Evolution VS Creationism

[Giratina93]

I guess I should have read it first before diving into this thread again.

There's one glaring problem that surfaces upon reading the issue: Since this lemur has a humanish Talus in her foot, and humanish nails. and lived over 47 million years ago, why aren't these traits seen in later fossils of descendants of Ida (The Lemur)? Perhaps this fossil was simply a genetic error and a "dead end route" instead of a missing link.This is simply my opinion on this matter.

[C S]

With her human-like nails instead of claws, and opposable big toes, she is placed at the very root of human evolution when early primates first developed features that would eventually develop into our own.

its just a name, not LITERALLY a monkey thats part lemur

[Giratina93]

...I swore that I'd NEVER come here again. However, due to new information reaching my ears, and a stir in my confidence, it's tiime to set things right!

Now, when Darwin published his origon of species, he envisioned the fossil record as a tree, with species leading to Genre to Families to Orders to CLasses to Phylum, all takin gplace over hundreds of millions of years. If Darwin's theory is correct, then when we look at the fossil record, we should be seeing new phylum appearing randomly thruought the Fossil Record. However, what we actually see is the opposite. Right from the Cambrian, almost every Phylum that exists today, from Chordata to Arthropoda to Mullusca, appear in a very brief peroid of time. And over the next "500 million years", very new body plans appear. Also, as we ascend the fossil record, new Classes stop appearing, and then new Orders cease to pop up. THis contradicts what Darwinian thinking says. Oh, and CS, Sharks are Chondrichthyes, and Crocodiles are Archosaurs. For some precurser creature to be the ancestor of both Archosaurs and Chondrichthyes, the amount of mutations needed would take far longer than the 500 million years between the Cambrian and the present day...

[C S]

way to completely miss the point

Phylum is a class where animals of similar body plans all fall into, ergo sharks (Chondrichthye) and crocs (Archosaurs)

anyway, to skip an overly long explanation, your little observation is complete horse sh*t =D

Cambrian explosion is when adaptations such as eyes appeared, and over the passage of time, different mutations for the eye in different species allowed those species an advantage, such as cats and birds of prey, with extremely fine tuned vision, much more than our own

:O wassat?! Oh yes, thats right, there have been THOUSANDS of species since the cambrian explosion

Dinosaurs, Crocs, sharks, and so on

so say the Phylum decreased after a massive bloom is completely insane. Give me a link to where you found any sort of evidence to even STATE such a thing

[Giratina93]

No, Seriously. After the Cambrian Explosion, there are very few, if any, new Phylum that popn up. Granted, new Gensu and Species appear all the time. But what are they? Oh yeah, just variants of the body plans that have been around since the Cambrian. No new features or body parts have arisen ever since.

As for the source of where I get these facts? Simple, really. From the book Pandas and People, and from the just released DVD, Darwin's Dilema. In fact, Darwin himself was very troubled from what he saw of the Cambrian Explosion. He prophisized that transition forms for those new creatures would pop up, but over 50 years have pased by, and no new transitions have popped up. And no, don't even get started on the "But the Transition Forms were too soft-bodied to be preserved" crud, because fossilized embryos of sponges have been found in Precambrian rocks in China. If those microscopic embryos could be preserved with remarkable detail, then why not a link between a Trilobite and it's supposed precambrian precuurser?

[C S]

Because the Earth is huge, theres numerous rock layers and the fact that the chances of finding transition species from way back when after an asteroid impact are very remote

rather, I look to a recently discovered transition species, Archeopteryx and its feathers, a new Phylum to appear when dinosaurs were transitioning to birds. There are other feathered dinosaurs as well. I also have to mention, from what your telling me, you expect to see a dramatic mutation in a long running species because of time and changing. Um... you are aware the fact crocs are essentially living fossils is because they're perfectly adapted to life as is? There hasnt been a croc with a super adaptation that allows it to out live all other crocs and kick start a new croc species recently because there is no need.

In simpler terms, you wont see a croc going "I WANNA FLY" and sprouts wings some time in the future, you wont see sharks slowly developing legs (speaking of legs, snakes were once lizards. Really. Look- they have hip bones and other leg based remnants. Same for whales and other marine mamals) and so on

[Giratina93]

Actually, crocodilian species have been popping up and dying out for quite a long time. For instance, For a while Deinosuchus and Sarchosuches were the top dogs of their time. However, they died out and were suceeded briefly by land crocs, which hunted for prey on the land. Those died out and were replaced by the crocs we see today. Though, your little image of a croc wanting to sly is pretty hilarious... Yet, have these crocs evolved into anything else? No, they have always been crocodiles and still are crocs.

