shmogie
Well-Known Member
Yep, what I expected. Most evolutionists now days, unless they are believers, run from the event that started the whole ball rolling. thank you for your response, I do understand.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ask me anything about the science of Evolution :)
- Thread starter sayak83
- Start date
shmogie
Well-Known Member
I doubt it, I stay pretty abreast of the issue.
You thought wrong. I have already done an extensive thread on the subject. Feel free to comment there.
Science of Abiogenesis:- By popular demand
shmogie
Well-Known Member
No, not at all.
See the details in this informative paper below, with actual fossil evidence.
Ask me anything about the science of Evolution :)
There are lots of fossils now showing all the stages of progressive adaptation of the whale line from land to water.
Yes all of them are mammals, obviously.
Yes there is a gradual increase in size.
Here is brief description from scientific sites
4)The earliest known archaeocetes were creatures like the 53-million-year-old Pakicetus and the slightly older Himalayacetus. They looked as if they would have been more at home on land than in the water, and they probably got around lakes and rivers by doing the doggie paddle. A million years later lived Ambulocetus, an early whale with a crocodile-like skull and large webbed feet. The long-snouted and otter-like remingtonocetids appeared next, including small forms like the 46-million-year-old Kutchicetus. These early whales lived throughout near-shore environments, from saltwater marshes to the shallow sea.
Pakicetus and Icthyolestes. Earliest archaeocetae (archaic whale ancestors)
3)Ambulocetus.
Unlike pakicetids, ambulocetids show obvious bodily adaptations to an aquatic lifestyle, such as reduced limbs and very large feet suitable for paddling. Their hindlimbs, also strong enough to support their weight on land, and possibly acting together with a dorsoventral undulation of the spine, probably were their main organ of propulsion in the water. A tail fluke had not yet evolved. Because hind-foot paddling is not a particularly effective way of swimming, it is unlikely that the carnivorous ambulocetids actually chased their prey. Rather, they probably ambushed it from the water, in a way strangely similar to crocodiles.
2)Protocetids (Proto whales) the oldest group to include the first fully marine cetaceans, lived about 39-47 million years ago. They were also the first cetaceans that finally left India and, indeed, the ancient Tethys Sea, and specimens of various protocetid genera have been found in both Africa and North America. As may be expected, protocetids from the Indian subcontinent include the oldest members of the family and comprise the genera Indocetus, Rodhocetus, Babiacetus, Takracetus, Makaracetus and Artiocetus. Protocetus, Eocetus and Pappocetus occur in Africa, whereas Georgiacetus, Eocetusand Nachitochia are found in North America.
Rhodocetus
Maiacetus (mother whale) is a fossil of this type. The fossil is found with a fetus inside her. It was an aquatic whale ancestor, that came up to land to give birth.
Maiacetus fossil (male)
Female with baby.
1) Dorudontidae were the first lineage to fully leave the land and give birth in Ocean as well.
Dorudontids are closely related to both basilosaurids and the two families of extant cetaceans, mysticeti and odontoceti, and indeed probably gave rise to both. They were considerably smaller than basilosaurids and, rather than having a greatly elongated body shape, had proportions resembling that of modern cetaceans. Similar to basilosaurids, their pelvis no longer attached to the vertebral column and their hind limbs tiny, and could thus no longer support their body weight on land. A distinct ball-shaped vertebra in their tail indicates that they possessed a tail fluke and their mode of locomotion is likely to have been similar to that of modern whales. They are found in 35-38 million year old fully marine deposits all over the world, indicating both a wide distribution and complete
Thus one sees the gradual transition of a land living mammal lineage to fully aquatic whales in a space of about 20 years (53-33 million years ago)
The title of this thread is:
Ask me anything about the science of Evolution
The book of Genesis lays out the process of “evolution” which makes it relevant to your discussion. Having said that, I agree this revelation will only distract from your intended purpose for this thread. I will not refer to “Genesis” again.
Ask me anything about the science of Evolution
The book of Genesis lays out the process of “evolution” which makes it relevant to your discussion. Having said that, I agree this revelation will only distract from your intended purpose for this thread. I will not refer to “Genesis” again.
Science concerns itself only with knowledge gained from observing nature. Thus science of evolution only includes knowledge of evolution as gained from the natural world only. Other sources are not the concern of science, whether they are valid or not.The title of this thread is:
Ask me anything about the science of Evolution
The book of Genesis lays out the process of “evolution” which makes it relevant to your discussion. Having said that, I agree this revelation will only distract from your intended purpose for this thread. I will not refer to “Genesis” again.
How did we evolve into what we are today?
Please do not us the above as your evidence.
Thanks in advance
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Please refresh my understanding of the evolution of the human race.
How did we evolve into what we are today?
This is an extremely vague question and only merits a very vague answer. Perhaps you might want to try to get a bit more specific in your question. And yes, an artistic drawing is not evidence. It is also misleading since the process of evolution results in a "bush" that has more and more branches. That illustration makes it look like evolution is a linear process. And that is clearly not the case.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
20 years ? I must assume that was a mistake. !! The reason these mammals can be determined to not have been contemporary with one another is the time element, correct ? That is, pre existing forms being replaced by later forms in time/ in the fossil record.See the details in this informative paper below, with actual fossil evidence.
Ask me anything about the science of Evolution :)
There are lots of fossils now showing all the stages of progressive adaptation of the whale line from land to water.
Yes all of them are mammals, obviously.
Yes there is a gradual increase in size.
