|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Fossil Fish (named "Tiktaalik") Sheds Light on Transition | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5032 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
Yea, but look, I mean look at the head. I was meaning to tell our EVCer from Ocala Fla(BELFRY) that I once chanced onto a gator head perfectly picked apart while chasing tortises down there in South USA and ya know there are legless snakes, legless lizards, legless amphibians (caecilians)&so what is wrong with legless gators. I hope the evidence for ichythology is VERY strong and less icky because it L00ks to me like just a scarce reptile rather than a scar or scare for Gish.
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 04-06-2006 07:02 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Actually, Rox, the flood predicts that there will be no such transitions. They are only "sorted" into that order by some sort of accident. I guess our new find with it's wee little legs out ran the more fish like forms by a bit and a bit less than the ones with better legs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
From Nature News, Published online: 5 April 2006; | doi:10.1038/news060403-7 -- The fish that crawled out of the water (click)
Creatures with features of both fish and land-living animals have been found before. Fish that may have been beginning to 'walk' in shallow water have been found from about 385 million years ago, and fish with limbs that bear digits have been seen from more than 365 million years ago. Specimens that fall into the gap, such as Tiktaalik, help researchers to work out the details of this transition. The newly found animal has a structure on its head that looks like a small gill slit that is on its way to becoming an ear, for example, and a long snout that would have been suited to catching prey on land. This is a specimen in the middle of a transition, and it fits both the time and the place for such a specimen: (ibid)Daeschler and Shubin set off to find this missing link in the evolutionary chain back in 1999. The pair targeted Ellesmere Island after noticing that it was listed in an undergraduate textbook as exposed Devonian rock that had not previously been explored for vertebrate fossils. The desolate area was reachable only by plane, and the weather was so bad that field work could only be done for about two months each summer. The team first walked around the rocky outcrops looking for fossils of plant life that indicated stream or delta sediments, in order to target areas that had once hosted shallow waters. "That is where the action is on the fish-to-tetrapod transition," says Daeschler. Not just the rough spot but the specific habitat that fit the predicted model.
faith writes: ... consistent with geology and the Flood. Why is this consistent with the Flood? What possible flood scenario predicts (a) such a transition between whole kinds of species (not just reptile to mammal, but water to land), and (b) requires that they would be found in rocks dating to the Devonian period? (We'll side-step for now the issue of (c) how does any flood accomplish any "ordering of fossils found in most parts of the geological column" without making errors?) The real problem is that "the flood" does not in any way require either (a) or (b) to have happened, thus it would be more "consistent" with "the flood" if it had NOT happened. Enjoy. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
U can call me Cookie Member (Idle past 4953 days) Posts: 228 From: jo'burg, RSA Joined: |
Err... Seems Gish is behind the times.
Why doesn't he try Amphioxus on for size; or even a hagfish...not to mention a number of fossils.
Talkorigins: Invertebrate-Vertebrate transition "The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 988 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
Oh a model!!!! Finally.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: But still couldn't outrun grass. Poor little fishy. "Religion is the best business to be in. It's the only one where the customers blame themselves for product failure." -- Ellis Weiner (quoted on the NAiG message board)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Tiktaalik was the front page headline story in the NY Times yesterday.
While I was reading the story, one of my employer-physicians happened by and asked, "I know that's of great interest to people like you and me, but why is it a front page story?" It occurred to me that it was a front page story for general readership because of the strenuous efforts of creationists et al. to undermine the credibility of the ToE and to impose religious views in the classroom. Without their social and academic agenda, the story would have been saved for the Science section or buried on a back page: ironically, political attempts to attack the ToE have resulted in wider publicity for its triumphs. Mixing science and faith is hazardous to science but even more so to faith: the all-or-nothing literalist/creationist viewpoint can only be rocked again and again by such discoveries. Having great confidence in the ToE, and being aware that fossil finding is becoming increasingly predictive and fruitful, I've long been curious about what the creationist response will be to such slam-dunk fossil proofs. From what I've seen so far, it will range from complete denial to assertions that God made both kinds and kind-chimeras, a Dr. Frankenstein kind of deity... Anyway, here's to Tiktaalik--boyo, we hardly knew ye.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
{The material of the second quote box is interesting, but is VERY OFF-TOPIC. Perhaps Omni could find a nice intelligent design topic home for that information. - Adminnemooseus}
Heh. Don't worry, Brad, there are always newly-created gaps in which to take shelter--though I gather John Morris feels Tiktaalik is very fishy, indeed. From today's WSJ "Science Journal":
Fossils from 10 Tiktaaliks were embedded in rock deposited by a meandering stream system, suggesting where that momentous step occurred. But creationists, many of whose Web sites declare "there are no transitional forms," are not easily persuaded. John Morris of the Institute for Creation Research in Santee, Calif., says Tiktaalik "is just a variety of fish. There is still a huge gap [between fish and land-dwellers] that has to be filled." There will always be new gaps.
