Newly found species fills evolutionary gap between fish and land animals

EurekAlert (AAAS) ^ | 05 April 2006 | Staff

[PatrickHenry]

If this is even half as big a discovery as this makes it appear, why are nothing other than small fringe sites carrying it?

The two sources I linked are: (1) EurekAlert!, which is the online news service of The American Association for the Advancement of Science; and (2) Nature magazine, one of the most highly regarded, peer-reviewed science journals in existence. Not classy enough for you?

[js1138]

Now you're just lying.

I have made mistakes on occasion, but this isn't one of them. As others have pointed out, Newton's Laws have been superceded by Einstein's theory of gravity, and work is in progress on a better theory of gravity.

Einstein's theory is more precise than Newton's Law.

[AmericaUnited]

Did you write all that yourself?

No, it was probably the same idiots who wrote this:

Huge predators would have lurked in Tiktaalik's rivers and lakes, study co-leader Shubin says—perhaps one reason why Tiktaalik appears to have been headed for land.

"Land had no predators, and it also had food in the form of invertebrates," Shubin said. "Put this all together and the shallows and mudflats might have been a good place to make a living."

Supposedly learned individuals put out this drivel and then other supposedly learned individuals soak it up like sponges...

[js1138]

So, someone has actually observed something rise from nothing, observed life rise from non-life, observed multi-celled organisms rise from single-celled organisms, observed intelligence rise from non-intelligence? You've got yourself a scoop there, buddy.

You get your science education from Hollywood movies?

[Ichneumon]

I always thought the lungfish was the link.

"A" link, but not "the" link -- a chain has many links, and so does an evolutionary sequence.

[Dimensio]

Do you have any arguments of substance, or is the whole of your objection an appeal to ridicule, without any actual attempt to dispute the claims?

[wallcrawlr]

^{Revelation 4:11}Intelligent Design
Constantly searching for objectivity in the evolution debate...
See my profile for info

[Right Wing Professor]

I am going to go out on a limb and make a few bold predictions:

And here comes RightWingNilla on the inside. He's three lengths ahead of Intelligent Design, coming to the turn. Four lengths. Five lengths. In the final stretch...

[Ichneumon]

Supposedly learned individuals put out this drivel

It's not drivel, it's based on the actual evidence, unlike your desperate attempts at empty ridicule as a substitute for actual analysis.

and then other supposedly learned individuals soak it up like sponges...

Because it best fits the totality of the evidence and makes predictions which are subsequently validated. That's that "science" thing you must have heard about.

[Sofa King]

It's amazing. Scientists, using ToE, predict that a fossil like this must exist. Then, BAM, it turns up. Creationist logic? ToE is "over".

[js1138]

A grain of salt for you.

[tallhappy]

Mine. If I quote something, I always say so and give the source.

Thank you. It was not clear in the manner you presented it.

I would be very surprised to hear such diatribe from a respectable project such as the ToL project at Arizona.

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Give a scientist a fish and he'll figure out where it came from.

Give a creationist a fish and he'll say you made it up.

[js1138]

What dinosaur? Where does this article talk about dinosaurs?

You should be aware that ID, with its vastly superior explanatory model, anticipated this find. In fact it anticipates everything.

[Right Wing Professor]

Supposedly learned individuals put out this drivel and then other supposedly learned individuals soak it up like sponges...

And that leaves dumbass clueless twits nothing to do but rant against it on FR?

Here's a free clue. They are learned. They stayed in school, and read books and stuff. They learned biology from books and biologists, not preachers. They know stuff you don't. All you have is an opinion, and you know what opinions are like.

[AmericaUnited]

They extrapolate so far from so little that they might ... try to get stints doing late night comedy.

Of course, all of the 'true believers' hang on every word.

[Right Wing Professor]

I would be very surprised to hear such diatribe from a respectable project such as the ToL project at Arizona.

Please identify what is incorrect in what he wrote. Be specific.

[swain_forkbeard]

I ain't no monkey's uncle.

[Ichneumon]

Interesting read, but what would REALLY spark my interest, and what the article fails to mention, is how they breathed. Gills? Lungs? Somewhere in between? What?

There are a number of fish lineages which have both gills and lungs (as do amphbians, at least at some stages of their life cycle), so the transition from fish to land-dweller isn't as strange or "difficult" as it might seem at first glance. Start with gills, at some point add an auxilliary air-storage bag (such as the swim bladder), the bag develops in stages over time into a more fully functional lung, then as the lineage spends more and more time on land, the gills become a useless vestage and fade away as the lungs become the exclusive oxygen-gathering system. Various stages of this transition can be found in numerous extant species.

[Lurking Libertarian]

to make the remark that humans did evolve from something similar sounds like it is wishful thinking that he, a human, likes the idea of being a creation evolved from a fishlike creature, instead of being created by a loving God in His likeness... I dunno... maybe some do like that idea...

Some of us both (a) accept the overwhelming evidence for the common descent of all life on earth, and also (b) believe that humanity was created in the (spiritual) image of God.