Sorry guys, we only need one pregnant marsupial to be accidentally washed up on driftwood. Marsupials being 'kinds' of course, would rapidly evolve into all the existant and extinct species we now find there.
Australia was once connected to Asia! Land bridges could have helped migration if water levels were lower in the past. Some animals have migrated to other countries using rafts and floating islands. "In times of flood, large masses of earth and entwining vegetation, including trees, may be torn loose from the banks of rivers and swept out to sea. Sometimes such masses are encountered floating in the ocean out of sight of land, still lush and green, with palms, twenty to thirty feet tall. It is entirely probable that land animals may be transported long distances in this manner. Mayr records that many tropical ocean currents have a speed of at least two knots; this would amount to fifty miles a day, 1000 miles in three weeks." - Paul Moody, University of Vermont. "It seems certain that land animals do at times cross considerable bodies of water where land connections are utterly lacking. Floating masses of vegetation, such as are sometimes found off the mouths of the Amazon, may be one means of effecting this type of migration. Even the case of the entry of the hystricoids [porcupine-like rodents] into South America may be a case of this sort, and one successful crossing might populate a continent." - Alfred Romer, Harvard University.
Lack of fossils documenting the migration of marsupials doesnt mean it didnt happen. Many animals are not documented in the fossil record because the "fossil record is incomplete". Did you know that millions of buffalos roamed the western praires and barely left a shred of fossil evidence that they existed? Did you know that the Indian Ocean tsunami destroyed the lives of 250 thousand people in 17 countries and barely any animals were killed? Evolution actually demands that marsupials lived in other parts of the world. "The marsupials spread over the world, in all directions. They could not go far to the north before striking impossible climate, but the path south was open all the way to the tips of Africa and South America and through Australia. The placental mammals proved to be superior to the marsupials in the struggle for existence and drove the marsupials out, that is, forced them southward. Australia was then connected by land with Asia, so that it could receive the fugitives. Behind them the true mammals were coming; but before the latter reached Australia, that continent was separated from Asia, and the primitive types to the south were protected from further competition." - A. Franklin Shull, Professor of Zoology, University of Michigan.
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.
And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12
Yes. It was. This fact fits in nicely with real biogeography, but it's no help to you.
If you wish to suggest that the Australian fauna crossed a land bridge from Asia to Australia after the flood, then you have to explain (a) why no placental mammals went with them (b) why all the Australian fauna ended up in Australia, not even leaving any bones behind them.
Some animals have migrated to other countries using rafts and floating islands.
Same objection applies.
Lack of fossils documenting the migration of marsupials doesnt mean it didnt happen.
It is kinda suggestive, though, don't you think?
Evolution actually demands that marsupials lived in other parts of the world.
Marsupials, yes. The modern and specifically Australian fauna, no.
Many animals are not documented in the fossil record ...
Yes, but those are small soft-bodied phyla. Can you point out to us one single mammalian family with no representatives in the fossil record?
Did you know that millions of buffalos roamed the western praires and barely left a shred of fossil evidence that they existed?
I do not "know" that because it isn't true.
Did you know that the Indian Ocean tsunami destroyed the lives of 250 million people in 17 countries and barely any animals were killed?
I very much doubt that, but if you think about it, even if it was true it would have no relevance unless you were adducing it as evidence that all mammals are immortal.
Portillo buddy, that is the evidence that proves you wrong.
1) It is not a wallaby.
2) It dates back to when there was a land connection between Australia and Asia - 125 million years ago. That is before humanity even existed.
3) The first actual kangaroo fossils known are still 25 million years old; again, older than humanity. This demonstrates that Macropods were evolving in Australia way before any humans arrived. Even if we only take the dating as relative, this still falsifies your little fable.
We begin at 150 million years ago, when the Seychelles were still buried within the Gondwana supercontinent. Note that present-day coastlines are outlined in purple, while green areas represent land either above or below sea level. As Gondwana breaks up, watch for the birth of the Mascarene Platform, on which the Seychelles lie, about 65 million years ago. Observe India as it collides with Asia, leaving behind the so-called 90 East Ridge. Represented by the green line appearing to jut out of eastern India, the 90 East Ridge is a submerged mountain range that arose along a hotspot trail (much as the Hawaiian islands did). The animation continues 50 million years into the future, with the African Rift Valley opening up widely and India migrating well into Asia. Please note that these future projections are purely speculative and merely represent how tectonic-plate movements are currently trending.
At the start of the animation you have S.America, Africa, India, Antarctica and Australia all grouped together -- and Asia is at the upper right, not part of the group.
After they separate you see India collide with Asia.
At the end of the animation you have Australia moving towards Indonesia, but not colliding with it.
In between Asia and Australia is the Wallace Line:
quote:The Wallace Line (or Wallace's Line) separates the ecozones of Asia and Wallacea, a transitional zone between Asia and Australia. West of the line are found organisms related to Asiatic species; to the east, a mixture of species of Asian and Australian origin is present. The line is named after Alfred Russel Wallace, who noticed this clear division during his travels through the East Indies in the 19th century. The line runs through Indonesia, between Borneo and Sulawesi (Celebes), and through the Lombok Strait between Bali and Lombok. Antonio Pigafetta had also recorded the biological contrasts between the Philippines and the Maluku Islands (Spice Islands) (on opposite sides of the line) in 1521 during the continuation of the voyage of Ferdinand Magellan, after Magellan had been killed on Mactan.
The distance between Bali and Lombok is small, about 35 kilometers. The distributions of many bird species observe the line, since many birds do not cross even the smallest stretches of open ocean water. Some bats have distributions that cross the line, but other mammals are generally limited to one side or the other; an exception is the Crab-eating Macaque. Other groups of plants and animals show differing patterns, but the overall pattern is striking and reasonably consistent.
quote:Today Alfred Russel Wallace (left) is a prisoner of scientific parentheses, as in, "the theory of evolution by natural selection proposed by Charles Darwin (and also by Alfred Russel Wallace)." Yet Wallace was a great naturalist in his own right, particularly in the way he used evolutionary theory to interpret the natural world. In one of his most important applications, he helped found the modern science of biogeography — the study of how species are scattered across the planet, and how they got that way.
Patterns of species' ranges Wallace had already accepted evolution when he began his travels in 1848 through the Amazon and Southeast Asia. On his journeys, he sought to demonstrate that evolution did indeed take place, by showing how geography affected the ranges of species. He studied hundreds of thousands of animals and plants, carefully noting exactly where he had found them. The patterns he found were compelling evidence for evolution. He was struck, for example, by how rivers and mountain ranges marked the boundaries of many species' ranges. The conventional explanation that species had been created with adaptations to their particular climate made no sense since he could find similar climatic regions with very different animals in them.
Wallace came to much the same conclusion that Darwin published in the Origin of Species: biogeography was simply a record of inheritance. As species colonized new habitats and their old ranges were divided by mountain ranges or other barriers, they took on the distributions they have today.
This map from Wallace's 1876 book shows his Oriental biogeographic region, broken into four subregions (outlined in red).
Wallace had noted that reproductive isolation resulted in increased diversity of life -- not just evolution but speciation.
The bottom red line surrounding "Indo-Malayan" and dividing it from the islands leading to Australia is Wallace's line.
There was no land bridge between Asia and Australia.