Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is the evolutionairy theory on the Giraffe?
joz
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 70 (740)
12-14-2001 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by redstang281
12-14-2001 7:52 AM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
Just curious. How did the giraffe acquire his long neck?
Um... Because being able to reach higher up the tree is an advantage when you eat leaves maybe?
Thus those with longer necks would tend not to starve to death and therefore pass a genetic tendency for long necks down to their offspring...those with short necks would starve and not pass on their genes....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by redstang281, posted 12-14-2001 7:52 AM redstang281 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by redstang281, posted 12-14-2001 10:30 AM joz has replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 70 (750)
12-14-2001 10:36 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by redstang281
12-14-2001 10:30 AM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
So if the ones with short necks would starve, then how did baby giraffe's survive long enough to grow long necks(so that they could survive long enough to pass on genes?)
You seem to be neglecting the common mammalian trait of nurturing our young....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by redstang281, posted 12-14-2001 10:30 AM redstang281 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by redstang281, posted 12-14-2001 10:47 AM joz has replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 70 (754)
12-14-2001 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by redstang281
12-14-2001 10:47 AM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
Explain.
Did you have a mother?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by redstang281, posted 12-14-2001 10:47 AM redstang281 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by redstang281, posted 12-14-2001 10:57 AM joz has replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 70 (758)
12-14-2001 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by redstang281
12-14-2001 10:57 AM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
I want to know in what way the giraffe took care of the baby giraffe to help him survive and eat the leafs on the top of the tree that only the full grown giraffe could reach.
I think I know what you are going to say, but I want you to say it, not me.

Your mother took care of you I presume?
If so then she was displaying the shared mammalian trait of nurturing your offspring...
Oh and you know what giraffes are mammals as well....
The mechanism by which the help is given is immaterial it is sufficient that the help is given...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by redstang281, posted 12-14-2001 10:57 AM redstang281 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by nator, posted 12-14-2001 12:09 PM joz has not replied
 Message 11 by redstang281, posted 12-14-2001 12:12 PM joz has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 70 (851)
12-17-2001 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by redstang281
12-17-2001 12:25 PM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
Did you know that a full grown giraffe's heart weighs over 24 pounds and pumps 16 gallons a minute? Because the giraffe's heart is much larger than his head, a series of special one-way, back-flow preventer valves are needed in the neck to regulate the flow of blood to the head, especially when the giraffe is bending down to get that much needed drink of water. Without these valves, the immense blood pressure coupled with gravity would make for one nasty headache and other such repercussions. Elastic blood vessels in the giraffe's head allow harboring of enough blood to prevent the giraffe from passing out when bent in this position.
How did this evolve?

Well just a guess but probably gradually, over the period of time that the neck was lengthening, those giraffes that didn't keel over of massive cerebral heamorages every time they bent over were more likely to pass their genes on...
Are you even vaguely familiar with the concept of natural selection?
On another note what the hell has the weight of the heart got to do with it? Surely the power with which it pumps blood is far more relevant.....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by redstang281, posted 12-17-2001 12:25 PM redstang281 has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 70 (881)
12-18-2001 7:50 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by redstang281
12-18-2001 7:44 AM


quote:
Originally posted by redstang281:
Wow, so not only would all that have to occur, but also the giraffe would have to be isolated and we would hope that the giraffe baby could nurse milk off the giraffe for a long enough time to grow to reach the tree branches.
This is why the evolution community has given up on that theory of giraffe evolution and has started a new one.
Meanwhile the creationists still maintain the giraffe was created a giraffe as God designed him as one of the creatures to help maintain plant grow.

Which would be fine if you had any evidence for your explanation other than a 2000 year old religious document......
Oh and I think you meant growth not grow....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by redstang281, posted 12-18-2001 7:44 AM redstang281 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by redstang281, posted 12-18-2001 8:01 AM joz has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 70 (886)
12-18-2001 8:51 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by John Paul
12-18-2001 8:36 AM


quote:
Originally posted by John Paul:
BTW, the Bible is more than 2000 years old.
What is your evidence that random mutations culled by natural selection could give rise to life's observed diversity from one or a few populations of single-celled organisms which just happened to have the ability to self-replicate?

