I thought I had them at the flood, but...

[Job 33:6]

I appreciate your area of specialty if your a geologist. But we are not talking about Glacial till which I suspect might be rich in fossil fragments like little pieces of broken up bone and teeth. But not whole bones much less whole animals. I am surprised though if this is some kind of and area of specialty of yours that so many consider wind blown Loess is made up of mostly glacier till.
Anyway. In the articles I have been gleaning over since we started this discussion, and remember Loess is new to me. I keep seeing things like Mastodons and such being dug up out of Loess in the Midwest. So apparently whatever caused these freaky dust storms capable of killing and burying nearly burying a couple of continents worth of animals. Many scientists consider the withdrawal of the glaciers and the leftover till responsible for the dust.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loess_Hills
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loess
https://igws.indiana.edu/Surficial/Loess.cfm
https://www.geobotany.uaf.edu/library/pubs/WalkerDA1991_emon_61_437.pdf

This helps, but you still have to clarify on a locality. The research papers you posted, they clarify on the environment, but they dont actually say anything about fossils within the loess.

I could make a statement about fossils being found in magma, and I could give you a research paper on igneous deposits. But if the research doesnt say anything about fossils, i could hypothetically be wrong. Not that I necessarily disbelieve you, you just have to be more specific.

 

[Job 33:6]

From one of your links above,

"
Simply put, loess is a deposit of wind-blown silt . A blanket of loess is widespread across the hills of southern Indiana and is an important component of many soils. The term is of German origin and in America is pronounced in many ways, the most common of which is "lus."


Map of southern Indiana showing areas covered by loess more than about 5 feet (1.5 meters) thick. Darker tones indicate associated dune sand.

Major areas of loess in southern Indiana lie just east of the Wabash and White Rivers and south of the Wisconsin Glacial Boundry . During the several glacial events of the Pleistocene Epoch, or Ice Ages, and notably during the time of the later Wisconsin Glaciation, these streams carried large volumes of sand and siltin meltwater that flowed from the wasting glaciers. Raging torrents in summer, these streams were much smaller in wintertime, when the deposits of outwash sand and gravel in their valleys became dry. As a result of these adverse conditions, no significant vegetation grew on these valley flats, and they were easily stripped of fine sand and silt by the westerly winds of winter.

The fine sand in these clouds of dust was deposited close to the bluffs on the east sides of the Wabash and White River valleys, mostly in the form of dunes. The finer particles, mainly silt , were carried farther. Rain or snow may have helped to bring the dust to earth and vegetation that took root on the hills may have helped to fix the sand and loess in place. The silt was carried across the entire state, but only areas where the deposit of loess was thickest are shown on the map. Wind-blown silt can be recognized as a component of many soils, however, all the way east to the Ohio state line."




On another note, if this is what you are saying mammoth fossils are trapped within, or some sort of paleo/historical version from the pleistocene,

If you go to page 36, you can see where layers of till, and glacial outwash from the melting of these glaciers, has collected in a valley, which has buried peat. This is where you coal comes from. But notice that there are different distinct layers of till from different and disting glacial advances that are temporally independent from one another. The butlersville till, centergrove till and the cartersburg till, all rest superpositionally above the peat. Below the peat though is the cloverdale till.

". Other unconformities permit the separation of the Jessup and Trafalgar Formations into members, named here the Cloverdale, Butlerville, Center Grove, and Cartersburg Till Members. These unconformities generally are marked by key beds, such as paleosols and thin fossiliferous beds."

Here they are distinguishing between layers, lithologically, and by identification of thin fossil beds. Which is to say that the fossils, did not appear all at once in any unorganized cobbled way. Rather the fossil beds themselves are encased in these cyclical patterns of strata.

 

[Job 33:6]

"Fossil mollusks are found in two of the facies of the Atherton Formation and in thin beds of silt between barren mudstones in the Jessup and Trafalgar Formations. Largely because of environmental changes, the assemblages differ from unit to unit in vertical succession, but differences are slight. Three range zones based on forms of Succinea are named, in descending order, the S. vermeta,S. gelida, and S. gelida var. Range Zones."

Here is more description of morphological differences between fossils of different beds. Which also is demonstrating the passage of time, as different mollusks lived at different times, and so their fossils form at different times in the cycling environment.



