Newly found species fills evolutionary gap between fish and land animals

EurekAlert (AAAS) ^ | 05 April 2006 | Staff

[VadeRetro]

Mudskippers are funny looking little dudes. Pretty amazing.

They are all of that.

[furball4paws]

"I do part with ToE on the evolution of man. But, I have no scientific evidence to back it up, so I won't argue it on this forum."

This is a serious question and I'm not looking to score points, just understand. Do you feel this way because it interferes with the "special" relationship between man and God?

[jec41]

Anyway, you lose the argument because you have to resort to 3rd grade comments about someone's IQ. Good day!

Please restrict your comments to the 2nd grade level so they can be better understood by yellowdoghunter. i cannot believed that she went to collage.

[jec41]

Anyway, you lose the argument because you have to resort to 3rd grade comments about someone's IQ. Good day!

Please restrict your comments to the 2nd grade level so they can be better understood by yellowdoghunter. i cannot believed that she went to collage.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

I noticed that the scientific method is nearly identical to the philosophical branch of epistemology.

[jec41]

Someone's idea. Many, many people may agree with that idea but it does not make it a fact.

Someone's idea is a opinion void of facts and not supported by any evidence. A theory is defined as observed fact, evidence and explanation of the fact. Not someone's idea.

[VadeRetro]

So it had crocodillian carachteristics but not human? All we need now is a crocodile that walked upright and/or had opposable thumbs. The tiktaalik is hardly a missing link. There are lots of amphibious animals that may have evolved from aquatic animals as a result of drought.

So a transition from fish to amphibians (that is, at the taxonomic level of "class") is not a transitional form? Move the goalposts much?

Is it also no big deal if an amphibian becomes a reptile? If a reptile becomes a primitive, egg-laying mammal? If a primitive mammal becomes a placental mammal? If a placental tree-dweller becomes a lemur-like primate? If a primate becomes a monkey? If a monkey becomes an ape? If an ape becomes a man? None of those are any harder than gill-breathing fish to lung-breathing, land-living, tetrapod.

[furball4paws]

Old science was indeed "Natural Philosophy". Indeed a Ph.D. is a Doctor of Philosophy, although there is precious little overt philosophy taught as part of science education today.

Philosophy is still a structural basis for science, but it is quite different from modern ideas of Philosophy.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Even in philosophy one must have logical reasoning to back up one's beliefs. Otherwise it becomes irrational epistemology. One does have the freedom to choose this as their preferred philosophy though.

[shuckmaster]

My apology for not indicating sarcasm.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Yes, it just seems to me that we are special and unique beyond what evolution can account for. I also do look to the Bible on this one. It does seem that God created us to be what we are. I don't doubt that we physically change. That would account for all the diversity we see among humans. Be we all still posses the ability to learn, reason, feel, defy our instinct, and choose. I know that evolution can show a progression of skulls that evolve in what appears to be human. I don't doubt that there were some creatures that looked very similar. I just believe that we are different from animals in a way that evolution can not explain, at least not conclusively. But, like I said, I have no evidence for science to test.

[jec41]

A theory is just a theory no matter which word you wish to put in front of it.

On that we agree. It explains a material fact. It is of a higher order of either faith, belief, opinion, or fact. Thats why theories are accepted over faith, belief, opinion, and fact. Maybe you should look up the definition of theory as it applies to evolution.

[jec41]

Notice that word, "COULD". Doesn't sound 100% for sure to me, maybe you read it differently. And if so, to each his/her own.

We make glass stronger than steel, however all things may be breakable. You might try throwing stones at a 5' diameter globe of bullet proof glass and see how you make out.

[Dimensio]

Someone's idea.

Then I am afraid that you are misinformed. Within a scientific context, "theory" is far more than idea. A "theory" is an explanation that is founded upon independently-verified peer-reviewed observation and has made multiple successful predictions. If an "idea" has not met these criteria, then it cannot be considered "theory". That evolution is a theory indicates that it is well-supported by observation evidence and that it has made multiple successful predictions about observed events.

[curiosity]

ignorance is inversely proportional to the amount they know.

Isn't that functional relationship true by definition?

[ahayes]

LOL! That's ok, I'll copy and paste my reply for use later--I'm sure I'll need it. ;-)

[ahayes]

Actually, I've never heard it said that women suffer those side effects! :-D

[Dimensio]

Yea! I'm sure this creature was thinking "Gee, it's very vicious out here in the deep. I think I'll learn to grow mini-legs over the next several million years so I can take a look-see on land and see if it's safe. If so, I'll then spend another several million years morphing myself into a 'land critter'"

And you call that substative?

No. I call that "attacking a strawman through ridicule".

[Dimensio]

Do you have an argument that addresses the substance of the claims, or -- like AmericansUnited -- is the entirety of your position built upon baseless ridicule?

[PistolPaknMama]

Move the goalposts much?

Actually I never move the goalposts. I don't have to since nobody has gotten near the end zone yet. Fish to amphibians to reptiles to egg laying mammals is still not a link from fish to man. There are still aquatic animals in this century that adapt to drought conditions by becoming more amphibious and I've yet to meet a human that lays eggs, much less hang from trees on its days off, unless you want to discuss the welfare class.

There is nothing in the whole Darwin *theory* to support the fish-to-man theory, no matter how many times they "move the goalposts."