Oh, and as for Archaeopteryx giving rise to a new phylum, your dead wrong. Archaeopteryx belongs to the Chordata Phylum, as do Crocodiles, Sharks, Monkeys, Carnotaurus, Snakes , Stegosaurs, and Reindeer.

[C S]

Well concerning the crocs, what did you THINK I was talking about? Of course I was talking about present day crocs, which are quite old to begin with

and about Archeopteryx, ya that was my brain fart, I meant adaptation

now back on topic

Why would a croc evolve any further? Like I said, theres no need. Like I said, species dont just pop up one day, it takes millions of years. Which was your entire argument, we havent seen any new species. There havent been any new EVOLUTIONS, but there are crap loads of species on Earth, and many times more undiscovered. To address your issue with lack of transitional ancestors

For instance, For a while Deinosuchus and Sarchosuches were the top dogs of their time. However, they died out and were suceeded briefly by land crocs, which hunted for prey on the land. Those died out and were replaced by the crocs we see today.

voila

[Giratina93]

Why would a croc evolve any further? Like I said, theres no need. Like I said, species dont just pop up one day, it takes millions of years. Which was your entire argument, we havent seen any new species. There havent been any new EVOLUTIONS, but there are crap loads of species on Earth, and many times more undiscovered.

Wll, if Evolution is as blind and random as Darwin said it was, then even if Crocodiles don't need to evolve, they will still evolve. They can't just turn off the "Evolve"button once they get to perfection. They will still evolve, but not into a whole new kind of creature, just into new species of crocs that are variations of the basic croc kind...

[C S]

There ALWAYS variation of crocs

the same reason why theres variation of humans depending on where you live, genetically we are still human though. As said before, your not gonna have a drastically different creature transitioning from another just like that. Its a long process thats all based on chance

[TyrannoTitan]

Evolution does tie with adaptation. A lot. Usually, when a species evolves a trait or mutation, its usually to cope with something in their environment. During the Ice Age, Mammoths were around with their thick coats to protect against the cold. When the Ice Age ended, most other elephant types completely lacked this fur, because it was no longer needed.

Hell, WE evolved down our path because of tall grass. Before humans were humans, they were monkeys, and developed the ability to stand upright to spot predators and sources of food over the tall grass they lived around. This adaption led to a chain of events that created a totally new species: Humans.

So yes, Gira, evolution DOES have an on off function to some extent. Random mutations occur quite often, but those that don't benefit the species end up killing off the animals that possess that mutation, therefore not allowing it to spread. This also means that beneficial adaptions could end up in a species or variation that ends up replacing the old.

Also, you have to understand that we once thought that the universe revolved around Earth. Darwin was brilliant, but it was a long time ago. His information led to our understanding of evolution, much like our early theories of the universe led to our current understanding, which isn't even complete. To take Darwin's word as gospel is just foolish. Times change, but his concept is still as true as ever.

[Evil Eye]

Not this again...
Gira, I'd just like to ask... going a little off topic here, but how do explain the whole case with MRSA getting immune to antibiotics, etc without evolution?

Edit:

Wll, if Evolution is as blind and random as Darwin said it was, then even if Crocodiles don't need to evolve, they will still evolve. They can't just turn off the "Evolve"button once they get to perfection. They will still evolve, but not into a whole new kind of creature, just into new species of crocs that are variations of the basic croc kind...

1. That's exactly why there are different kinds of crocodillians.

2. There might be extremely small adaptations that will eventually lead to something big enough to cause a new species going on right now in said crocodillians.

3. Yes, evolution isnt a switch controlled by the creature evolving. However:
a. While evolution is based on Darwin's ideals, there are obviously changes in them since he thought up the whole concept, that im sure he, being a scientist, would accept were he alive today.
b. An organism will only evolve if there is a NEED to, barring the random mutations in genes, which, as you said yourself, usually cant be considered evolution, as they're just very small changes that may benefit, harm, or do nothing to the organism (the ones causing it to benefit, might, however, turn into something big enough to cause a new species, again, while the harmful ones would most likely kill off the creature eventually). Take the simple example of the giraffe. It needed to reach the leaves, high up in trees. The ones with short necks couldn't do that, and so died out. By freak coincidence (and this is the "random" part of it), one of them would have a bit longer neck than the rest of them, letting it reach the high up leaves. It survives, while the short necked ones dont, long neck produces offspring, which all have longer necks than what used to be, the cycle continues. Another great example is the flying fish. The fish needed to escape predators; it found jumping a useful way to do so. Eventually, there'd have been a couple fish that could jump farther than it's buddies, and so, it would escape predators more easily or more often, while the others may get eaten by those predators. The fish passes on the longer jumping trait to it's offspring, which then also jump farther in turn, and survive, and so on. In the meantime, it would have also started to wag its tail the way modern flying fish do, while perhaps also spreading out its fins to catch some air, and, presto, we have the current product.

