Newly found species fills evolutionary gap between fish and land animals

EurekAlert (AAAS) ^ | 05 April 2006 | Staff

[PistolPaknMama]

You're a condesceding arrogant ass, but suprisingly a testament to flaws in the evolution theory. So maybe you do serve a purpose. Thanks for the sexist knitting links. Actually I gave that up years ago in order to spend more time exploring why some men never quite evolved. Ever so often another one surfaces. If you need some freshly knitted socks, freepmail me. You may not need them with all the hair on your feet, but you never know!

[grey_whiskers]

[Photo of mudskipper deleted].

Vade, everytime I see that photo, I have a brief but instantaneous impression that the mudskipper had just gnawed through the tree it is sitting on.

The missing link between fish and beaver.

Cheers!

[muawiyah]

ADM does this all the time.

I suspect that once you have an intelligent lifeform messing with genomes and inserting here and there, and fiddling around with viruses in the oceans, all our older "models" turn into so much poop.

Whether or not there was ever an Intelligent Designer, there is now, and God help him, eh?!

[grey_whiskers]

I see. I suppose that posting such an image is easier than providing actual evidence to support the claim, however it is far less convincing.

FSM ping! ;-)

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"You're a condesceding arrogant ass,..."

And yet your arguments are still just as silly. No evolutionists say that there ever were egg laying primates. Nor is there any reason at all to think there should have been egg laying primates. :)

"Thanks for the sexist knitting links."

I wasn't being sexist. I was looking for something less intellectually stimulating for you. Something you could handle. Debates about evolution are obviously too much for you.

"If you need some freshly knitted socks, freepmail me. You may not need them with all the hair on your feet, but you never know!"

Sorry, my name isn't Frodo.

I see you have not had enough pints to enlighten us on your *gills to testicles* theory. I'll wait. I recommend Guinness.

[balrog666]

Oh, I see ~ I was responding to the claims of "live birth" ~ simply noting that sharks give live birth ~ just like mammals.

Some sharks.

There are also snakes that give live birth..

Some snakes.

[jec41]

He didn't notice a fact ~ he came up with an idea for a model.

Big difference.

Maybe in your mind however he constituted theory using the method of science. The method of science is observation of a material fact, evidence and emperical evidence of the fact and a explination of the fact. Theories are composed of facts and laws. It is not the model of evolution.

[grey_whiskers]

the bag develops in stages over time into a more fully functional lung

Details? Proposed mechanism?

If you want to point me to a link (no pun intended), that's fine. But I'm not doing this for flamebait--if you wish send me a private freepmail and I'll explain my question in greater detail...

Cheers!

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Hey, you're an analogy kind of guy. I like that! They really are a useful means of communication.
I enjoy writing, and have completed a manuscript that I would love to have published. Right now I am editing. So, this analogy makes complete sense to me, as I went through this very process.
Thank you. That is an interesting way of explaining this perspective.

[ml1954]

There's currently a debate between "scientific true believers" and "noncommital scientists".

Define what a "noncommital scientist" is and provide evidence there is: 1) a significant number of them (how many are there?); and 2) that there is a debate taken seriously by at least a majority of the scientific community.

[highball]

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.

I don't think he's actually interested in the definition of words. He's made it clear that he'd rather be ignorant.

Not worth the time. How do you have a conversation with someone who choses fanaticism over facts?

[grey_whiskers]

Perhaps you don;t know what diatribe means.

And here we go...as if on cue!

...and that's my cue.

1 diatribe = 2 unitribes. (rim shot)

Cheers!

[muawiyah]

Darwin was running ahead of the pack he was in, and the scientific method was pinned down pretty much after he was gone from the scene.

It's coincidental that his methods resemble the modern approach.

Where he stepped off the planet was with his sexual selection theories ~ although they are still popular, other, more rational bases for the observations keep getting thought up. Remember, for Darwin, long separations from his wife may have given him a lot of ideas. With the animals, it's simply chemistry.

[grey_whiskers]

That would've been funnier and more apropos had it been an ark...

Cheers!

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Remember, for Darwin, long separations from his wife may have given him a lot of ideas."

When did he have long separations from his wife?

[muawiyah]

I just identified one right there in my post. He's noncommital about a lot of this stuff ~ just wants to move on and see what all those apparantly unused genes we find in viruses do.

I think it's a great idea.

[jec41]

Not worth the time. How do you have a conversation with someone who choses fanaticism over facts?

You are correct and there are plenty of them all over the world. They stopped progress for thousands of years. Hope they don't get control again. They would suppress any new knowledge.

[George - the Other]

Thanks for the posting and the ping.

[ml1954]

I didn't think you would, or could.

[Sola Veritas]

"Must make you proud inventing such an ignorant strawman argument."

Call me stupid (which I'm certain you will), but I thought is was witty and funny.