Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,461 Year: 3,718/9,624 Month: 589/974 Week: 202/276 Day: 42/34 Hour: 5/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?
edge
Member (Idle past 1728 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 1111 of 1385 (853655)
05-30-2019 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 1110 by Dredge
05-30-2019 12:34 AM


Re: YEC vs OEC
It's got nothing to do with the CC selling out to theistic evolution, but everything to do with reinterpreting Scripture in light of scientific discoveries ... as opposed to denying reality and clinging to an unenlightened sixteenth-century exegesis.
I suppose you would know more about the inconsistencies of religious beliefs than I would, but how do you know that the CC is not "reinterpreting Scripture in light of scientific discoveries" also?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1110 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2019 12:34 AM Dredge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1135 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-01-2019 1:02 AM edge has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4413
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 1112 of 1385 (853659)
05-30-2019 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1092 by Dredge
05-29-2019 3:47 AM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
Dredge writes:
Tanypteryx writes:
Dredge writes:
Gunter Bechly considers the fossil record to be "saturated" - meaning, we have enough fossil evidence now to conclude that the record is complete in a general sense.
Do you have a reference for where he says this?
"Gnter Bechly: Rich Fossil Record Says No to Insect Evolution
Posted on March 11, , 2019
Thanks for the reference.
That's why I was unaware of him saying this, it was not in a published scientific paper, just his BS opinion at DI, no evidence to back it up.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1092 by Dredge, posted 05-29-2019 3:47 AM Dredge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1114 by edge, posted 05-30-2019 12:40 PM Tanypteryx has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4413
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 1113 of 1385 (853660)
05-30-2019 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1094 by Dredge
05-29-2019 3:56 AM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
Dredge writes:
Tanptyeryx writes:
Science has moved well beyond Darwinian evolution and I am unaware of anyone bothering to "confirm Darwinian evolution" today.
What a strange phenomenon - scientists en masse accepting and dogmatically preaching as a fact a claim that can’t ever be confirmed. I’m trying to think of another example of this in science, but I can’t. I smell a big, fat rat
Well, your sense of smell is world renowned.
What claim specifically are you talking about?
Dredge writes:
Well, it is not evidence of anything, because insects DO NOT appear out of nowhere.
Right, so you know better than Gunter Bechly, a world-renowned paleontologist who specializes in insects?
World-renowned? Right. Appeal to authority.
Dredge writes:
With all due respect, I’d say your knowledge of the paleontology of the origins of insects is rather limited
With all due respect, you have absolutely no way of knowing my level of knowledge.
Dredge writes:
(which is perfectly understandable - knowledge of the fossil history of insects is useless and irrelevant to a working biologist)
Curiously, I have never found what you believe is useless or irrelevant, to be a barrier to gaining knowledge.
Dredge writes:
and is probably based on the assumption that evidence for the evolutionary ancestors of insects exists.
Nope, based on knowledge that evidence exists.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1094 by Dredge, posted 05-29-2019 3:56 AM Dredge has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1728 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 1114 of 1385 (853661)
05-30-2019 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 1112 by Tanypteryx
05-30-2019 12:06 PM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
Thanks for the reference.
That's why I was unaware of him saying this, it was not in a published scientific paper, just his BS opinion at DI, no evidence to back it up.
Are you saying that you don't keep up with the DI propaganda outlets?
Shame on you!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1112 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-30-2019 12:06 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1116 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-30-2019 1:00 PM edge has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4413
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 1115 of 1385 (853662)
05-30-2019 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 1100 by Dredge
05-29-2019 5:07 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
Dredge writes:
Tanyptyerx writes:
Tanypteryx writes:
as more evidence is discovered we can understand more and more about how it occurred in the past.
Dredge writes:
Nonsense. You are evo-extrapolating into the realms of evo-fantasy.
Nope, I'm just reading reports of interesting new fossil finds all the time.
You're ignoring my point: You can dig up all the fossils you like, but they don't tell us HOW macroevolution occurred.
So what? We already know how macroevolution occurs, you just keep ignoring it, probably because you cannot bare to admit that your knowledge of macroevolution is incorrect.
Dredge writes:
Neo-Darwinism is found wanting when trying to explain the fossil record
Oh no, not Neo-Darwinism, next it will be the New-Synthesis.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1100 by Dredge, posted 05-29-2019 5:07 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1143 by Dredge, posted 06-02-2019 1:38 AM Tanypteryx has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4413
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 1116 of 1385 (853664)
05-30-2019 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1114 by edge
05-30-2019 12:40 PM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
Are you saying that you don't keep up with the DI propaganda outlets?
Shame on you!
The only time I tried reading their stuff, hot coffee came out of my nose and shorted out my keyboard.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1114 by edge, posted 05-30-2019 12:40 PM edge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1117 of 1385 (853701)
05-31-2019 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 1080 by Tanypteryx
05-28-2019 12:23 AM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
Tanypteryx writes:
Dredge writes:
What organism from the Ediacaran biota is the evolutionary ancestor of trilobites?
I guess since YOU don't know, there must not be an answer.
Translation: “I can’t bring myself to admit that there is no known fossil evidence of evolutionary links between the Ediacaran biota and the Cambrian trilobites.”