Here is brief description from scientific sites
4)The earliest known archaeocetes were creatures like the 53-million-year-old Pakicetus and the slightly older Himalayacetus. They looked as if they would have been more at home on land than in the water, and they probably got around lakes and rivers by doing the doggie paddle. A million years later lived Ambulocetus, an early whale with a crocodile-like skull and large webbed feet. The long-snouted and otter-like remingtonocetids appeared next, including small forms like the 46-million-year-old Kutchicetus. These early whales lived throughout near-shore environments, from saltwater marshes to the shallow sea.
Pakicetus and Icthyolestes. Earliest archaeocetae (archaic whale ancestors)
3)Ambulocetus.
Unlike pakicetids, ambulocetids show obvious bodily adaptations to an aquatic lifestyle, such as reduced limbs and very large feet suitable for paddling. Their hindlimbs, also strong enough to support their weight on land, and possibly acting together with a dorsoventral undulation of the spine, probably were their main organ of propulsion in the water. A tail fluke had not yet evolved. Because hind-foot paddling is not a particularly effective way of swimming, it is unlikely that the carnivorous ambulocetids actually chased their prey. Rather, they probably ambushed it from the water, in a way strangely similar to crocodiles.
2)Protocetids (Proto whales) the oldest group to include the first fully marine cetaceans, lived about 39-47 million years ago. They were also the first cetaceans that finally left India and, indeed, the ancient Tethys Sea, and specimens of various protocetid genera have been found in both Africa and North America. As may be expected, protocetids from the Indian subcontinent include the oldest members of the family and comprise the genera Indocetus, Rodhocetus, Babiacetus, Takracetus, Makaracetus and Artiocetus. Protocetus, Eocetus and Pappocetus occur in Africa, whereas Georgiacetus, Eocetusand Nachitochia are found in North America.
Rhodocetus
Maiacetus (mother whale) is a fossil of this type. The fossil is found with a fetus inside her. It was an aquatic whale ancestor, that came up to land to give birth.
Maiacetus fossil (male)
Female with baby.
1) Dorudontidae were the first lineage to fully leave the land and give birth in Ocean as well.
Dorudontids are closely related to both basilosaurids and the two families of extant cetaceans, mysticeti and odontoceti, and indeed probably gave rise to both. They were considerably smaller than basilosaurids and, rather than having a greatly elongated body shape, had proportions resembling that of modern cetaceans. Similar to basilosaurids, their pelvis no longer attached to the vertebral column and their hind limbs tiny, and could thus no longer support their body weight on land. A distinct ball-shaped vertebra in their tail indicates that they possessed a tail fluke and their mode of locomotion is likely to have been similar to that of modern whales. They are found in 35-38 million year old fully marine deposits all over the world, indicating both a wide distribution and complete
independece from freshwater.
Thus one sees the gradual transition of a land living mammal lineage to fully aquatic whales in a space of about 20 years (53-33 million years ago)
Could you please give me a brief synopsis of how the time alluded to is determined ? How is it known that A existed, and ceased to exist, about the time B came along ?
An animal that had the ability to come out of water on to land for whatever purpose, evolved skeletal characteristics that prevented this. How do evolutionists explain this within the framework of adapting to the environment ? Why could this occur, to what advantage ? Thanks !
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Different layers of sedimentary rocks can be dated. Each layer has its own assemblage of fossils. Some of those will be index fossils, fossils that are widespread and in existence over a limited amount of time. In places those fossils can be dated due to a layer of volcanic materials in a strata. Over time a catalog of a range in dates of various index fossils have been made. As a result we can date a stratum by the fossils that are found within it now.
Some microfossils have very specific dates allowing for accurate dating of layers that have these fossils in them.
This article may help:
https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/dinosaur-bone-age1.htm
Even though sedimentary layers cannot usually be directly dated with radiometric dating, thanks to the fossils in them we can indirectly date those layers.
Please read the posts I made in the thread below. Feel free to ask questions.Please refresh my understanding of the evolution of the human race.
How did we evolve into what we are today?
The Science of Human Evolution
Sorry 20 million years.
How we date rocks.
Evidence for an ancient earth
Evidence for an ancient earth
Rock strata and fossils sandwiched between two well dated layers of rocks are considered to be of time between the upper and lower dates. This is layer 1 has age of 40 million and layer 3 is of age 44 million then the layer 2 sandwiched between them is estimated to be around 42+-2 million years.
I do not know what constraints you were alluding to that sea creatures had to prevent them to come to land. Please provide more information and the associated source.
Sapiens
Polymathematician
What is your current understanding?Please refresh my understanding of the evolution of the human race.
How did we evolve into what we are today?
shmogie
Well-Known Member
If they evolved skeletal structure that no longer would bear their weight on land, to what purpose ?
They lived on water, a skeletal structure that will well adapted to water can't be well adapted to land as well. Physics and Mechanics constraints.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
Missing the forest for the trees.
"Your honour, one fact cannot demonstrate that I am guilty!"
"But the prosecution has presented hundreds of facts!"
"Exactly! And each of those hundreds of facts individually is ONE fact! Therefore, they are insufficient."
Looncall
Well-Known Member
I suggest that you beware of the word "purpose". Evolution has no purpose: changes happen (mutations), some persist, some don't. If a configuration can reproduce, it may persist, or maybe not if it is unlucky. History is full of contingency.
Audie
Veteran Member
Pretty simple. Imagine you wish to build a submarine, with the typical characteristics of a modern navy craft. But it also needs to be able to
climb out of the water, and travel on the highway.
Do you suppose the "climb out of water" design features would compromise
its efficiency at sea?
Would it be fully competitive with subs dedicated entirely to work on the high seas?
Does a whale or sub actually need to climb the beach?
If it did would that place some sort of size limitations on the sub or whale?