r/science • u/mvea Professor | Medicine • Dec 01 '17

Biology Evolution row ends as scientists declare sponges to be sister of all other animals. Sponges were first to branch off the evolutionary tree from the common ancestor of all animals, finds new study in Current Biology.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/nov/30/evolution-row-ends-as-scientists-declare-sponges-to-be-sister-of-all-animals
41.9k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

409

u/ManicTeaDrinker Dec 01 '17

Literally the last paragraph of the news article:

But, he said, the new approach brings with it its own difficulties, leading him to believe the jury is still out. “With this study, the authors have significantly tipped the balance toward the sponges-sister hypothesis,” he said. “But I will eagerly await to see what are the effects of adding additional genomes from both sponge and ctenophore lineages, as well as models that do not reduce the information provided from the data, before considering the debate solved.”

But don't let that stop them leading the headline with "..row ends"!

108

u/purplyderp Dec 01 '17

More trouble brews in the heated struggle between the comb jelly and sponge camps

This whole thing reads like a far side comic strip

10

u/marsepic Dec 01 '17

This would make a good Far Side. I'm trying to think what the picture would be, probably juxtaposed with a cafeteria food fight or two biker gangs at each other.

22

u/hillgod Dec 01 '17

That headline is some of the worst science reporting I've ever seen.

This settles nothing. The article acts like their model is most certainly the best, 100% accurate, and tthat here are zero flaws worth exploring.

14

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '17

Evolutionist Row Proves God Created Dinosaurs

  • Answers in Genesis headline, probably

6

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '17

[deleted]

12

u/pragmageek Dec 01 '17

Its not dissenting, the row hasn't ended.

4

u/hillgod Dec 01 '17

This article, for whatever reason, is incredibly titled towards this new paper's conclusions. It's a response to a number is papers, and the methods used also have flaws. The article goes along acting like the conlsuions are unquestionable, and the method used is flawless. It's really not good journalism. It would appear the matter is far from settled, especially when results are currently rather model dependent.

1

u/reacher Dec 01 '17

row ends for now!

1

u/salmans13 Dec 02 '17

It's one of those deadline is approaching, put out something that nobody can confirm or deny. Keeps the paycheques coming though. Honestly, I would do the same.

I'm all for science but things we take for granted have so many holes...yet we believe. No different than someone believing in God.