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1080 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-28-2019 12:23 AM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1119 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-31-2019 12:21 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 1127 by edge, posted 05-31-2019 9:56 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1118 of 1385 (853702)
05-31-2019 12:14 AM
Reply to: Message 1086 by Tanypteryx
05-28-2019 1:00 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
Tanypteryx writes:
typing a bunch of of repeating HAs may be a coherent argument if you're 12.
How dare you! Do you have any idea of the calibre of human you're talking to?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1086 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-28-2019 1:00 AM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1120 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-31-2019 12:24 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 1125 by JonF, posted 05-31-2019 9:31 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 1128 by ringo, posted 05-31-2019 12:21 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 1130 by DrJones*, posted 05-31-2019 2:29 PM Dredge has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4413
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 1119 of 1385 (853703)
05-31-2019 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 1117 by Dredge
05-31-2019 12:02 AM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
Dredge writes:
Tanypteryx writes:
Dredge writes:
What organism from the Ediacaran biota is the evolutionary ancestor of trilobites?
I guess since YOU don't know, there must not be an answer.
Translation: “I can’t bring myself to admit that there is no known fossil evidence of evolutionary links between the Ediacaran biota and the Cambrian trilobites.”
Nope, it's more like, So what? If we don't have answers to all the questions that's a good thing, because it means we have lots of things to challenge us, new discoveries to find, it makes life interesting.
You're never going to understand.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1117 by Dredge, posted 05-31-2019 12:02 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1153 by Dredge, posted 06-03-2019 12:58 AM Tanypteryx has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4413
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 1120 of 1385 (853704)
05-31-2019 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1118 by Dredge
05-31-2019 12:14 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
I'm not familiar with that scale. Wait, was that a trick question?

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1118 by Dredge, posted 05-31-2019 12:14 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1121 of 1385 (853705)
05-31-2019 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1089 by RAZD
05-28-2019 6:53 AM


Re: aliens-did-it is not a scientific theory
razd writes:
Except it is not logically consistent to propose unknown unobserved aliens when your actual belief is otherwise
I fear you are talking nonsense. Accepting “the best scientific explanation” has nothing to do with believing that theory is the truth.
there is an existing theory that adequately explains the evidence.
Let this be the last time you speak of this pathetic atheist delusion.
Nor do you have any actual evidence of aliens, nor any actual mechanism for achieving the purported process and you have no evidence of that process being anything other than standard ToE processes ...
1. How many folks claim to have seen UFOs or aliens? Thousands.
How folks claim to have seen a reptile evolve into a mammal via Darwinian processes? Zero.
2. The mechanism is genetic engineering. Ever heard of it? It produces observed, repeatable macroevolutions. Google it and learn . then wake up and grow up out of your primitive, simplistic, nineteenth-century Darwinist superstition. I suggest this for you own good.
.. and it doesn't appear to be falsifiable
I can’t at this juncture think of a way to falsify my theory - but I will let the world know when I do.
the ToE ... is chock full of actual observed mechanisms and actual observed processes,
. which do nothing more than describe limited variations within a population. To get from this to an explanation for the fossil record, one needs to add huge doses of wild extrapolation and wishful thinking . as well as being blessed with a very vivid imagination.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1089 by RAZD, posted 05-28-2019 6:53 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1124 by RAZD, posted 05-31-2019 8:19 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 1131 by Taq, posted 05-31-2019 3:39 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1122 of 1385 (853706)
05-31-2019 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 1090 by edge
05-28-2019 9:23 AM


