricatus, Turbo castanea (Hamilton, 1977; Hamilton, Winter, 1982, 1984), freshwater pulmonary Planorbarius corneus (Zhukov et al, 2002), Lymnaea stagnalis (Andrew, Savage, 2000) and ground lung Achatina fulica (Zhukov , Baikov, 2001), Otala lactea (Hermann, 1968), Helix aspersa (Hamilton, Winter, 1984) using visual information for orientation in the environment.”
http://spacenoology.agro.name/?page_id=5460

It is now cephalopods and gastropods are so different. And sometime in the early Cambrian, I think it was just underwater and overland stage of metamorphosis, some mollusks, amphibians. And his eyes - for an underwater stage, alone, for the land - more! As the types of photosynthesis in some plants: an underwater stage - C3, for the land - C4!

So, David, the eyes of cephalopods have certain characteristics that distinguish them from the very eye of vertebrates. Well, in this context is the case with the eyes of gastropods? On the vision of gastropods in general know not very much.

http://spacenoology.agro.name/?page_id=5460

Pteraspida: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pteraspida
Thelodonti: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelodonti
Anaspida: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaspida
Galeaspida: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galeaspida
Pituriaspida: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pituriaspida
Osteostraci: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteostraci

David, in the photo of Charnia you see in the “scolex-head” something big oval. This is obviously a sucker. A black arrows indicate those tracks that can be interpreted as imprints of the eye. Of course, may not be interpreted! But after not deny the existence of eyes in the Vendian Charney on the basis of paleo-material no longer available. And this is not a joke, I assure you!

Cyclostomes have close relatives - Ostracoderms, who died in Devon.

[Pteraspida][1], [Thelodonti][2], [Anaspida][3], [Galeaspida][4], [Pituriaspida][5], [Osteostraci][6]

They had a limb - the fins! And now we can be sure that it is the adult form, rather than an intermediate stage of metamorphosis, amphibians of some special Devon? The absence of a paleontologist finds in this case does not prove anything except that a absence of finds. Lack of primitivism or eyes may indicate a regression of this organ in the care of low-lit niche. At the same time may well have preserved some features of the source of the universal eye, which had been lost in other taxa. But does it say about the fundamental difference? Lampreys and hagfish, by the way, now is not considered to be very similar forms. Perhaps both of these forms were separated at various times from Ostracoderms, lost limbs and full vision. So lost eyes today some karst fish and salamanders. Maybe because they lost lancelet, salps, apendikulyarians, ascidians hagfish, many jellyfish, polychaetes and many Turbellaria. It is possible that not only applies to the Visually Impaired is the argument. Hemoglobin, hemo-cyanine, hemo-vanadium - different pigments of blood, which might well operate simultaneously in the universal common ancestor of amphibian in the early Cambrian and Vendian!

Nucleic-acid-peptide micro-molecular technology - a database of DNA through RNA intermediaries is implemented by the polypeptide interface. But this is an automated production system. A user who is? And this is an older subject - lipid membrane. Once upon a time, a few billion years ago, some engineers of a great civilization lipidoides created this nucleic acid-peptide technology and armed with it, settled by a million ships in all parts of the visible universe. But what do our evolutionists? And they are the origin and evolution of life on self-replicators - RNA! Wow! So you can keep your computer from the origin of a computer mouse! Yes, the computer system, of course at the last regular duplication mice formed a small detail, like user …
I think the concept “extra-terrestrial” for life is not correct. Life is life. It is the same painful geo-anthropo-centrism. Intelligent life, armed with a nucleic-polypeptide technology could in a few billion years to spread widely in the universe, and here we have one of the planetary population.
Yes, indeed, it is difficult to say now, as there are beings engineer, consisting only of lipid membranes. But the direct descendants - the membrane of our cells! We must learn to understand how to create a personality - an active model of the world on the quantum-electronic fields of membranes! And to make a structured membrane artificially create artificial intelligence, similar to a natural! Difficult? But then, maybe it will be understood as such a phenomenon could occur by itself!
http://www.naontiotami.com/2011/08/does-the-intelligent-design-movement-need-to-be-demolished-and-rebuilt/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=does-the-intelligent-design-movement-need-to-be-demolished-and-rebuilt