I think this really comes down to the whole can small changes (mutations) add up (integrate would probably be a better term) to large changes argument you left hanging about a week or so ago.... so get your arse back over there and finish it....
BTW...So the bible was written more than 2000 years ago huh....
Lets see Jesus was apparently crucified in the early part of the fourth decade A.D. so any document that mentions this would (until 2030 something) be LESS than 2000 years old.... Just a small point....
[This message has been edited by joz, 12-18-2001]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by John Paul, posted 12-18-2001 8:36 AM John Paul has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 70 (889)
12-18-2001 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by John Paul
12-18-2001 9:10 AM


quote:
Originally posted by John Paul:
joz:
I think this really comes down to the whole can small changes (mutations) add up (integrate would probably be a better term) to large changes argument you left hanging about a week or so ago.... so get your arse back over there and finish it....
John Paul:
So we can go back & forth "can not"/ "can too"? What a waste of time. Show me the biological or genetic evidence...
joz:
BTW...So the bible was written more than 2000 years ago huh....
Lets see Jesus was apparently crucified in the early part of the fourth decade A.D. so any document that mentions this would (until 2030 something) be LESS than 2000 years old.... Just a small point....
John Paul:
ROTFLMAO! Ever hear of the Torah (Old Testament)? Only the New Testament was written after the death of Jesus. Genesis was written well before Jesus was born. Actually if Jesus died during his 33rd year on Earth he would have died in the third decade AD. He wasn't born in 1 AD or zero or even 1 BC. Herod died in 4 BC and Mary & Joseph were fleeing his decree (kill the babies) when Jesus was born. With that in mind Jesus would have been born in or before 4 BC.

I wasnt the one who said The Bible (note not the old testament, not parts of the bible) is more than 2000 years old, you were the ages of parts of the bible (torah, or old testament) are immaterial in refuting the claim that the bible was written MORE than 2000 years ago....
So it was his 33rd year on earth that moves the older than 2000 years cutoff point to a minimum of 2020 something we are still in 2001 so it isnt older than 2000 years....
[This message has been edited by joz, 12-18-2001]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by John Paul, posted 12-18-2001 9:10 AM John Paul has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by John Paul, posted 12-18-2001 9:44 AM joz has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 70 (892)
12-18-2001 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by John Paul
12-18-2001 8:36 AM


quote:
Originally posted by John Paul: BTW, the Bible is more than 2000 years old.

And I say again I am not the one who said and I quote "BTW, the Bible is more than 2000 years old."
You didn`t say Genesis, you didn`t say the old testament or the Torah you said the bible....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by John Paul, posted 12-18-2001 8:36 AM John Paul has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 70 (896)
12-18-2001 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by John Paul
12-18-2001 10:00 AM


quote:
Originally posted by John Paul:
joz:
And I say again I am not the one who said and I quote "BTW, the Bible is more than 2000 years old."
You didn`t say Genesis, you didn`t say the old testament or the Torah you said the bible....
John Paul:
And I as have shown you, it is. And as I also pointed out, in the context of what you were talking about- only Genesis applies.

Context doesn`t enter into it mate you said the bible not Genesis, the bible refers to the whole thing not one book.....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by John Paul, posted 12-18-2001 10:00 AM John Paul has not replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 70 (1007)
12-20-2001 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by John Paul
12-20-2001 9:15 AM


And I`m waiting for your evidence of limits to NS and RM over on that other thread so please feel free to stop being a hypocrite and drop by and supply some....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by John Paul, posted 12-20-2001 9:15 AM John Paul has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by John Paul, posted 12-20-2001 10:12 AM joz 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