toldailytopic: How many years ago did dinosaurs walk the earth? And how do we know th

[Angel4Truth]

What if the world is a cube and we just perceive it as round? What if at the center of Jupiter, Zeus is pointing his staff outward where the Great Red Spot is? What if we infinitely finite?

This is what creationist inquiries sound like.

Cows turning into whales sounds much more reasonable.

 

[Memento Mori]

Cows turning into whales sounds much more reasonable.

Guess again!

Unless of course, you think pakicetus is a cow...

 

[Angel4Truth]

Guess again!

Unless of course, you think pakicetus is a cow...

I never thought they came from cows, some evolutionists teach it. Know what sarcasm is?

 

[Angel4Truth]

Whale Evolution:


Call it an unfinished story, but with a plot that's a grabber. It's the tale of an ancient land mammal making its way back to the sea, becoming the forerunner of today's whales. In doing so, it lost its legs, and all of its vital systems became adapted to a marine existence -- the reverse of what happened millions of years previously, when the first animals crawled out of the sea onto land.

Some details remain fuzzy and under investigation. But we know for certain that this back-to-the-water evolution did occur, thanks to a profusion of intermediate fossils that have been uncovered over the past two decades.

In 1978, paleontologist Phil Gingerich discovered a 52-million-year-old skull in Pakistan that resembled fossils of creodonts -- wolf-sized carnivores that lived between 60 and 37 million years ago, in the early Eocene epoch. But the skull also had characteristics in common with the Archaeocetes, the oldest known whales. The new bones, dubbed Pakicetus, proved to have key features that were transitional between terrestrial mammals and the earliest true whales. One of the most interesting was the ear region of the skull. In whales, it is extensively modified for directional hearing underwater. In Pakicetus, the ear region is intermediate between that of terrestrial and fully aquatic animals.

Another, slightly more recent form, called Ambulocetus, was an amphibious animal. Its forelimbs were equipped with fingers and small hooves. The hind feet of Ambulocetus, however, were clearly adapted for swimming. Functional analysis of its skeleton shows that it could get around effectively on land and could swim by pushing back with its hind feet and undulating its tail, as otters do today.

Rhodocetus shows evidence of an increasingly marine lifestyle. Its neck vertebrae are shorter, giving it a less flexible, more stable neck -- an adaptation for swimming also seen in other aquatic animals such as sea cows, and in an extreme form in modern whales. The ear region of its skull is more specialized for underwater hearing. And its legs are disengaged from its pelvis, symbolizing the severance of the connection to land locomotion.

By 40 million years ago, Basilosaurus -- clearly an animal fully adapted to an aquatic environment -- was swimming the ancient seas, propelled by its sturdy flippers and long, flexible body. Yet Basilosaurus still retained small, weak hind legs -- baggage from its evolutionary past -- even though it could not walk on land.

None of these animals is necessarily a direct ancestor of the whales we know today; they may be side branches of the family tree. But the important thing is that each fossil whale shares new, whale-like features with the whales we know today, and in the fossil record, we can observe the gradual accumulation of these aquatic adaptations in the lineage that led to modern whales.

As evolutionary biologist Neil Shubin points out, "In one sense, evolution didn't invent anything new with whales. It was just tinkering with land mammals. It's using the old to make the new."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/03/4/l_034_05.html

Sounds like a crock to me.

 

[Memento Mori]

I never thought they came from cows, some evolutionists teach it. Know what sarcasm is?

No evolutionists teach it. That is flat out false. Some creationists accuse some evolutionists of teaching but they don't. This was based on a misunderstanding of the word 'ungulate' which means hoofed because Pakicetus had hooves (which obviously means cows to creationists, apparently).

 

[alwight]

Leaving the thinking to the experts is not a good policy for a thinking person in a society where so much information is available. Scientist need to be questioned.

Thinking for yourself seems like a much better idea to me than simply adhering to a dogma or doctrine.
The scientific method involves questioning, falsifying and peer review, so what specifically makes you suggest that perhaps science isn't being questioned enough or that anyone just accepts what scientists may conclude?

