Slashdot Mirror


Eight-Armed Animal Preceded Dinosaurs

Garimelda writes "Scientists have discovered what they believe is an eight-armed creature which colonized a large section of the world's oceans over 300 million years before the first dinosaurs emerged."

10 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Eight-armed creature by MisterSquirrel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Eight-armed, in the sense that a starfish is five-armed. Not quite as sci-fi weird as the headline might sound.

    1. Re:Eight-armed creature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Erm... did many people interpret it as such?

      I did. It's because of the "preceded dinosaurs" which made me think it was eight-armed vertebrates, for about two seconds. There's no reason to say "preceded dinosaurs" when it was significantly before dinosaurs and had nothing to do with them. You could say they preceded humans. It's just silly and confusing. It turns out these fossils are twice as old as dinos.

      A better word would be "predate" which doesn't imply a close correlation in time.

    2. Re:Eight-armed creature by lpq · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I dunno...eight arms? soft? like a pussy cat...hey, lets call it an octopus! Who knows...some day maybe someone can get a Ph.D. studying these creatures -- we could call 'em Doc-Oc...

  2. "preceded dinosaurs" by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Given the time scales involved, that's kind of like saying "Alexander preceded Napoleon" -- I mean, it's true, but it leaves out a whole lot that happened in between.

    Oh, never mind. The past is telescoped. There's old stuff (things that happened before my parents were born) older stuff (George Washington and other guys in funny clothes) very old stuff (King Arthur and Robin Hood) extremely old stuff (cavemen and dinosaurs) and, apparently, incredibly old stuff (before cavemen and dinosaurs -- who knew?) No point in asking people to maintain a sense of persepective.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
  3. Re:Apologies to Douglas Adams by CDMA_Demo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    According to The Guide, it was the Jatravartids who were "unique", and since The Guide predates Ediacaran period, it is more likely to be correct (unless life itself is guilty of being neither beautiful, nor true).

    Plus, if these newly discovered creatures had 8 limbs, they'd be similar to Octopuses (or octopi/octopodes) who are not known to use deodorants (and instead use a foul smelling chemical to avert predators). Thus, since Octopuses are not known to invent deodorants it is less likely that Eoandromeda octobrachiata invented them either.

    Hence, the guide wins and Jatravartids keep the trophy.

  4. Re:Octospiders by pete-classic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For an instant I was upset that you spoiled it. That feeling was immediately washed away by gratitude.

    Thank you for sparing me from reading this.

    -Peter

  5. Re:Bilateral symmetry by pure chance by Hoplite3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think bilateral symmetry could be shown to have advantages out-of-water. In the ocean, movement in three dimensions is common, and radially-symmetric designs are reasonable. But on land, movement is confined (mostly) to a plane, so the extra symmetry doesn't help an organism very much. There'd be a lot of wasted tentacles.

    Like an octopus bar on $1 tequila night.

    --
    Use the Firehose to mod down Second Life stories!
  6. Re:Bilateral symmetry by pure chance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Not pure chance at all. Radial symmetry doesn't work on land where the movement is 2D and through a much thinner fluid. It adds too much weight also (something you don't have to worry about as much in the water).

  7. Re:who says ..... by Undead+NDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When the Bible says man who says they were refering to the first bi-ped. Who isn't to say the Bible wasn't refering to the final iteration of homosapain.

    If you adopt that line of reasoning (i.e.: words don't really mean what they mean), why stop there?

    Who isn't to say that all the words in the Bible don't mean something else entirely because the book was actually written in an unknown language that only coincidentally resembled ancient Hebrew?

  8. Are those really limbs? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Those 'limbs' are in an exceptionally regular spiral pattern. If you fossilized an octopus, you'd expect the limbs to be all crossed over and tangled up. I'm guessing that those 'limbs' couldn't move independently, and are more like ridges in a sheet of material.

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.