Request to intelligent freepers that beleive in evolution - post the name of the species

self ^ | 2004/02/13 | self

[Truth666]

Good comment - it's part of debunking that point.

[qam1]

Is this case different from dogs ?

Yes, Their seperation is much further along. Unlike Dogs goldfish can have 1000s of offspring per year so they were able evolve faster from the carp than dogs could from wolves.

Wolves and Dogs are still pretty much genetically identical while goldfish and carp are a much further apart, For example Goldfish have 94 Chromosomes while the Carp has 100. Unlike Dogs and wolves which can still produce fertile offspring of both sexes goldfish-carp hybrids can only produce fertile males. The genetics of the Carp family of fishes is very bizarre and unique, Different species (Even of different geneses) can breed that way also, There is a lot of redundancy in their genetics (hence the high Chromosome #)  which enables them to produce hybrids this way so using the strict definition of speciation of being able to breed with each other doesn't apply in the case of Goldfish and Carps. Though that's only with the common goldfish and carp, I am not sure about the fancy breeds (the ones at the bottom) if they can still mate with Carps in many cases they can't mate with other breeds of goldfish and produce viable offspring (Not because of genetics but because their body layout is different that their offspring's swim bladders get screwed up so they die)

What do you mean with "New ... Organs and structures" ?

Well look at the bottom 3 pictures, You won't find a bubble eye (#2) or the lionhead/oranda (#1 & #3) head growth on any carp, These fancy breeds also have 2 tails and their body plan is egg shaped as opposed to the cigar shape of the common goldfish and carp and their swim bladders are arranged differently. And in picture #1 notice the scales, Those are called Pearl scales which are a unique type of scale that you also won't find on any carp or any other fish. 

And since you don't find these features in the wild carp and the ancient Chinese didn't have genetic engineering capabilities we can safely conclude that they arose from mutations and through selective breeding they evolved. And yes even though people selected the breeding it's still evolution, Those that had unique features that piped it's owners interest survived and got to breed while those who didn't became dinner. And before you say they were always there but not seen because those features wouldn't survive in the wild, The bubble eye was first recognized in the early 20th century so for it to have remained hidden for the first 900+ years and hundreds of generations of domestication is a ridiculous notion (And other features came way later also).

I don't know the exact number but I would bet that goldfish (especially the fancy breeds) are further apart genetically percent wise from their original carp ancestor than chimpanzees are from Humans. I could probably name more differences between goldfish-carp than humans-chimps. If not they are pretty close in separation differences and if in 1000 years goldfish can desperate that far from their ancestors in 5,000,000 years humans and chimps could from theirs.

[qam1]

if goldfish can desperate that far

Make that

if goldfish can separate that far

[garylmoore]

I'm sorry but you won't find an intelligent freeper that believes in that nonsence. Intelligent people only believe the truth, not some made up, wacky story about how life began. But keep searching you may stumble upon the truth, it doesn't really take intelligence to find the answer.

[balrog666]

Awesomely-ignorant anti-science thread placemarker.

[Gargantua]

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

Abe Lincoln once said something to the effect of, "When you throw a stone into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps the loudest is probably the one you hit."

;>/

[Gargantua]

In'shallah, babe.

Now get back in your burkah and speak only when spoken to. N'kay?

;>/

[Tigercap]

What evidence is there of evolution between species? Small variations within species - yes, but nothing between species (ala "big boom").

[qam1]

What evidence is there of evolution between species? Small variations within species - yes, but nothing between species (ala "big boom").

HUH???????

Open your eyes!!!! Look at the pictures in my post that's way more than "Small Variation within species", Goldfish have evolved into a different species from carp

Look at again, Here's the bubble eye breed first recognized in the 1920's

Differences between the original carp it evolved from

1) 94 Chromosomes instead of 100
2) Different color, Gold instead of Grey
3) New organ evolved, The Fluid filled sacks (Bubble Eye)which includes new blood vessel supply and regulatory system
4) No dorsal fin
5) 2 Tails instead of one
6) Eyes facing upward instead of on the sides
7) Fewer columns of scales
8) "Egg" shaped body layout instead of "Cigar" shaped
9) No Barbels
10) Bone structure altered
11) Frontal Swim Bladder rounded instead of elongated
12) Different size of other fins
13) Able to survive in captivity

And so much more, That's probably more differences than you can name between Chimps and Humans and that's just the bubble eye breed other breeds of Goldfish also have a wide variety of other evolved features (i.e Lionhead, Pearlscale, Telescope, Pompom, Etc.)

Those aren't just variations of the carp, Those are new features/structures/organs that evolved. You will not find a single one of those traits in a wild carp so it's not just variation within species. We know these features evolved because we have the total historical record of the Goldfish which first came about relatively recently in China in about 1000 A.D..

I guarantee you, If you find someone who didn't know through historical records that Goldfish came from Carp, If you showed them picture of any one of those breeds at the bottom of my post and a picture of a carp they would not only not be able to identify them as being related species but they wouldn't even believe they are in the same family (or "Kind" if you prefer).

[Truth666]

"so they were able evolve faster from the carp than dogs could from wolves."
I understand that you are impressed with the velocity of "evolution". Would you please post the latin names of the fish displayed in your photos, and tell when the first specimen of the three species at the bottom first were "created" ?

[qam1]

"so they were able evolve faster from the carp than dogs could from wolves."

I understand that you are impressed with the velocity of "evolution".