Three forms of Succinea, a pulmonate mollusk, allow three range zones to be set up for the Indiana Pleistocene deposits. They are named the Succinea gelida var., Succinea gelida, and Succinea vermeta Range Zones (fig. 2). In addition, nine fossiliferous beds LITHOLOGIC TERMS FOR PLEISTOCENE SEDIMENTS 19 are recognized in the Pleistocene deposits. Three of these beds are named tongues of the Atherton Formation that are interbedded with the till formations; the other six beds are thin lenses of silt that lie between tills in the Trafalgar and Jessup Formations (fig. 2). Hendersonia occulta is a significant element of the fauna in three of the key beds that are used to mark formation and member boundaries. The lower Hendersonia occulta bed underlies the Jessup Formation; the middle Hendersonia occulta bed lies between the Cloverdale and Butlerville Till Members of the Jessup Formation; and the upper Hendersonia occulta bed lies between the Jessup and Trafalgar Formations. The thin fossiliferous zone that lies between the Center Grove and the Cartersburg Till Members of the Trafalgar Formation is the Vertigo alpestris oughtoni bed.



More discussion of thin fossiliferous beds separated by formations of glacial till.

 

[Job 33:6]

Here is some good stuff,

Definition.-The name Atherton Formation is here proposed for a group of intertonguing and interrelated unconsolidated sediments that resulted from glacial action but that were deposited extraglacially. These sediments, gravel, sand, silt, and clay, all were derived primarily from glacial outwash and were sorted and deposited by meltwater currents or wind action or in the quieter water environment of glacial lakes. As most of these sediments are closely interrelated in their distribution and lithologic characters as well as in their origin (fig. 3), 1 have chosen to treat them together as a single unit of formation rank.

Dune facies.--The dune facies of the Atherton Formation consists of sand that has been eroded and redeposited by wind action. Because of the sorting action of the depositing agent, a very high percentage of most dune sands, commonly 80 to 90 perecent, is medium to fine (0.42 to 0.175 millimeter) in size. (See Bieber and Smith, 1952, p. 15-18.) Individual grains normally show a higher degree of sphericity than do sands deposited by aqueous currents. Such windblown sand intertongues with water-laid gravels, sands, and silts of the Atherton Formation in many places; thus the dunal sand bears a true facies relationship to the other sediments of the formation with which it is associated.

Loess facies.--Massive, locally fossiliferous, and brownish-yellow silt as much as 20 meters thick constitutes the loess facies of the Atherton Formation. The maximum thickness of the facies is limited in Indiana to a fairly narrow belt along the east side of the Wabash and White River valleys and along the Ohio Valley, and exposures of the facies are abundant in those areas (Appendix A, sections 1 and 6). This facies thins abruptly to less than a meter in thickness over most of the rest of southern Indiana. (See Thorp and Smith, 1952.)

The loess facies of the Atherton Formation includes at least three distinct stratigraphic units that have been differentiated on the basis of composition, color, superposition, and soil profile or paleosol (key-bed equivalent). Names for most of these stratigraphic units have been in common usage among glacial geologists for many years; they are here proposed as formal members and tongues of the Atherton Formation in Indiana (loess facies).

The uppermost member in the loess facies has long been known as the Peoria (Peorian) Loess, originally named by Leverett (1898, p. 185-188). Usage and meaning of the name have changed since its original definition (see Leighton, 1958a, p. 294-297), however, and the term is currently used in Indiana in the manner in which it was used by Leighton and Willman (1950, p. 617-619). The Peoria Loess Member, here so designated and regarded as part of the Atherton Formation (loess facies), is commonly fossiliferous and calcareous along the Wabash and Ohio Valleys, where its thickness exceeds 2 meters. North of the Wisconsin glacial boundary, the Peoria Loess Member splits into two tongues; the lower one seems to be equivalent to the Morton Loess of Frye and Willman (1960, p. 7). The name Morton Loess Tongue is proposed for this unit in Indiana as well as in Illinois. The upper tongue may be the Indiana equivalent of the Richland Loess in Illinois (Frye and Willman, 1960, p. 7), but I have not adopted the term in this report. Beneath the Peoria Loess Member, the loess of the Atherton Formation includes three older stratigraphic units that commonly are covered by slopewash and that may be absent from some exposures; thus they seldom have been observed. Directly beneath the light yellowish-brown silt of the Peoria loess is a grayish-brown silt that rarely is calcareous or fossiliferous and that commonly is capped with a thin layer of dark-gray silt containing a noticeable amount of humus (here you have that burial of vegetation which results in the formation of lignite). This unit has been called the Farmdale Silt in Illinois (Frye and Willman, 1960, p. 7) and is here designated the Farmdale Loess Member of the Atherton Formation in Indiana (Appendix A, section 1).

