Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are there any unexplained branches of evolution?
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 764 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 4 of 35 (107287)
05-10-2004 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Gary
05-10-2004 10:56 PM


The origins of bats are very poorly documented by fossils, as I understand it. That shouldn't be too surprising if the ancestors were small, light-boned forest dwellers. There are bunches of invertebrates with almost no fossil record, too, but I'm trying to figure out where I read about examples. (The memory is the second thing to go.....)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Gary, posted 05-10-2004 10:56 PM Gary has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 764 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 25 of 35 (107430)
05-11-2004 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by almeyda
05-10-2004 11:56 PM


Re: ...
I recall reading that there was only found a few bone fragments and pieces here and there but was bloated in a transition of whales etc. The legs and arms were pure imagination if i recall..
A Google on "whale" with each of the names "Thewissen" and "Gingerich" will correct your recollection. Both Pakicetus and Ambulocetus are at least 50% complete, with pelvisis, legs, skulls, etc. Not "pieces here and there." Heck, National Geographic had an issue a few years back that showed a bunch of the fossils.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by almeyda, posted 05-10-2004 11:56 PM almeyda has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024