[1234sdf]

"Hell, WE evolved down our path because of tall grass"

It makes me wonder,what would the present day earth be like if grass(in general) never appeared. I know the herbivores would be different, but what else?

[SniperSaurus]

Well alot less greener.... no use for some insects....

[Doc 42]

Wll, if Evolution is as blind and random as Darwin said it was, then even if Crocodiles don't need to evolve, they will still evolve. They can't just turn off the "Evolve"button once they get to perfection. They will still evolve, but not into a whole new kind of creature, just into new species of crocs that are variations of the basic croc kind...

You must remember. A creature 'evolving' is an abstract term.

A species does not 'EVOLVE' as an entity.
That is called Intelligent design, where something controls how a whole species develops. As a theory, it isn't very popular, mainly because the idea that a species could colaboratively change themselves is just stupid.

Evolution, on it's most basic basic form, is everywhere all around us.
Look around your class room at school. Look at how different and unique everyone of us is. Different hair colours, skin tones, tall people, smallish people, heavily built people, skinny people etc etc.

Everything constantly changes, but it's not called evolution.
It only becomes evolution, when selective design comes into play. Be it intelligent design or Natural Selection.

For example: you have an artic fox, white, fereal, furry fox.
This fox has a litter of pups.
Each one of these pups is unique. Some are smaller, some are bigger etc.
now we introduce Intelligent Design.

Lets say, some breeders take about 50 foxes and begin breeding them, and then choosing only the cutest and fluffiest pups, which are then bred together and so forth. Within a few generations, as few as 5, the resulting pups are ridiculously cuddely and tame.
The fereal artic fox, having been domesticated into a cuddely artic fox. Essentially, evolved.
This is the same way Dogs were domesticated.

Natural Selection works in a similar, but slower and less exclusive way. In the natural world, survival by any means possible, is what allows an animal to breed, and is therefore, a success.
Essentially, the animals which aren't capable of surviving dissappear, and those who do better, evolve.

However, if nobody does significantly better, then nothing happens.
Crocs didn't turn off the 'Evolve' button, nature did.
The Crocs stopped evolving because the weak crocs stopped dying.
If you were to take lets say, 1000 crocs, and released them into an artificial environment, then establish a food chain, only to replace their primary food source with a scarcer and tougher food source, you'd soon find crocs dying. Their numbers would drop, as it would be harder for them to find food.
Eventually the number of crocs would even out and stop dropping.

I garantee you, if you were to examine these crocs then, you'd find they had evolved. Not a new leg or anything stupid like that, but you'd probably find them to be stronger, or equipped with more suitible camoflauge.

[SniperSaurus]

Or you could have just said that animals adapt to their enviorments, but so slowly we dont notice.

[Evil Eye]

Well alot less greener.... no use for some insects....

The first bit I agree with. The second not so much. A lot less green, yes, because if there's something so powerful that grass is wiped out or unable to survive, then all the other plants would surely die, being less tough and hardy than grass.
I have yet to see an insect that can't survive without grass though.

[SniperSaurus]

Well theres some that are built for grass, camo etc,

[Giratina93]

Not this again...
Gira, I'd just like to ask... going a little off topic here, but how do explain the whole case with MRSA getting immune to antibiotics, etc without evolution?

Very simple... they've had that immunity from the start... It's something I can't really explain, but then, neither can biologists...

And as for Evolution occuring only when there's a NEED to, that's just pure idiocy that goes against the point of Evolution. Evolution is blind, random, and unguided, only caused by completely random genes getting mutated or shutting on and off. If an organism were to need, say, a pair of wings, if one were to follow the blind, unguided theory, it's just as likely for said organism to develop hydrogen sacks to allow it to float, than to develop a pair of wings, both of which would take millions of years, with random mutation building upon random mutation. If left as is, all you'd get would be complete random piles of garbage unidentifiable as intelligent life rather than what we see around us today. Yes, small mutations do occur (As from, say, one basic kind of Crocodile to all the diffrent species we have today, as well as loads of extinct ones,)but tiny, random mutations cannot turn a crocodile into, say, a tuatara or a Pythosaur, even with numerous blind mutations stacked ontop of each other...

[TyrannoTitan]

I don't think you understand the definition of Evolution. Adaptation and evolution go hand and hand. Like humans, for instance. We were once monkeys who lived in grasslands. To look over the tall grass for various reasons (Food, identifying each other, spotting predators), we had to stand on our back legs. After doing it for so long, we began to evolve to fit the upright posture. Instead of it being simply a behavioral thing, it became the only way future generations can move.

Evolution isn't just THROW A DART AND MUTATE DURP. Yes, its random, but unfit mutations die out really quick. Those that benefit the species live on, and soon the entire species shares the trait, albeit in a very long time.