The Farmdale Loess Member is underlain by a clayey orange-brown silt that commonly is less than 2 to 3 meters thick, and thus exposures of calcareous and (or) fossiliferous silt are rarely found. The key-bed soil profile extends through the complete thickness of most exposures of the unit. The name Loveland Loess has been applied to this unit by glacial geologists for several years (Leighton and Willman, 1950, p. 601-602). The original type section in Iowa is no longer available, but a new section adjacent to the old one was described recently for reference use (Daniels and Handy, 1959, table 1). This unit has been recognized in exposures in central and southern Indiana, particularly along the bluffs of the Wabash and Ohio Valleys, and is here designated the Loveland Loess Member of the Atherton Formation. Although this unit is generally nonfossiliferous, a few fossiliferous exposures are known where it intertongues with the Jessup Formation. The lowermost member in the loess facies of the Atherton Formation, the Cagle Loess Member (Wayne, 1958a, p. 10), is rarely identifiable except where it is found as a tongue at the base of the Jessup Formation (Appendix A, section 6). In this position it is separated from the other members (and tongues) in the loess facies of the formation. The only good exposure of the Cagle loess is the type section, in which it is a dark grayish-brown calcareous fossiliferous silt. There it overlies rocks of Pennsylvanian age and is overlain by the Jessup Formation.


All of this discussion about intertonguing layers, and being above and below unique formations of till, this is just a description that is telling us that this location was covered in ice, ice melted and outwash was deposited, loess is formed by wind blown loose deposits from glacial retreat, then the glaciers come back in, grind up more stone and deposit more till, melt and deposit more outwash, wind comes in and blows the outwash

And it just happens over and over and over and over again. Which creates the cyclical pattern.

And in between these cycles, there are times of moderate warmth, where mammoths get stuck in lakes, where they die and their bones are later buried by outwash and loess, where vegetation is buried which later is compressed into lignite and different forms of coal. And the pattern repeats, so you get different layers of different fossils, and different layers of lithologically different till and loess.

It wasnt just one giant wind storm that just buried millions of animals instantaneously. The fossils formed as a process over tens of thousands of years of repeated glacial deposition during melting and burial by outwash and loess, followed by the advance of glaciation at a later point in time which deposited a different layer of outwash which was picked up and blown as loess...all the while, the bones of all the animals that lived in these arctic regions over these tens of thousands of years, were picked up and buried.


But really, it doesnt even stop there, because these glacial deposits do not stop at the pleistocene. These cycles can be found going back into the pliocene as well, some 2.5 to 3 million years ago. We have mammoth fossils dating back millions of years, and more recent ice age mammoths going back hundreds of thousands of years, if not more.

"The oldest representative of Mammuthus, the South African mammoth (M. subplanifrons), appeared around 5 million years ago during the early Pliocene in what is now southern and eastern Africa. Descendant species of these mammoths moved north and continued to propagate into numerous subsequent species, eventually covering most of Eurasia before extending into the Americas at least 600,000 years ago. The last species to emerge, the woolly mammoth (M. primigenius), developed about 400,000 years ago in East Asia, with some surviving on Russia’s Wrangel Island in the Arctic Ocean until as recently as roughly 3,700 to 4,000 years ago"

Someone might ask how there could be so many mammoth fossils, well when you go back 5 million years, its not hard to imagine how there could be so many.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

Not ignoring you. Working a lot of hours and to tired to even look at the computer.

Here is some good stuff,
And in between these cycles, there are times of moderate warmth, where mammoths get stuck in lakes, where they die and their bones are later buried by outwash and loess, where vegetation is buried which later is compressed into lignite and different forms of coal. And the pattern repeats, so you get different layers of different fossils, and different layers of lithologically different till and loess.

It wasnt just one giant wind storm that just buried millions of animals instantaneously. The fossils formed as a process over tens of thousands of years of repeated glacial deposition during melting and burial by outwash and loess, followed by the advance of glaciation at a later point in time which deposited a different layer of outwash which was picked up and blown as loess...all the while, the bones of all the animals that lived in these arctic regions over these tens of thousands of years, were picked up and buried.