{The material of the second quote box is interesting, but is VERY OFF-TOPIC. Perhaps Omni could find a nice intelligent design topic home for that information. - Adminnemooseus} This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 04-07-2006 01:43 PM +/- bE: 'Sho nuff, Adminnemooseus--though the second portion seemed relevant to what is exposed by the light that Tikaalik sheds on evolutionary transitions, since it concerned a molecular transition and analogous denials. The WSJ reporter thought it relevant, and so did I. But I will defer and delete. This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 04-07-2006 03:00 PM This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 04-07-2006 03:02 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5032 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
Here's what the problem is. I will try to keep it on topic of an evolutionary transition and if the heady creature really fullfills the problem. Craik(THE NATURE OF EXPLANATION
Guide to the World's Philosophers - philosophers.co.uk p 20) says quote:. "Same point" refers to (p19-20) quote: Now as I saw it (the two gator heads (one in Ocala and the other pic in this thread)) there are two problems here, one is of course the design issue that Criak calls subconsiously to iron and the engine withing the issue of "unit" of evolution let us say, that is how the result for Gish or Morris may always be scarcely a scar and simply a scare for it might be argued till oops day that "transition" "consciousness" and "heirarchy" are subjetively incompatible, but the other one is where I think biologists themselves are not conscious enough about the logic of the particular transition supposed FROM fish-throughamphibians-to parental care more cold-bloods. Even granting an evolutionist Criak's point that one can cognize arbitarily (and this is what a cver might suspect (but would be out of topic here I guess) without the 'transitional'"'STAGE'", this works WHERE there is rigidity or substance appearin like impenetribility ("what we might designate as immutable"). This given platform starts with SOME MATERIALITY but must consciously show the "higher unit" (whatever it is that the fossil is supposed to connote as an EVOLUTIONARY CHANGE) arsies "from nothing" as to what existed through translation and space and form-making prior. What I was saying was ,that if the only new visual/substantive contribution that the gator-fish makes, is some kind of stunted arm bones,... then I propose that the "higher unit" is not consciously arrived at, but is instead assumed; based on simple adherence to the evolutionary notion of general change only:: The problem for fish to herp transition is, in HOW the bones themselves divide (moving from cartilage etc), so, just showing that there are divisions in the extra-vertebral bones WHILE the head appears (on it's side) like a gator but [/b]not[b] with as many divisions in THE SAME UNITS' appendiges, as the higher unit already posses("ed" for evos) AND given that these units also have kinds without said divisions at all(legless this and that)... it seems ONly to me that, anyone is using a general prescription to a lack of need for a transitional stage to be in place of the purported "contrarily" transition (when there was none to begin the debate with anyway in Criak's "sense") and THEN saying elliptically that, that by reason of having the cake and eating it too that this is what was the old problem of the fact of evolution and that it is NOW solved. I think that is rather soap I would need to wash my mouth out with than deft move in the c-e game no longer played through the glass but with all our marbles. I can be convinced otherwise if the icythyological evidence were a lot stronger than the simple part head outline I sketeched. My own attempts at looking in detail at the fish reproduction to amphibian life cycle tends to foucs on soft parts and I have not been overwhelmed by literature on bones only, so though I may be wrong here, I would have to work on a lot more biology in to get to that position. This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 04-08-2006 07:36 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
CACTUSJACKmankin Member (Idle past 6273 days) Posts: 48 Joined: |
quote: The unfortunate thing about being an "evolutionist" is I have the burden of having to prove something like that before I can say it. Tiktaalik is not at all an alligator. For one thing it's way too early, this animal pre-dates all reptiles. Tiktaalik had primitive limbs that didn't even have true fingers, as you can see in this image (tiktaalik is in the middle).
So, next time you make a silly and blatantly inaccurate statement like that at least have the decency to back it up with evidence. This message has been edited by CACTUSJACKmankin, 04-22-2006 01:22 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
He was joking. Chiroptera is no creationist.
The smiley didn't tip you off? Good post, though. We'll keep it bookmarked for when a real creationist tries the same argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Well, my profile does list me as living in Oklahoma, so CactusJack's assumptions are probably forgivable. Heh.
(PS, I would have thought my signature would be an even more blatant tip-off, though.) "Religion is the best business to be in. It's the only one where the customers blame themselves for product failure." -- Ellis Weiner (quoted on the NAiG message board)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
CACTUSJACKmankin Member (Idle past 6273 days) Posts: 48 Joined: |
Sorry, but (A) I'm new and don't know anybody (B) your profile says Oklahoma and (C) it is well silly enough for a creationist to have said it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
NosyNed has just proposed a new topic on Tiktaalik.
In the process of tracking this topic down, I discovered an old "Proposed New Topic" (PNT) that had never been acted upon:
Scientist takes on AiG's letter over Tiktaalik. There Harlequin posted:
Discovery put creationist on the defensive is a great take down of AiG's Mark Looy over Tiktaalik. It is a must read and great example of what can be done with a good letter to the editor. Going to close that PNT now. Adminnemooseus Added by edit: That other topic was "Links and Information", not a PNT. That topic reopened. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : See above.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
In this message:
Message 44 NJ says:
Yes, I was aware of the argument when it was discovered. Naturally, I remain unconvinced. And this is due in part that it is incomplete. We know nothing of the hindquarters, yet we're told that its essentially a missing link. in regards to Tiktaalik. I'd like to know what NJ's reasoning is for the above comment.I'd like NJ to explain why the missing hind part is important in particular. Just for reference:Tiktaalik - Wikipedia |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024