Re: YEC vs OEC
edge writes:
if you don't believe your 'scientific theory' is valid
But I do believe it’s valid (except for little matter of falsifiability) - I just don’t believe its true. Since when did a scientific theory have to be believed to be a fact to be vaild?
Believe it or not, I don't read all of your posts
Then how are you going to learn?
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1090 by edge, posted 05-28-2019 9:23 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1126 by edge, posted 05-31-2019 9:31 AM Dredge has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1427 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1123 of 1385 (853712)
05-31-2019 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1096 by Dredge
05-29-2019 4:15 AM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
... I think you’re a few fossils short to make that claim - by about a thousand . at least.
What you think is irrelevant.
So, about ten fossils ...
Whether it's 10 or 2000 is also irrelevant.
... spanning a period of millions of years demonstrate microevolutionary steps? ...
Yes, because each of the intermediate fossils show minor variation from preceding fossils -- slight relocation of bones, slight changes in relative sizes, these are microevolutionary steps, similar to what we see between dog varieties. Added up from one to the next to the next etc they show a gradual change over time from reptilian jaw and ear to mammalian jaw and ear.
Enjoy
References:
  1. THE THERAPSID--MAMMAL TRANSITIONAL SERIES
    quote:
    Not only is this explanation not "merely wishful conjecture", but it can be clearly seen in a remarkable series of fossils from the Triassic therapsids. The earliest therapsids show the typical reptilian type of jaw joint, with the articular bone in the jaw firmly attached to the quadrate bone in the skull. In later fossils from the same group, however, the quadrate-articular bones have become smaller, and the dentary and squamosal bones have become larger and moved closer together. This trend reaches its apex in a group of therapsids known as cynodonts, of which the genus Probainognathus is a representative. Probainognathus possessed characteristics of both reptile and mammal, and this transitional aspect was shown most clearly by the fact that it had TWO jaw joints--one reptilian, one mammalian:
    "Probainognathus, a small cynodont reptile from the Triassic sediments of Argentina, shows characters in the skull and jaws far advanced toward the mammalian condition. Thus it had teeth differentiated into incisors, a canine and postcanines, a double occipital condyle and a well-developed secondary palate, all features typical of the mammals, but most significantly the articulation between the skull and the lower jaw was on the very threshhold between the reptilian and mammalian condition. The two bones forming the articulation between skull and mandible in the reptiles, the quadrate and articular respectively, were still present but were very small, and loosely joined to the bones that constituted the mammalian joint . . . Therefore in Probainognathus there was a double articulation between skull and jaw, and of particular interest, the quadrate bone, so small and so loosely joined to the squamosal, was intimately articulated with the stapes bone of the middle ear. It quite obviously was well on its way towards being the incus bone of the three-bone complex that characterizes the mammalian middle ear." (Colbert and Morales, 1991, pp. 228-229)
    In a slightly later group, known as the ictidosaurians, the mammalian part of the double jaw joint seen in Probainognathus was strengthened, while the old reptilian part was beginning to become reduced in size. In describing a member of this group known as Diarthrognathus, paleontologists Colbert and Morales point out: "The most interesting and fascinating point in the morphology of the ictidosaurians (at least, as seen in Diarthrognathus) was the double jaw articulation. In this animal, not only was the ancient reptilian joint between a reduced quadrate and articular still present, but also the new mammalian joint between the squamosal and dentary bones had come into functional being. Thus, Diarthrognathus was truly at the dividing line between reptile and mammal in so far as this important diagnostic feature is concerned." (Colbert and Morales, 1991, p. 128)
    The therapsid-mammal transition was completed with the appearence of the Morganucodonts in the late Triassic. This group is described by paleontologist T.S. Kemp:
    "The axes of the two jaw hinges, dentary-squamosal and articular-quadrate, coincide along a lateral-medial line, and therefore the double jaw articulation of the most advanced cynodonts is still present . . . The secondary dentary-squamosal jaw hinge had enlarged (in the Morganucodonts) and took a greater proportion if not all of the stresses at the jaw articulation. The articular-quadrate hinge was free to function solely in sound conduction." (Strahler, 1987, p. 419)
    Thus, the fossil record demonstrates, during the transition from therapsid reptile to mammal, various bones in the skull slowly migrated together to form a second functional jaw joint, and the now-superfluous original jaw bones were reduced in size until they formed the three bones in the mammalian middle ear. The reptilian quadrate bone became the mammalian incus, while the articular bone became the malleus. The entire process had taken nearly the whole length of the Triassic period to complete, a time span of approximately 40 million years. Since the determining characteristic of a mammal in the fossil record is the structure of the jaw bone and joint, all of the therapsids up to the Morganucodonts are classified as reptiles, and all those after that are considered to be mammals. As Romer puts it, "We arbitrarily group the therapsids as reptiles (we have to draw a line somewhere) but were they alive, a typical therapsid probably would seem to us an odd cross between a lizard and a dog, a transitional type between the two great groups of backboned animals." (Romer, 1967, p. 227)
  2. Therapsida
    quote:
    Synapsida

