Yes! They were quite successful in finding a valuable niche and exploited it against all-comers.
Back to the books for evolutionists.
Nonsense. See my Post #17. We used this in my previously mentioned Zoology class as one of the classic anatomical lessons in the evolutionary chain of life on this planet. Evolutionists have no problem whatsoever with this organism since it once again bolsters the TOE as it represents a stepping-stone on the way to man.
First: They represent the evolutionary link between the Invertebrate and Vertebrate Phyla since they have a primitive (cartilage) backbone.
Second: A further common ancestor went on to become the sharks and rays, which eventually evolved into fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, primates, man.
Since a lamprey didn't need to evolve this means that humans didn't either. That's what I get out of this.
Extremely poor logic [*LOL*]. I suggest, much the same as I took long ago, a Year-long Zoology course to open your mind to the wonders of Evolution.
Hope this helps. Best of luck with your coursework!
Well wow. If I had known that I wouldn't have made my comments. NOT!!!
And, once again, I ask, where is the evidentiary links which support the contention that different species of animals "evolved" from completely different earlier species of animals? The Zoology course I took in college certainly didn't provide such evidence, and noone on any of the threads from FR has either. The most that biologists have been able to say is that they "think" that is what happended, not "we know that is what happened".