http://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=%D1%80%D1%8B%D0%B1%D0%B0-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0+%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Sorry, an error of translation. Lamprey (not hagfish)

http://murzim.ru/biologiya/9132-kruglorotye.html

“Once cyclostomes were many and varied. But to this day has lived only about 50 species of lampreys and myxines.”

“Unlike myxines they have sighted eyes. And not two but three! Third, parietal, is underdeveloped. It is the oldest body has been preserved very few vertebrates.”

“The male begins building the nest. Fancy to land on the rocky bottom, he vigorously tearing shingles and break new ground with a diameter of 50 cm Once there, he grabs his pebbles oral sucker and takes them away.”

Differences in eye device can be easily explained by the fact that in the eyes of the earliest applied once all the technology, but divergent forms after macro-Devolution of the so-called “Cambrian explosion” of these technologies are distributed among different taxa.

What there may be a joke? I am quite serious.

One day at a Russian-language forum, I argued with evolutionist-paleontologist about whether Vendian Charnia free-floating organisms, or grown in the substrate, as it is painted. At my request, the opponent provided shale- photo prints of Charnia. I immediately saw a trace that can be interpreted as imprints of the eye.
http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/222295_133308133405691_100001795141602_214099_1142218_n.jpg
If you came across on the first print is such traces, so … all the rest - as well?! But why Charnia and similar organisms Wend draw heads buried in the substrate? Conspiracy, though!

I now fish-stuck in my head, too, has such a sucker, and on the sides - the eyes. Hagfish has three eyes and such a sucker on the back - she drags this sucker stones when building a nest!

“the light-sensitive neuron” - This means that the Vendian was subject to the neurons. Who? Turbellaria - a typical resident of the Vendian (isometric growth, the absence of the skeleton, the absolute lack of regenerative - phenomenon creates damage, müller-larva), which had as now Turbellaria brain ortogon-type and camera-lenses-eye! Here the question. Why the new taxa to “reinvent the wheel”, that is, face it, if they have a direct ancestor? This is called - Occam’s Razor. And why do to need to manipulate the theory that evolution necessarily lead DESCENDANTS Turbellaria of eyeless forms and then impose the idea of ​​a parallel re-development of the eye? To prove the progress of evolution from a primitive replicator to the “Top of the evolutionary creation”? Ha! That - evolutionists are agents of creationism in biology!

With all the great variety of eye, inducers that control tab in the ontogeny of the eye are the same for all studied taxa, including vertebrates and jellyfish. Moreover, the settlement and the time of appearance of the first sample of the inductor - Vendian.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/07/14/1008389107

These eyes have a lens with a jellyfish: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2825319/

And these eyes have a lens also Turbellaria: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ресничные_черви

And polychaetes: http://www.liveinternet.ru/showjournal.php?journalid=2443535&tagid=1022068

Further. Human embryo at an early stage has gills, caudal fin … But he can not use them. This is because genetic technology support was lost when the larva was in the placenta. Or in the egg. Macro-de-evolution is irreversible! But now, the frogs have a larva with gills and tail fin! They are versatile us. A Turbellaria, some species of which contemporaries and now have eyes with lenses, the brain is orthogonal to type, the organ of equilibrium, etc., they are active predators! - Some Turbellaria are also free-living Müller’s larva! This is - free-living morula gastrula! Hence, their ancestors - in Vendian! They still have more versatile! Give Turbellaria such a trifle as a skeleton - and it is no easier to us.

So, Turbellaria in Vendian - a super-versatile creature. And before Turbellaria? Myxomycetes! According to the logic - even more versatile!

Interestingly, Mr Richard Dawkins reads these comments?