Page 1 of 2
Observed Evolution!
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:40 am
by Minimalist
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,227572,00.html
TOKYO — Japanese researchers said Sunday that a bottlenose dolphin captured last month has an extra set of fins that could be the remains of back legs, a discovery that may provide further evidence that ocean-dwelling mammals once lived on land.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:40 pm
by Guest
why would a mutation or a defect automatically be subscribed to evolution? all they have is a extra set of fins, they observed nothing. there was no process to observe all they have is butkus and are trying to turn it into something.
talk about grasping at straws. this isn't proof. these faity tales are the reason i avoid all evolutionary threads now.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:10 pm
by Minimalist
Because people who know what they are talking about, said so.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:51 pm
by Guest
all it is is a birth defect nothing more than that. they happen all the time it is not news. plus one dolphin a case for evolution does not make.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:02 pm
by Cognito
Fossil remains show dolphins and whales were four-footed land animals about 50 million years ago and share the same common ancestor as hippos and deer. Scientists believe they later transitioned to an aquatic lifestyle and their hind limbs disappeared.
Though odd-shaped protrusions have been found near the tails of dolphins and whales captured in the past, researchers say this was the first time one had been found with well-developed, symmetrical fins, Hayashi said.
"I believe the fins may be remains from the time when dolphins' ancient ancestors lived on land ... this is an unprecedented discovery," Seiji Osumi, an adviser at Tokyo's Institute of Cetacean Research, said at a news conference televised Sunday.
Min, obviously Seiji Osumi doesn't know what he is talking about since the expert Archbishop Ussher proclaimed that Sunday, October 23, 4004 bce, was the beginning of the world. The bible backs it up so it cannot be any type of fairy tale, right?
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:37 pm
by Minimalist
Don't insult Bishop Ussher. Arch has pin-ups of him on his wall.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 4:36 pm
by Guest
Though odd-shaped protrusions have been found near the tails of dolphins and whales captured in the past, researchers say this was the first time one had been found with well-developed, symmetrical fins, Hayashi said.
so birth defects happened in the past as well, it is not new or news. what is interesting is that educated men would extrapolate such natural happenings to a theory that can't be proven.
Don't insult Bishop Ussher. Arch has pin-ups of him on his wall
insult him all you want, i only have his book which was not that good anyways. i do not subscribe to the ussher school of thought as he is off by about 2-4,000 years.
Ussher
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:28 pm
by Cognito
insult him all you want, i only have his book which was not that good anyways. i do not subscribe to the ussher school of thought as he is off by about 2-4,000 years.
You're serious ... aren't you. To state that the world was created 6-8,000 years ago is ludicrous.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:40 pm
by Minimalist
Can't make progress on every front, Cogs.
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:32 am
by War Arrow
I was going to say something here but I've decided against it.
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:51 am
by Digit
Birth defect, mutation? When does the one become the other?
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:23 pm
by Frank Harrist
I'm no geneticist, but aren't birth defects caused by recessive genes? Aren't recessive genes remnants of previous forms of the animal in question? Hmmmmmmmm?
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:28 pm
by Minimalist
I'm not at all sure about the first question, birth defects can come from a variety of reasons but I believe the second question is true.
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:52 pm
by Digit
A birth defect would not be transferable to any offspring, a mutation could be. But as the animal is apparently deceased, short of a DNA analysis we'll never know, making this discussion rather pointless don't you think?
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 1:31 pm
by Minimalist
I didn't get that out of the story, digit.
The dolphin measures 8.92 feet and is about five years old, according to the museum.
Present tense and earlier they used the phrase "captured" not "killed."
Interesting point, though.