Author
|
Topic: Evidence of species alive today?
|
Speel-yi
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 16 of 23 (57432)
09-24-2003 4:42 AM
|
Reply to: Message 15 by Quetzal 09-20-2003 6:52 AM
|
|
quote: Yeah, like how come you never find grass and dinosaurs? It's not like the Flood is going to sort plants, after all. Why don't we find them together?
Grass is an Angiosperm, a flowering seed bearing plant. Before the sudden end of the Tertiary, most plants were not seed bearing and there were few niches for the Angiosperms. When the Earth was plunged into the long winter and then came out of it at the beginning of the Quaternary, the seeds were able to survive and then flourish in the empty niches left behind. Relatively few non-seeded plants remained. The dinosaurs did not disappear either BTW.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 15 by Quetzal, posted 09-20-2003 6:52 AM | | Quetzal has not replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 17 by mark24, posted 09-24-2003 6:19 AM | | Speel-yi has replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5223 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
Message 17 of 23 (57442)
09-24-2003 6:19 AM
|
Reply to: Message 16 by Speel-yi 09-24-2003 4:42 AM
|
|
Speel-Vi, I beg to differ, angiosperms were widespread in the late cretaceous, plus the seed habit had been around since the late Devonian. By the tertiary most of the true plant biomass was seed bearing, that is, angiosperms & gymnosperms combined. In fact all the major groups of seed bearing plants had appeared by the Triassic, excepting angiosperms. Mark
This message is a reply to: | | Message 16 by Speel-yi, posted 09-24-2003 4:42 AM | | Speel-yi has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 18 by Speel-yi, posted 09-24-2003 11:31 AM | | mark24 has not replied |
|
Speel-yi
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 18 of 23 (57486)
09-24-2003 11:31 AM
|
Reply to: Message 17 by mark24 09-24-2003 6:19 AM
|
|
Whoops, I have my time periods off slightly, but what's a few tens of millions of years between friends anyway. Yes, angiosperms came to be plentiful after the Yucatan asteroid collision which killed off the majority of species on Earth at the time. We now live in the Age of Angiosperms, of which the grasses are an important part of modern flora. Thanks for the link Mark.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 17 by mark24, posted 09-24-2003 6:19 AM | | mark24 has not replied |
|
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 763 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: 11-12-2002
|
|
Message 19 of 23 (57488)
09-24-2003 12:48 PM
|
Reply to: Message 15 by Quetzal 09-20-2003 6:52 AM
|
|
My biggest problem with the "living fossil" designation is that it ignores the incredible diversity of life which has lived, flourished, and died out - leaving only these impoverished remnants of once-great lineages.
Thanks for that excellent info, Q. Another example of a "living fossil" that doesn't get much press, only because they are so familiar, is the horse family. What remains of this once-proud group now, maybe three genera? Horse, ass, and zebra? And there were scads of them in the Eocene. They aren't thought of as a "remnant" because we've all seen them, and possibly because they're a little bigger and more one-toed than their ancestors, but they aren't much more diverse now than your other examples - just more populous.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 15 by Quetzal, posted 09-20-2003 6:52 AM | | Quetzal has replied |
|
Rei
Member (Idle past 7041 days) Posts: 1546 From: Iowa City, IA Joined: 09-03-2003
|
|
Message 20 of 23 (57508)
09-24-2003 2:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 19 by Coragyps 09-24-2003 12:48 PM
|
|
Horses still have plenty of close relatives living in the same family and order, although it is sad to think about the great extinction of new world horses. Most of the "living fossil" species are notably less diverse, usually confined to a few species in an entire family or order. ------------------ "Illuminant light, illuminate me."
This message is a reply to: | | Message 19 by Coragyps, posted 09-24-2003 12:48 PM | | Coragyps has not replied |
|
awinkisas
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 21 of 23 (57519)
09-24-2003 3:57 PM
|
Reply to: Message 19 by Coragyps 09-24-2003 12:48 PM
|
|
I think we have forgotten about one of the best living fossils alive today. A dinosaur that survived the mass extinction ... the crocodile. "Modern crocodiles first appeared in the Cretaceous period, 65 to 135 million years ago, and any animal that can so defy the laws of natural extinction is a superb work of adaptation" http://www.unearthed.australia.com/apr99/profile1.htm
This message is a reply to: | | Message 19 by Coragyps, posted 09-24-2003 12:48 PM | | Coragyps has not replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 22 by Zhimbo, posted 09-24-2003 5:29 PM | | awinkisas has not replied |
|
Zhimbo
Member (Idle past 6040 days) Posts: 571 From: New Hampshire, USA Joined: 07-28-2001
|
|
Message 22 of 23 (57524)
09-24-2003 5:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 21 by awinkisas 09-24-2003 3:57 PM
|
|
Other than the "dinosaur" part, good point. Crocs aren't at all like dinosaurs; but they are amazing examples of adaptation and survival.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 21 by awinkisas, posted 09-24-2003 3:57 PM | | awinkisas has not replied |
|
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: 01-09-2002
|
|
Message 23 of 23 (57682)
09-25-2003 3:59 AM
|
Reply to: Message 19 by Coragyps 09-24-2003 12:48 PM
|
|
Hi Coragyps, If you want an excellent and excruciatingly detailed discussion of horses and phylogeny, I can't recommend more highly Groves CP, Ryder OA, 2000, "Systematics and Phylogeny of the Horse", in Bowling and Ravinsky, eds. "The Genetics of the Horse", CAB International. Equus is definitely another example of a very small remnant of a once highly-diverse group of lineages (at least in terms of numbers of species alive today vs numbers extinct). I think one of the reasons creationists don't use these guys as "living fossil" thingys is because they weren't "alive at the time of the dinosaurs" which for some reason is a criteria for proclaiming that evolution is dead. Honestly never understood the logic there.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 19 by Coragyps, posted 09-24-2003 12:48 PM | | Coragyps has not replied |
|