-
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!
Evolution, maybe someone can explain?
- Thread starter YoursTrue
- Start date
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
You should read this article: Code hidden in Stone Age art may be the root of human writing
leroy
Well-Known Member
Good now try to answer my question
leroy
Well-Known Member
Tuna is also in the yellow line......eye-view-tree-of-life/what-is-a-fish/[/QUOTE]
Can you quote anything in that source that contradicts anything that I have said ? No
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
There is nothing to answer.
They expected to find a specific fossil in a specific strata.
They went looking and found the specific fossil in the specific strata.
They knew about fish from 400 million years ago and they knew about tetrapods from 360 million years ago. So they looked for a transitional between those two. And found it.
Not sure what you find so complicated about this.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
leroy
Well-Known Member
Strawman. I can support *my* claims not your straw man versions of my claims
Please ether agree or refute my actual claim
And you have been refuted..... The fact that you are recurring to straw man fallacies suggest that I had success in my refutations
Ok by what objective criteria are whales not fish? Why can't the be both mammals and fish in the same way trex is both a dinosaur and a reptile....... Please share your objective criteria
Bye for now . . . for the millionth time
Well. ah . . . it is not a matter of agreement. It is the intentional ignorance of science based on an ancient religious agenda that people reject the sciences of evolution.
You can't be serious....
leroy
Well-Known Member
Then don't answer anything.... Why did you address a point that I didn't make?
No disagreementThey expected to find a specific fossil in a specific strata.
They went looking and found the specific fossil in the specific strata.
The issue is that currently we know about tetrapods that predate tiktaalik...... This means that tetrapods didn't evolved from that tiktaalik nor any of his contemporaries
That shows a lack of understanding of how evolution works..... Even if the transition took place during that period that doesn't mean that there couldn't be intermediates in other layers or even living today .
For example we could find tiktaalik or any other fishapod in the Jurassic
In other words based on the theory of evolution it is possible to find fishapods like tiktaalik in the late denovian . But evolution doesn't predict that these fossils are expected to be found in the late denovian and only in the late denovian
In science there is no disagreement as to when writing began in the different cultures of the world independently evolving from forms of proto-writing. The archeology evidence is specific and well documented,
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Just claiming it does not make it so.
By the fact that whales are mammals.
Mammals are tetrapods. Tetrapods aren't fish.
Dinosaurs are reptiles and trex is a dinosaur.
Whales and other sea mammals are air breathing genetically descended from land mammals and a very different clade than fish.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Out of interest, name the tetrapod species that predates tiktaalik that you are talking about.
Secondly, nobody said that all tetrapods evolved from tiktaalik. Nobody even said tiktaalik would have been the only one such species nor if there would be even older, or younger, species exhibiting the same kind of features.
Tiktaalik represents a transitional between fish and tetrapods.
That's what they were looking for: a transitional fossil aged between 400 million and 360 million years old.
Tiktaalik is 380-375 million years old. Found in the predicted strata with the predicted features.
This is the simple point: they KNEW about only fish +400 million years ago. They KNEW about tetrapods -360 million years ago.
So logically, there would be transitionals between both within that 40 million year interval.
It's not rocket science.
Right, right.... the paleontologists that predicted the anatomical features of this species as well as the strata it would be found in and then subsequently found it, are showing a "lack of understanding of how evolution works" by accurately predicting fossil finds.
Uhu.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Uh-oh.... you used the word "clade" in the same sentence as "fish".
Get ready for a ginormous @leroy rant.
Well, ah , , , responses from @leroy are not meaningful, and fraught with intentional ignorance as to what is a clade.
Clarification: Yes it was a bit of generalization that fish represent a clade, and actually represent more than one clade, but that is open to further discussion, Sea mammals do represent more than one clade, but nonetheless they are air breathing mammals descended from land animals.
He believes the human clade descended from Adam and Eve.
Last edited:
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
I'm not even sure what he believes. I suspect his ambiguity is very deliberate