Yet another creationist vs evolutionist question... sorry...?

Question

So I've been thinking... People have spent a lot of time and energy finding transitional fossils between animals and humans. Yet they have not tried to find transitional fossils between plants and animals. I realize that finding early fossils is difficult at best, because there just aren't a lot of them. Evidence from 500+ million years ago is hard to find, and harder to classify and interpret. At a time when all life was developing for the first time, it's hard to find black-and-white lines between life forms.

So- do strict evolutionists believe that animals came from plants, and humans came from animals? Or do they believe that plants and animals are distinct, and humans came from animals? Or is further evidence needed one way or the other? When and how do they believe life, period, first began? (This is an honest question- I don't want people to get all ticked off. Any thoughtful answers appreciated.)

Answer 1

Good question.
1. No animals did not come from plants.
2.Humans came from animals, yes.
3.No further evidence needed , It is all here.
4. another very good question..
Yes we have descended from animals, we are all animals but to be blunt we came from fish. This is a very broad statement.
I will explain more in detail if you are interested. Email me via my profile.

Answer 2

I don't know what happened way back then! I have the Bible telling me according to the Gap Theory of Genesis 1:1 - 1:2 that the Earth can be zillions of years old. If the Gap Theory is correct, there was life, a cataclysm and then a recreation of life on Earth.

And then we have scientists that will either overlook that right along with most of Christianity because it doesn't fit with tradition.

According to one show on . . . I think it was Discovery, there was NO plant life on the surface of the Earth. All life lived in the oceans. The land was barren and wasn't capable of supporting plant life.

So then I get the idea that plants were existing only as photo plankton or whatever kind of microbe, and then evolved into more complex forms later independent of animal life.

But you are right! There has to be a missing link between animal and plant life, however I would suspect that IF evolution is true, the missing link would be small . . . . really small. Hard to find when they are so small.

It could have happened, but I still don't believe in it.

Answer 3

First off, evolution is not concerned with the origin of life, just the origin of species.

Now to answer your main question, photosynthesizing single celled organisms came *first* (there may have been some 'non-cellular' things before - but they came before everything that we recognize as life today). Then came cells taht basically absorbed or ate other cells. These were the original plants and animals but on a much smaller scale. Since there won't be any fossilized cells from 3 billions years ago, we would never expect a fossil record of this transition.

Answer 4

There was, obviously a "first" life form. I remember Carl Sagan referring to "primordial soup". I also recal seeing "life" created in a lab using raw materials of early Earth (sea mater, protiens, electric sparks, etc.). Some of these plants eventually evolved to have more animal characteristics than plant characteristics, and some went on to become higher plant life. But when you're talking single cell micro-organisms that far back, fossils are nearly impossible to find.
Interesting that our blood, to this day, has a chemical composition similar to sea water- as the oceans are our ancestrial home.
Sagan also has a chapter in the book "Cosmos" that begins by describing the similarities between humans and our "cousins" the Oak Trees. This book, and the companion PBS series, are very informative, and easy to understand. I suggest looking into them.
It baffles me that anyone would try to debunk evolution. It ,simply put, is what happened and continues to happen. Look at the cold virus - you can't catch the same cold twice, but you can get A cold twice because the virus continues to evolve.

Answer 5

No animals did not come from plants, at least not strictly speaking. As the early primative organisms continued to change they adopted different strategies, so some strategies relied on obtaining energy from the sun and other by eating other organisms. This eventually caused a branching which resulted in animals and plants. Even today there are some organisms that are strictly one or the other.

This is a highly simplified explanation.

Answer 6

Okay, I've got very rudimentary biology knowledge here but I'll give it a go. If I remember correctly, the multicellular life diverged in the seas to form plants and fish/animals separately. Plants began to populate the land masses before fish/animals emerged from the seas. There are significant differences between plant life and animal life.

Life began as microscopic organisms in the warm seas 3.5 billion years ago.

Answer 7

The split between plants and animals occurred at the single cell stage. Although single cells do not leave fossils, some forms from that era have survived virtually unchanged. Also, the parent line survives as fungi.

Answer 8

Animals did not evolve from plants, but they share a common ancestor (if you go back far enough).
Humans are animals.

And contrary to Dadof4's assertion, many transitional fossils have been found. Indeed all fossils are transitional fossils, as is obvious to anyone with even a basic understanding of the theory of evolution.

Answer 9

The plant/animal split occured while life was still single cellular. As such, finding fossils depicting the split is nigh impossible, as single celled organisms don't often leave fossils, and even if they do, they're often overlooked.

It is unlikely that we'll find any tangible evidence outside the phylogenic tree (essentially: comparative DNA studies).

Answer 10

I will assume you are asking for kicks. If you knew the information in the first paragraph, then you couldn't possibly have asked this in all seriousness.

No, animals are not plants, although the first microbes on the surface of the planet did have chlorophyll. Plants and animals are two distinctly different families.

Humans not only came from animals, humans are animals. They are also primates and mammals.

atheist