I didn't say there was one giant loess storm. I said there was one giant flood and what happened in the aftermath of the flood is not happening now because we are not seeing mass burials and multiple ice ages nor really anything geologically on the scale of what has happened.

But really, it doesnt even stop there, because these glacial deposits do not stop at the pleistocene. These cycles can be found going back into the pliocene as well, some 2.5 to 3 million years ago. We have mammoth fossils dating back millions of years, and more recent ice age mammoths going back hundreds of thousands of years, if not more.

"The oldest representative of Mammuthus, the South African mammoth (M. subplanifrons), appeared around 5 million years ago during the early Pliocene in what is now southern and eastern Africa. Descendant species of these mammoths moved north and continued to propagate into numerous subsequent species, eventually covering most of Eurasia before extending into the Americas at least 600,000 years ago. The last species to emerge, the woolly mammoth (M. primigenius), developed about 400,000 years ago in East Asia, with some surviving on Russia’s Wrangel Island in the Arctic Ocean until as recently as roughly 3,700 to 4,000 years ago"

I disagree because the dating methods are bogus and if all this mass burial, mass fossilization, mass freezing could happen in a thousand years of the post flood world where massive changes are taking place, changes that have ceased to happen. Then as a Christian I am going to look there first.

Someone might ask how there could be so many mammoth fossils, well when you go back 5 million years, its not hard to imagine how there could be so many.

People imagine millions of civilizations out in space too. Doesn't make it so. I can imagine exactly what we see happening with the flood and then the 1000 years of the post flood world. A world we cannot study first hand but only via its effects.

 

[Job 33:6]

"I didn't say there was one giant loess storm. I said there was one giant flood and what happened in the aftermath of the flood is not happening now because we are not seeing mass burials and multiple ice ages nor really anything geologically on the scale of what has happened. "

Nothing in science suggests that we should see mass burials or multiple ice ages.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm a young earth creationist since a few months ago but today after doing further research on the geologic column it would appear I have met my match. Creationists have tried to explain how the flood could have separated neatly all the fossils consistently across the world between each layer of the geologic column, but it seems the geologic column actually does support an old earth theory because of this, especially since it separates both plants and animals of the same species correctly within each layer.

I thought I had escaped the science of macro evolution through Noah and the flood but now I am back at square one unsure of the age of the earth and whether the creation story is really just a myth. It's really terrible for me because creationism really strengthened my faith in the bible and I know it doesn't really have anything to do with the gospel of Jesus either but I guess I just got my hopes up.

I guess the only thing I'm still holding on to is that night I believe I met Jesus.

I think things like the stories of the Bible and theories re the configuration and age of the Earth and universe are intensely interesting to think about, to discuss, even to debate if all parties can do so without getting angry or frustrated or making it something antagonistic or personally insulting. I have my beliefs, opinions, theories about all of that which may or may not agree with your beliefs or somebody else's beliefs.

Ultimately, I don't think God really cares what we think or believe about all that. He is most interested in our relationship with Him and how we treat others and allow Him to love others through us. I think when we arrive in our spiritual life and no longer see things 'through a glass darkly' as Paul put it, we are all going to have a good laugh at all the things we got wrong and how unimportant it was to be right about them. I think God doesn't care all that much about our theology. I think he cares that we do our best to love Him and those that He created.

 

[The Barbarian]

Ultimately, I don't think God really cares what we think or believe about all that. He is most interested in our relationship with Him and how we treat others and allow Him to love others through us. I think when we arrive in our spiritual life and no longer see things 'through a glass darkly' as Paul put it, we are all going to have a good laugh at all the things we got wrong and how unimportant it was to be right about them. I think God doesn't care all that much about our theology. I think he cares that we do our best to love Him and those that He created.

I think you have it exactly right.

 

[Tayla]

Creationists have tried to explain how the flood could have separated neatly all the fossils consistently across the world between each layer of the geologic column, but it seems the geologic column actually does support an old earth theory

I accept the old earth view of Hugh Ross -- progressive creationism. The Bible is literally true, inspired, inerrant, and infallible as claimed. All the disputes are merely interpretations, nothing more.

 

[The Barbarian]

First thing you have to realize is that Evolution is not science.

Of course it isn't. Evolution is an observed natural phenomenon. Evolutionary theory is the theory that explains it.

It fails every test in science.

