Butterflies, lobsters, and spiders are surviving relatives of a species called Yawunik Kootenayi – a marine organism with two-paired-eyes and grasping appendages that existed 508 million years back, even 250 million years prior to when the dinosaurs surfaced.


Where Was The Fossils Found?

An international group of esteemed palaeontologists based at the prestigious University of Toronto and at Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto and Pomona College, California identified this unprecedented fossil. The fossil was an element of the esteemed and renowned fossil deposit called Canadian Burgess Shale deposits. This newly found initial species on earth’s crust was found in the Marble Canyon website.

Yawunik had extended frontal appendages – ones that resembled antennae of shrimps or beetles. These appendages composed of lengthy claws; two of these were placed opposite to one another and had rows of teeth that would help any animal catch hold of the prey.


Features Of The Creature

The creature had distinct predatory and anatomy habits, akin to the initial arthropods – the family of lobsters and spiders. Cedric Aria, the lead author of this exquisite study and a Ph.D candidate mentioned that the creature had certain attributes of arthropods, with external skeleton, joined appendages and segmented physiques. There were certain typical traits that are observable even in the modern day arthropods.

This study reveals that Yawunik used to move its set of frontal appendages forward and back. It also possessed whip-like flagella which extended from the very tip of their claws, thus making the appendages versatile and a bit complicated. Unlike crustaceans or insects, this creature never possessed any appendage on the head region.

The site (Marble Canyon) wherein this fossil has been found is approximately 40 kilometres south of Burgess Shale area in British Columbia’s Yoho National Park. Researchers said that abundant number of Yawunik species fossils is available in Marble Canyon and would play a pivotal role in its study.

9 Responses

  1. lucky gmail

    Doesn’t look a day older than 506 million years to me but, then again, my eyes aren’t what they used to be back then.

  2. calgarycowboy

    508 you sure it wasn’t 507 what a farce an people believe this shit

  3. Mike

    the fossil was found on a website? This newly found initial species on earth’s crust was found in the Marble Canyon website.

  4. In_Miami

    How can this be true? the Christian church puts the earth at 6000 years old!

    • Dr. Allah

      and….6.1 billion years according to numerical values in Quran…point?

      • In_Miami

        Point is…I am an Atheist and religious people are retarded!
        Their denial in light of proof while clinging to beliefs in absence of proof!

      • propwash

        Point is – you’re quite hateful. What are you afraid of? Feared that when you meet your end, it won’t really be the end? That someone, in fact, WILL be standing at some fabled “golden gate” asking you to account for the life you were put in charge of? Yes, there are a ton of discrepancies between science and religious teachings. Only a few Christians still cling to the 6,000 year age theory. Most of us acknowledge that a simple look at rock strata in any zone featuring uplifting of that feature will tell us that our planet has been here many many millions of years. No need to respond, I’ll assume your answer to my comment will be full of the same vitriol with which you approach everything that you don’t understand or isn’t in agreement with your narrow views.

      • In_Miami

        And yet you give NO evidence that this deity exists, just common gibberish and insults… I welcome death, it is a fact of life…Furthermore, if this judgment does exist, I would face it like any exam I studied hard for, I probably will score higher than the one judging me. I make it a point to do something daily that positively effects the world!
        I do this not to escape eternal torture but because it is the right thing to do!

      • Dr. Obvious

        I think his “point” was that we should rely on science and evidence, not on nonsense from some book with many factual errors. 6k is wrong. and 6.1b is wrong too. If you are suggesting the Q is a scientifically valid source, you’re crazy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

I accept the Privacy Policy

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.