Re: [asa] First Animal?

From: Murray Hogg <>
Date: Thu Oct 01 2009 - 03:04:05 EDT

Hi Greg,

I wouldn't think anybody has even asked the question, let alone there being any consensus.

With my limited knowledge of biology, I'd suggest that the first animal (evolutionarily speaking) would be the first eukaryotic, multi-cellular organism which survived by ingestion rather than photosynthesis (such would be the first plant).

There's no doubt Nobel prizes to be one if you can manage to identify said wee beastie.


Gregory Arago wrote:
> Hey All,
> A perhaps simple or silly question, but it came to mind nonetheless and
> since in another thread people are speaking again about 'Adam,' 'the
> man,' perhaps 'the first man' categorically speaking, I was thinking in
> another direction.
> Is there a 'generally agreed upon' (arrgghh, this word 'consensus')
> example of a/the 'first animal'?
> As the story goes, life from non-life, inorganic to organic, more and
> more 'complex' organisms, etc.
> Is there a moment when a 'first animal' appears in natural history and
> if so, what was the 'first animal', categorically speaking (via Linnaeus)?
> Gen 1: 20 indicates water creatures, then birds. But we can look to
> natural-scientists too. (e.g.
> Thanks to Murray for saying "modern conceptions of historiography don't
> apply." So, it is perhaps a simple or silly question, nonetheless, it is
> one that has now been asked.
> Warm regards (from plus 5 Spb),
> Gregory
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. *Go to
> Yahoo! Answers.* <>

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Oct 1 03:04:56 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 01 2009 - 03:04:56 EDT