    Therapsida
    —Raranimus
    Biarmosuchia
    Dinocephalia
    —Anteosauria
    Tapinocephalia
    Anomodontia
    —Venyukovioidea
    Dicynodontia
    Theriodontia
    —Gorgonopsia
    Therocephalia
    Cynodontia
    The Therapsids were one of the great success stories of the Permo-Triassic. First appearing in the middle or even the early (if Tetraceratops is a member of this group) Permian, they very quickly dominated terrestrial and semi-aquatic environments, filling a number of ecological niches and guilds, including felid, canid, bear, otter, ungulate, and even mole analogues, as well as many forms with no contemporary counterparts. In keeping with the episodic nature of synapsid evolution, there seem to have been at least two distinct dynasties, a middle Permian fauna dominated by dinocephalians and other primitive forms, and a late Permian fauna characterised by a wide range of more advanced carnivorous and herbivorous groups. These animals were so abundant (especially the herbivorous yet bizaarely specialised dicynodonts with their toothless beaks) that one could easily refer to this period as the age of therapsids, with both anapsid reptiles and relict pelycosaurs playing second fiddle. Their evolutionary success was unfortunately cut short by the end Permian extinction event, and although a number of lineages made it through to the Triassic, their protomammalian metabolism put them at a disadvantage in a hot dry Triassic world far more suited to sauropsid reptiles, and increasingly dominated by thecodontian archosaurs. They survived by becoming progressively smaller and more mammal-like, except for the dicynodonts which if anything became larger. By the time the dinosaurs had appeared, the therapsids had given rise to the first mammals, although one lineage of rodent-like, non-mammalian therapsids, the tritylodonts, would continue to the Middle Cretaceous. MAK120127

The cladogram in the second reference is hyperlinked to more details at each level. For instance you can click on Cynodontia and go to
Cynodontia
quote:
Therapsida

Cynodontia
—Procynosuchidae
Galesauridae
Eucynodontia
—Cynognathia
—Cynognathidae
Tritylodontidae
Probainognathia
—Tritheledontidae
Mammaliaformes
In the unbroken evolutionary sequence from reptile to mammal, the cynodonts are intermediate between earlier and more primitive theriodont therapsids and the earliest mammals. These highly successful animals first appear in the late Permian, radiate quickly into a number of different forms (including both terrestrial and semi-aquatic) before the end of the period, reach their maximum diversity in the Early Triassic, and become increasingly mammal-like as the Triassic progresses, giving rise to true mammals in the later Triassic. By the start of the Jurassic, only the insectivore-like tritheledonts and rodent-like tritylodonts remained; the latter continuing alongside true mammals throughout the Jurassic and even into the early Cretaceous.
In cladistic nomenclature, the term "cynodont" is also used to include mammals, which evolved from cynodonts and hence are, phylogenetically speaking, derived cynodonts. MAK120206