 

[Angel4Truth]

No evolutionists teach it. That is flat out false. Some creationists accuse some evolutionists of teaching but they don't. This was based on a misunderstanding of the word 'ungulate' which means hoofed because Pakicetus had hooves (which obviously means cows to creationists, apparently).

You are wrong.



http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/biology/2001-09-19-cow-whales.htm


09/19/2001


Researchers: Whales related to cows, hippos

By Alex Dominguez, Associated Press

Fossil discoveries in Pakistan have led scientists to believe whales share a common ancestor with land-based plant-eaters such as cows and hippopotamuses.

New fossil discoveries add weight to the conclusion that whales are related to land-based plant-eaters such as cows and hippopotamuses rather than to an extinct group of carnivores, two groups of researchers report (more at link)

 

[alwight]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/03/4/l_034_05.html

Sounds like a crock to me.

Or a Crocoduck perhaps?

 

[Angel4Truth]

nah its more like this:

 

[Memento Mori]

You are wrong.



http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/biology/2001-09-19-cow-whales.htm


09/19/2001


Researchers: Whales related to cows, hippos

By Alex Dominguez, Associated Press

Fossil discoveries in Pakistan have led scientists to believe whales share a common ancestor with land-based plant-eaters such as cows and hippopotamuses.

New fossil discoveries add weight to the conclusion that whales are related to land-based plant-eaters such as cows and hippopotamuses rather than to an extinct group of carnivores, two groups of researchers report (more at link)

:doh:

Yes, ungulates are related.

They did not:

Cows turning into whales sounds much more reasonable.

The same way, we did not evolve from modern chimps. Cousins are not parents of one another.

 

[alwight]

You are wrong.



http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/biology/2001-09-19-cow-whales.htm


09/19/2001


Researchers: Whales related to cows, hippos

By Alex Dominguez, Associated Press

Fossil discoveries in Pakistan have led scientists to believe whales share a common ancestor with land-based plant-eaters such as cows and hippopotamuses.

New fossil discoveries add weight to the conclusion that whales are related to land-based plant-eaters such as cows and hippopotamuses rather than to an extinct group of carnivores, two groups of researchers report (more at link)

Cows and whales are both modern creatures. Cows didn’t come from whales, whales didn’t come from cows, but it seems that they share a common ancestor.
Humans didn’t come from monkeys, they too are both modern creatures who evolved separately since having a common ancestor.
That is what your link is talking about, not what you choose to think it says.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Spin ... in the meantime while the evilutionists try to explain it all away , enjoy this song by the same name

Spin

 

[Memento Mori]

Spin ... in the meantime while the evilutionists try to explain it all away , enjoy this song by the same name

Excellent reply. I believe O'Reilly is looking for some new people in his "No Spin" Zone. :thumb:

 

[alwight]

Willful ignorance:

Willful ignorance is the state and practice of ignoring any sensory input that appears to contradict one’s inner model of reality. At heart, it is almost certainly driven by confirmation bias

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Willful_ignorance

 

[Angel4Truth]

Willful ignorance:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Willful_ignorance

But of course it can only be me practicing that, right? Not you, never you.

 

[Memento Mori]

But of course it can only be me practicing that, right? Not you, never you.

You realize we both properly replied to your accusation with facts, right?

 

[alwight]

But of course it can only be me practicing that, right? Not you, never you.

You are perhaps the one who is most clearly demonstrating what awful wilful ignorance is here at least.:first:

 

[Angel4Truth]

You realize we both properly replied to your accusation with facts, right?

You realize i proved that in fact some evolutionists did teach that whales came from cows when you said none taught that and creationists made it up- when they did not right?

 

[Angel4Truth]

You are perhaps the one who is most clearly demonstrating what awful wilful ignorance is here at least.:first:

 

[alwight]

You realize i proved that in fact some evolutionists did teach that whales came from cows when you said none taught that and creationists made it up- when they did not right?

That wasn't what you chose to think your link said.