Perhaps you don't know what "science" is. You see, scientists made a number of predictions based on Darwin's ideas. Some of those:
Fitness usually increases in a population over time.
Humans will have been found to first appear in Africa.
There were at one time, dinosaurs with feathers
Transitional fossils should be found for major groups of organisms.
And a great many more. All of those predictions have been confirmed to be true.

A hypothesis, after being repeatedly confirmed by evidence, is considered to be a confirmed theory.

Evolution is an alternate creation myth

for those who want to deny the God of Abraham.

That's a common superstition, but it's false. In fact, Darwin asserted that God created the first living things.

Evolution, just like other creation myths, gives unseen, mysterious forces which can't be proven to explain how we got where we are.

It's called "natural selection", and even professional creationists now admit that it's an observed fact.

In Evolution Myth, the unseen, mysterious force is time.

No, you've been misled by someone who knew no better than you. It's called "natural selection." Would you like to learn how it works?

Time explains the Grand Canyon. Time explains the oceans of Oil. Time explains the "geological column".

Sorry, none of those are about evolution. You'd be a lot better at fighting it, if you knew what it is. This is why so many creationists are just swinging at boogeymen of their own creation. All these myths you've created about science won't necessarily take away your salvation, but it would be very foolish to insist that Christians must believe your modern revisions of God's word.

 

[Kenechi]

Sir, I strongly encourage you to read my two relatively short posts on Quora:
https://www.quora.com/Did-science-g...Kenechi-Okoli?ch=10&share=83a3d0b6&srid=3Wn6A

https://thechristianarmy.quora.com/Evolution-facts-vs-fables?ch=10&share=42640cbf&srid=3Wn6A

 

[The Barbarian]

Sir, I strongly encourage you to read my two relatively short posts on Quora:

Here's part of that:

Similarly, the idea that all living things we see today originated from an initial group of bacteria which lived billions of years ago, is also a self-defeating proposition.

And like the flat earth, we only need one practical argument, which any person young or old educated or not can follow. i.e., the origin of a fully-jointed internal skeleton.

If the macroevolutionary theory is a correct representation of what happened in the deep past, then the first multi-celled organisms which evolved from bacteria, went from being boneless entities to becoming fully-jointed vertebrates.

We must ask ourselves, how did boneless, strictly soft-tissued animals, develop a backbone (i.e., a vertebral column)?

That's only the beginning of the impossibility. How would the first eel-like lifeforms then continue to evolve the different kinds of joints and bones needed to become sharks, whales, etc?

In other words, how do we go from no skeleton at all to a full jointed skeletal system?

It makes no sense no matter how vivid your imagination is, and the millions of fossils we've dug up only confirms what any sensible person already knows.

There has evidently never been, and never will be, a mechanism that grants an internal skeletal system to a group of bacteria and archaea.

This is a deal-breaker.

So how does that happen? How do you get from a single cell prokaryocite to mammal?

The first step was the big one. Endosymbiosis. The evolution of the prokaryotic cell. Looks like billion-year project. But then we have a nucleated cell.
From prokaryotes to eukaryotes

(if you'd like to see some detailed evidence for this step, let me know)

So what then? So we have to have multicellular organisms. And not surprisingly, we have all sorts of steps from single to multicellular organisms still alive today.
Research examining closely related single cellular and multicellular algae shows that some single celled organisms today have the genetic equipment to achieve multicellularity: they don't have to evolve new genes, they just have to use their existing genes in slightly different ways. Moreover, in some remarkable experiments with single celled yeast, researchers were able to create conditions that resulted in yeast cells forming elaborate multicellular structures, with certain cells performing specialized roles.
Evolution of Multicellular Life Might Have Been Easier Than We Thought

That still happens in nature, with slime molds. Sometimes just single-celled, sometimes multicellular organisms with specialized structures.

So what then? Bilateral form.

The Origin, Evolution and Development of Bilateral Symmetry in Multicellular Organisms
https://www.researchgate.net/public..._Bilateral_Symmetry_inMulticellular_Organisms

Next step is a notochord, the foundation for a backbone. The bilaterans have two groups, the protostomes and the deuterostomes. The deuterostomes have a ventral nerve chord. One group of these, the sea squirts, (which look sort of like sponges) have a mobile larval form that has a small rod of cartilage that supports the nerve cord, being the ur-chordates.

Other chordates like the Cambrian Pikaia, were free-swimming as adults. Amphioxus still retains that form.