And you can click on Mammaliaformes and go to
Mammaliaformes
quote:
Cynodontia

Mammaliformes
—Allotheria
—Haramiyida
Multituberculata
—Paulchoffatiidae
Gondwanatheria
Cimolodonta
Morganucodontidae
Docodonta
—Megazostrodontidae
Docodontidae
Hadrocodium
Symmetrodonta
—Kuehneotheriidae

Mammalia
All of the early mammaliforms looked more or less like rodents and were about the same size as that most successful group of modern mammals. The mammaliform story is about internal, structural developments, many of which we have only begun to be able to study in the last decade. Understanding these changes unavoidably requires us to look at technical anatomical details. Some of the things to look for are these:
1) The dentary-squamosal jaw joint: All terrestrial vertebrates except mammaliforms form the jaw hinge between the articular and the quadrate. Mammaliforms form the joint between the dentary and the squamosal. This transition was well under way before mammaliforms got started.
2) The post dentary bones -- the articular and angular -- weren't lost. They, and the quadrate, became incorporated into the middle ear as the auditory ossicles. In mammals they are called the malleus, incus and stapes.
3) The inner ear was also re-engineered. The otic capsule became somewhat separated from the rest of the braincase as a pair of petrosals. Within the petrosal, one of the organs of hearing (the maculae) became first enlarged, and then coiled.
4) The teeth of mammals are almost unique in a number of respects. Instead of having lots of simple teeth that were replaced frequently, mammals have only one set of adult teeth which meet (occlude) in a very precise fashion.
5) Most importantly, mammals developed separate, specialized molars. Molars not only have points (cusps) which shear past each other, but have a certain cusps which grind food on relatively flat regions of the opposite molar. This system seems to have evolved separately at least three times and probably more often. Since most mammaliform remains consist of teeth, we have a great many examples of tooth forms. Unfortunately, the degree of convergent dental evolution has also greatly confused the picture.
6) The brain itself, and the surrounding bone, seems to have undergone some profound reorganization. After hundreds of millions of years of gradual retreat, the anterior part of the old palatoquadrate (the epipterygoid of reptiles) makes a strong come-back in mammaliforms in vatious guises such as the alisphenoid and orbitosphenoid -- structures that provide central support for the anterior skull.
7) these changes in the organization of the skull are accompanied by soft tissue changes in the distribution of the cranial nerves and the major blood vessels. These transitions remain poorly understood.
8) Post-cranially, as in reptiles, the limbs tended to move under the body. Surprisingly, mammals seem to have been very slow to acquire a truly erect stance; and the fore- and hind-limbs seemed to have evolved erect postures almost independently.
Of course, a great many other things were going on at the same time: lactation, increased body metabolism, body hair, and so on. But these are almost impossible to study directly in the fossil record. They remain, for the most part, matters of speculation.

And you can click on Mammalia and go to
Mammalia
quote:
Mammaliformes

Mammalia
—Australosphenida
—Ausktribosphenidae
Monotremata
Triconodonta
Spalacotheroidea
Cladotheria
—Dryolestoidea
Theria

