Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Marsupial evolution
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5829 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 9 of 91 (398580)
05-01-2007 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Pete OS
04-30-2007 1:10 AM


This was one of the major lines of evidence that convinced me of evolution.
Many marsupial mammals have their counterparts in placental mammals. Placental and marsupial moles and placental vs. marsupial wolfs are most striking examples of so called convergence between them.
Skull of marsupial wolf is so similar to skull of canis lupus that only an expert knowing teeth formula of the species can distinguish them.
Such "convergent" evolution prove more evolution governed by law (Nomogenesis or PEH) as darwinistic natural selection as source of it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Pete OS, posted 04-30-2007 1:10 AM Pete OS has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by crashfrog, posted 05-01-2007 3:30 PM MartinV has not replied
 Message 11 by PaulK, posted 05-01-2007 3:36 PM MartinV has not replied

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5829 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 23 of 91 (399033)
05-03-2007 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by arachnophilia
05-02-2007 12:19 AM


Re: placental vs. marsupial
Darwinists here seem to be pretty sure that they can tell apart skulls of marsupial and placental wolfs:
arachnophilia writes:
yes. marsupials ARE more similar to each other than to their similar-looking placental counterpart. it might not be obvious from tiny pictures of the living animal, but the internal anatomy is a dead give-away.
PaulK writes:
No, you don't have to be an expert if you get a good look at the teeth. I can easily tell them apart. You would need a little specialised knowledge to know which is which - but only a little. The differences are obvious and anyobdy should be able to see them.
I dare say that if you don't know dental formulas by heart you will
not tell them apart let say after one year seeing them again lateral. I can support my view by Richard Dawkins observation:
quote:
Zoology students at Oxford had to identify 100 zoological specimens as part of the final exam. Word soon got around that, if ever a 'dog' skull was given, it was safe to identify it as Thylacinus on the grounds that anything as obvious as a dog skull had to be a catch. Then one year the examiners, to their credit, double bluffed and put in a real dog skull. The easiest way to tell the difference is by the two prominent holes in the palate bone, which are characteristic of marsupials generally.
Yet folks here are better experts than Oxford students of Zoology.
The skull of thylacinus is btw. more similar to fox than to wolf:

The Tasmanian tiger, Thylacinus cynocephalus, is more similar in skull shape to the red fox, Vulpes vulpes, than to the placental wolf, Canis lupus.
CSIRO PUBLISHING | Australian Journal of Zoology
What surprised me also is thylacinus stripes on it's back, the form of which is "remarkably similar" of Afrikan Zebra duiker.
http://www.naturalworlds.org/...oducing/tasmanian_wolf_1.htm
Such stripe pattern is as striking as similarity of marsupial and placental wolfs skulls. One would say that the animal was compounded of many different patterns like platypus.
Darwinists tend as usually to explain the striking similarity of stripe pattens between thylacinus and Zebra duiker "LIKELY due to similar types of habitat".
Of course marsupial wolf is predator what is not the case of Zebra.
And marsupial wolfs hunted during night so I am not sure who enjoyed their strips. Problem is obviously much more complicated and going far beyond darwinian standard story explanations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2007 12:19 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by iceage, posted 05-03-2007 4:04 PM MartinV has replied
 Message 25 by PaulK, posted 05-03-2007 6:31 PM MartinV has not replied
 Message 26 by RAZD, posted 05-03-2007 9:32 PM MartinV has not replied
 Message 27 by anglagard, posted 05-03-2007 11:40 PM MartinV has not replied
 Message 32 by arachnophilia, posted 05-04-2007 11:48 PM MartinV has not replied

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5829 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 28 of 91 (399227)
05-04-2007 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by iceage
05-03-2007 4:04 PM


Re: placental vs. marsupial
And Zebras are hunted during night and low light conditions.
Anyway explanation of Zebras stripes are probably another neodarwinian armchair ad-hoc story not supported by serious research yet (like in many cases of mimicry btw) - the research from 2002:
quote:
Additionally or alternatively, although stripes apparently increase zebra visibility in daylight, it is at least plausible that they provide effective cryptic protection from predators in poor light, although critical testing has not been attempted. Other related evolutionary questions are raised and suggestions made for future research
Content Not Found: Ingenta Connect
or
Just a moment...
So I don't know how darwinists would explain stripes on marsupial wolfs. Consider the fact there is probably no need for marsupial wolfs in a wolfpack/kennel (if such wolfpack/kennel ever existed) to be indescernible from each other.
Consider the fact that stripes are predominantly on the backs of marsupial wolfs. I suppose such stripes on the back are not the main part the prey is aware of during its escape (I assume the marsupial wolf didn't creep near its prey by their ass with its head on the other side).
------------------
------------------
------------------
Might be there is time for darwinists to use another unverifiable evasion - sexual selection?
Like this one:
quote:
The novel hypothesis developed by Simmons and Scheepers (1996) argues that the giraffe’s long neck arose from its use as a weapon during intrasexual combat.The sparring between two male giraffes is referred to as “necking”, a behavior used to establish dominance hierarchies in the male herds (Coe, 1967).
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.
Edited by MartinV, : Giraffe neck added
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by iceage, posted 05-03-2007 4:04 PM iceage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by iceage, posted 05-04-2007 5:51 PM MartinV has not replied
 Message 30 by iceage, posted 05-04-2007 7:42 PM MartinV has not replied
 Message 31 by AdminNosy, posted 05-04-2007 8:00 PM MartinV has replied

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5829 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 35 of 91 (399356)
05-05-2007 4:34 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by AdminNosy
05-04-2007 8:00 PM


Re: Topic warning
quote:
Though marsupial stripes are sort of on topic they aren't the core of the discussion here which concerns the similarities between placentals and marsupials.
Coloration and shape of animals is what counts. No animal except man compare skulls of differnet species. No wild animal - as far as I know - is interested in dissecting anatomy of other animals. What other animals are interested of are predominantly these - shape, color, smell, taste.
I wanted to discuss how different animals perceive each other and if such perception could lead to natural or sexual selection.
The problem of underlying molecular biology is unimportant even if some guys here consider it as crucial. It is as unimportant as it is what is behind scenes when you look in theatre to a play. It could not help you underestand better what you see on the stage if you know what is behind stage.
Do not go running down yet another rabbit hole asking questions to which the answers are obvious and not on topic.
Yet I have no knowledge of experiment supporting darwinistic hypothesis of function of stripes as "camouflage" ("it is at least plausible without any experiment"). Again see my post 226.
I - personaly - see no obvious answer of function of stripes on back of marsupial wolf - placental wolf do not have such stripes as far as I know.
Anyway I agree this is the topic for itself. It would be pity if I would be banned because of my remarks of coloration and stripes. The same problems occured discussing coloration of mushroom on the thread about mammals - the thread was closed.
Maybe it would be fine to open new thread about coloration of animals and explanation of it. Is it possible?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by AdminNosy, posted 05-04-2007 8:00 PM AdminNosy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by NosyNed, posted 05-05-2007 5:21 AM MartinV has not replied
 Message 41 by iceage, posted 05-05-2007 12:17 PM MartinV 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