Mineralization of dermal tissue was first noted in the late Cambrian, which served as protection and as storage for calcium.

Darja Obradovic Wagner and Per Aspenberg
Acta Orthop. 2011 Aug; 82(4): 393–398.
The earliest mineralized structures in the vertebrate lineage were tooth-like structures, odontodes. It is debated whether these emerged first in the throats of jawless, eel-like creatures with a notochord (conodonts), or as dental-like structures in the skin, arranged closely together to form a protective shield (Figure 1). In either case, it is obvious that predation and protection from predation was a driving force for this development (Figure 2). Modern theories suggest that it is not so meaningful to argue that teeth are the origin of dermal mineralization, or vice versa. Early teeth and the forerunners of bony skin plates appear to be the product of the same genetic machinery, regulating epithelial/mesenchyme interactions and able to produce similar structures at different locations. The machinery, involving BMPs, WNTs, and FGFs, was probably in place for other functions, e.g. forming sensory structures related to modern taste buds, and needed only modifications to enable formation of mineralized structures (Fraser et al. 2010). Thus, in modern animals, the RUNX transcription factors—which are crucial for bone formation—are also involved in the regulation of skin thickness and skin appendages such as hair follicles (Glotzer et al. 2008).

Bones formed at each somite supports the notochord in primitive vertebrates. These primitive vertebrae were calcified in most vertebrates.

Evidence suggests that paired fins and limbs are the result of modifications of branchial rays.
Gills, fins and the evolution of vertebrate paired appendages - the Node

Legs first developed from fins without secure connection to the spine:
Devonian Times - Acanthostega gunneri

They were used by fish to walk on the bottom of shallow water. Later, stronger connections allowed other organisms such as Icthyostega to walk on land.

Again, transitional forms exist, showing that the evolution of a skeleton was a gradual process.

If you'd like more detail for any of these, we can go over them, one at a time. What would you like to see next?

 

[Kenechi]

Thanks for the stories, I was already aware of them.

 

[The Barbarian]

Thanks for the stories, I was already aware of them.

Notice the evidence. That's the difference between creationist stories and scientific research. Yours is based on wishful thinking and revisions of scripture. Theirs is based on evidence.

As you just learned, there is abundant evidence for the evolution of the vertebrate skeleton. And that includes biochemical, fossil, genetic, and experimental data.

Let's take a look at some more of your stories...

 

[The Barbarian]

But what does genetic variation, used in dog breeding for example, have to do with the origin of photosynthesis and the necessary photosynthetic apparatus in the earliest bacteria?

It appears to have been a modification of nitrogen-fixing pathways via gene duplication:

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993 Aug 1;90(15):7134-8.
Early evolution of photosynthesis: clues from nitrogenase and chlorophyll iron proteins.
Burke DH1, Hearst JE, Sidow A.
Abstract
Chlorophyll (Chl) is often viewed as having preceded bacteriochlorophyll (BChl) as the primary photoreceptor pigment in early photosynthetic systems because synthesis of Chl requires one fewer enzymatic reduction than does synthesis of BChl. We have conducted statistical DNA sequence analyses of the two reductases involved in Chl and BChl synthesis, protochlorophyllide reductase and chlorin reductase. Both are three-subunit enzymes in which each subunit from one reductase shares significant amino acid identity with a subunit of the other, indicating that the two enzymes are derived from a common three-subunit ancestral reductase. The "chlorophyll iron protein" subunits, encoded by the bchL and bchX genes in the purple bacterium Rhodobacter capsulatus, also share amino acid sequence identity with the nitrogenase iron protein, encoded by nifH. When nitrogenase iron proteins are used as outgroups, the chlorophyll iron protein tree is rooted on the chlorine reductase lineage. This rooting suggests that the last common ancestor of all extant photosynthetic eubacteria contained BChl, not Chl, in its reaction center, and implies that Chl-containing reaction centers were a late invention unique to the cyanobacteria/chloroplast lineage.

 

[The Barbarian]

Or how unicellular eukaryotes became multicellular?

As you should know, even today, there are all sorts of intermediate forms between unicellular and multicellular organisms. Some of the are facultatively multicellular, but usually exist as unicellular organisms. Sponges are animals that are intermediate between unicellular choanoflagellates and true metazoan animals. Would you like to learn about them?

You've clearly been confused by the stories. I suggest you look at the details.

 

[Kenechi]

God bless you.
Peace