Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intermediates
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 10 of 52 (540849)
12-29-2009 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by AndrewPD
12-29-2009 9:25 AM


AndrewPD writes:
I can't read to much into deformed and reconstructed skulls personally.
If you are looking at a modern Chimp skull and a modern Human skull, which one would you say is deformed?
Have you actually studied any skulls?
What basis do you use to judge whether skulls are normal or deformed or if fragmentary skulls have been incorrectly reconstructed?
AndrewPD writes:
If a species goes extinct like the dodo it doesn't tend to leave ancestors.
Their ancestors lived before they did. An individual organism that reproduces leaves descendants. Your parents are your ancestors, your children are your descendants.
Species all have ancestral species, but they may or may not have descendant species, depending on whether or not a sub-population became reproductively isolated long enough to become a new species.
The TOE is completely compatible with an ancestral species and a descendant species continuing to ext at the same time.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
You can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by AndrewPD, posted 12-29-2009 9:25 AM AndrewPD has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 21 of 52 (541014)
12-30-2009 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Dr Adequate
12-30-2009 9:25 AM


Dr A writes:
They don't have to be aesthetically pleasing to me, just sexually attractive to each other.
But Dr A, you should know by now that God created them all to please us!
This is the first time I have ever heard the Aesthetically Pleasing Argument as a reason to reject evolution.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
You can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-30-2009 9:25 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 34 of 52 (541110)
12-31-2009 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by AndrewPD
12-31-2009 11:04 AM


AndrewPD writes:
A mollusc doesn't need a humans eye and the eye of a cat will never develop into a humans eye.
What an organism needs does not affect how the species evolves. Evolution can only work with what is already there, through slight modifications (mutations) of structural or developmental genes and subsequent selective pressures.
Molluscs are an interesting group. There are many different types of eyes within Phylum Mollusca ranging all the way from no light sensitive organs, to the simple eyes of Snails and Slugs, the the complex eyes of Squids and Octopuses (has a pupil, lens, and retina, similar to vertebrate eyes).
No one is suggesting that cat eyes would develop into human eyes, but in the future cat descendent's eyes may be different due to new mutations that may spread through a population.
AndrewPD writes:
But to get from a simpler eye to the human eye you would surely need numerous beneficial mutations and at no stage from simpler eye to extremely complex eye could the mutation create a disadvantage.
It is true that there have been numerous beneficial mutations between simpler ancestral eyes and modern human eyes.
Interestingly, we know that mutations that cause a disadvantage do not necessarily interrupt the development of a more complex eye. Only if the disadvantage keeps the organism from surviving and reproducing will those mutations be removed from the gene pool. In the human population, for example, there are numerous mutations that cause impaired vision and that are passed on to offspring. It is even possible that disadvantageous mutations may confer an advantage to descendants in the future in a different environment.
AndrewPD writes:
If you see a professional Tom Cruise look-alike you don't assume he's directly related to Tom just someone randomly with a striking resemblance.
But we would know that he is the same species as Tom, and we could even surmise (if his resemblance is natural) that some of the genes controlling development of features are similar to Tom's.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
You can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by AndrewPD, posted 12-31-2009 11:04 AM AndrewPD has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024