—Metatheria
Eutheria
  1. Metabolic rate: transition to more or less full homeothermy inferred from geographic range, nocturnal habit, etc.
  2. Temporal fossa: increase in size; confluence with orbit.
  3. Zygomatic Arch: development; replacement of jaw adductor by masseter as principal jaw muscle; greatly increased capacity for oral processing of food.
  4. Reflected lamina of angularLower jaw: dentary becomes only significant element of mandible; development of coronoid process; reduction of post-dentary elements; reflected lamina of angular; dentary-squamosal jaw articulation. See infra, ear.
  5. Dentition: development of heterodont dentition with incisors, canines, pre-molars and molars; "permanent" (diphyodont) teeth with prismatic enamel; increasingly fixed pattern of occlusion; definite dental formula.
  6. Palate: full secondary palate.
  7. Ear: reflected lamina of the angular (tympanic); retroarticular process of articular; conversion of post-dentary bones to sensory use in middle ear. Reflected lamina may have been resonating chamber, followed by development of tympanic membrane framed by increasingly small and gracile reflected lamina and/or retroarticular process
  8. Pineal foramen: pineal foramen initially becomes more conspicuous, then recedes and is lost.
  9. Skull table: development of parietal crest with muscular attachment on outside of dermal bones.
  10. Braincase: parietal and squamosal spread downward to cover braincase, gradually replacing (in advanced mammals) neurocranium while providing muscle attachment on lateral (formerly dorsal) surface; epipterygoid changes from pillar supporting parietal and braincase to alisphenoid element of skull, continuous with parietal, squamosal, & petrosal (fused otic capsule). Brain size does not increase relative to diapsids.
  11. Skull fusions: fusion of parietals and frontals, otic capsule, occipitals, numerous other elements in therians; loss of dermal bones, e.g. post-orbitals.
  12. Skull attachment: double occipital condyle, condyles move ventrally, development of mammalian circular form.
  13. Spine: loss of lumbar ribs (reversed in advanced cynodonts & lost again in Mammalia); increase in number of sacral vertebrae (??); reduction of tail; vertebral articulations changed to accommodate dorsoventral undulation; vertebrae amphiplatyan (flat on both ends), implying loss of notochord remnants (?).
  14. Limb girdles: reduction (e.g. pubes, coracoids) or loss of ventral elements; more vertical orientation of limbs.
  15. Limbs: more vertical orientation; elongation of humerus & femur; digits shorter; calcaneal heel
  16. Integument: fur?; mammalian muzzle
  17. Habit: primitively large carnivores; great reduction in size; development of omnivorous and herbivorous adaptations. --ATW 001202


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1096 by Dredge, posted 05-29-2019 4:15 AM Dredge has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1427 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 1124 of 1385 (853713)
05-31-2019 8:19 AM
Reply to: Message 1121 by Dredge
05-31-2019 12:24 AM


Re: aliens-did-it is not a scientific theory
razd writes:
Except it is not logically consistent to propose unknown unobserved aliens when your actual belief is otherwise
I fear you are talking nonsense. Accepting “the best scientific explanation” has nothing to do with believing that theory is the truth.
You're moving the goalposts again. We were talking about logical consistency, not “the best scientific explanation.”
Meanwhile “the best scientific explanation” is still the one supported by all the evidence and by known observed processes rather than imaginary conflations of anecdote and wishful thinking.
there is an existing theory that adequately explains the evidence.
Let this be the last time you speak of this pathetic atheist delusion.
Curiously science is neither atheistic nor delusional ... you must be thinking of pseudoscience.
Nor do you have any actual evidence of aliens, nor any actual mechanism for achieving the purported process and you have no evidence of that process being anything other than standard ToE processes ...
1. How many folks claim to have seen UFOs or aliens? Thousands.
How folks claim to have seen a reptile evolve into a mammal via Darwinian processes? Zero.
2. The mechanism is genetic engineering. Ever heard of it? It produces observed, repeatable macroevolutions. Google it and learn . then wake up and grow up out of your primitive, simplistic, nineteenth-century Darwinist superstition. I suggest this for you own good.
Like I said, imaginary conflations of anecdote and wishful thinking.
How many folks claim to have seen UFOs or aliens? Thousands.
And yet not one is supported by any objective empirical evidence.
How folks claim to have seen a reptile evolve into a mammal via Darwinian processes? Zero.
Yet we can see the evidence of this transition in the fossils -- see Message 1123 for example. We don't need to see a murder to detect when one has taken place.
.. and it doesn't appear to be falsifiable
I can’t at this juncture think of a way to falsify my theory - but I will let the world know when I do.
And until that time, you do not have a scientific theory, just a imaginary conflations of anecdote and wishful thinking.
the ToE ... is chock full of actual observed mechanisms and actual observed processes,
. which do nothing more than describe limited variations within a population. ...
And Message 1123 adequately shows that the "limited variations within a population" can, population after population, build on one another to develop the evolutionary change over time from reptile to mammal.
... To get from this to an explanation for the fossil record, one needs to add huge doses of wild extrapolation and wishful thinking . as well as being blessed with a very vivid imagination.
Careful, you are quite succinctly describing your alien theory there.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1121 by Dredge, posted 05-31-2019 12:24 AM Dredge has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 190 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 1125 of 1385 (853716)
05-31-2019 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1118 by Dredge
05-31-2019 12:14 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
We know the calibre of human we are talking to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1118 by Dredge, posted 05-31-2019 12:14 AM Dredge 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