It's not a question of being impressed, Just an observation. Goldfish are able to evolve new traits faster than dogs because they have 1000s of offspring per year as opposed to 1-6 which increases the chances of mutations and gives breeders much more to work with. Plus in dogs many of the original wolf traits are desirable so we wouldn't have been trying to breed all of them out.  

Would you please post the latin names of the fish displayed in your photos,

The original Carp Goldfish came from is the Gibel carp (Also known as the Prussian carp or Silver Crucian carp) it's latin species name is carassius auratus gibelio and all goldfish have the latin species name carassius auratus auratus.

Here is a better picture of the Gibel carp, As you can see the differences are striking.

Though I will point out I was in error before when I said Goldfish lost their barbels, They were already previously lost in the Gibel carp.

and tell when the first specimen of the three species at the bottom first were "created" ?

All three aren't considered different species (yet) from the original goldfish they are still just considered different breeds.

But all three were created between 1893-1908

Here is the history of Goldfish, I was slightly off before with some exact years but the point still stands that they are new created features/structures that were absent in the Gibel carp.

(d. = dynasty)

Chun d. (265-419) gold colouration first recorded

Tang d. (618-907) goldfish raised in captivity (in ponds) in Buddhist monasteries; common goldfish probably established

Nan Song d. (1127-1279) goldfish raised in domestic ponds; white and red-and-white colouration developed

Ming d. (1368-1644) goldfish raised in bowls indoors as pets, enabling selection for mutations that would not have survived (or been observed) in ponds; double tail and anal fins, dorsal-less condition and short body evolved, eggfish developed

1590 red cap

1592 globe eye

1596 matt scales and calico colouration; keeping of fancy goldfish, once the preserve of the aristocracy, now widespread.

1603 goldfish first exported to Japan

1611 goldfish first exported to Europe (Portugal)

Ching d. (1644-1911) bronze and blue colouration

1728 goldfish first bred in Europe (Holland)

1870 celestial

1874 goldfish first exported to America

1893 oranda/tigerhead

1900 pompon and pearlscale; shubunkin colouration developed in Japan

1908 bubble eye

1911 curled operculum

early 1900s comet and veiltail

1934 Bristol shubunkin standard promulgated

[Truth666]

"But all three were created between 1893-1908 "
By reading this below, I get the impression that they are not that old :
"the variety, and characteristics, of goldfish available in aquarium stores have changed dramatically during the past 20 years.
Most beginners are not really interested in the ordinary goldfish of yesterday - what today's market appallingly labels as "feeder goldfish."
Instead, goldfish keepers are attracted to the growing number of "fancy" goldfish varieties: lionheads veiltails, moors, bubble eyes, celestials, etc."

[qam1]

By reading this below, I get the impression that they are not that old : "the variety, and characteristics, of goldfish available in aquarium stores have changed dramatically during the past 20 years. Most beginners are not really interested in the ordinary goldfish of yesterday - what today's market appallingly labels as "feeder goldfish." Instead, goldfish keepers are attracted to the growing number of "fancy" goldfish varieties: lionheads veiltails, moors, bubble eyes, celestials, etc."

Well there is last time I checked 144 different breeds of goldfish, The reason why the fancy breeds are popular now a days as opposed to the past is because of technology, i.e. better filters, heaters, etc. which makes raising them and transporting them much more easy so they are relatively cheap. When Goldfish first came to America in 1800's one fish could cost $100s to $1000s of dollars in today's money. And I am sure today's bubbleeye for example is different from the original in 1903

But I don't understand the point of your question, What difference does it make if they were evolved yesterday or 100 years ago, They still evolved.

But if I use the bubble eye we can even trace it's evolutionary transistional forms from the

Common goldfish ~1000 AD

to the Telescope (Globe eye) in 1592

to the Celestal in 1870

To the Bubble eye in 1903

[Truth666]

I'm trying to follow one of the cases at the bottom of your tree, say the one that probably "catches more the eye", the bubble eyes.
There are three posssibities concerning its ancestors :
- as you write : the goldfish G1 from your picture in the second level (which according to you was created by the chinese around 1000 A.D.)
- another species or set of species (which might or not include G1)
- no ancestors ("they were always there but not seen")
Well I totally agree yith you - let's exclude the last possibility because as you say "those features wouldn't survive in the wild".

[Truth666]

Since we assume it was created, there are two posssibities concerning its creation (we exclude natural evolution) :
- no genetic manipulation : as you write, human-engineered hybrid, selectively bred to enhance specific characteristics, by the chinese in 1908. So the same way CHIHUAHUAS were alledgly created from WOLVES in a few thousand years or whatever time it took. Let's live now aside the discussion of what could make (goldfish -> bubble eyes) more impressive than (WOLVES -> CHIHUAHUAS), i.e. velocity of evolution, differences in form.
- genetic manipulation (like cherry tomatoes) (including selectively breed or not)

[Truth666]

Now first of all I would like to see a picture of a similar bubble eye at least 20 years old.

[qam1]

Now first of all I would like to see a picture of a similar bubble eye at least 20 years old.

Well it's hard to find dates but when looking for pictures to make my case I choose the simplest and that bubble eye above is probably very close to the original. They have gotten real eloborate.

[Truth666]

Since it's not clear, based on photo evidence, in which category your "bubble eyes" example belongs, I will leave it out of the list.

[qam1]

There are three posssibities concerning its ancestors :

- as you write : the goldfish G1 from your picture in the second level (which according to you was created by the chinese around 1000 A.D.)

It's not according to me, It's according to the historical records

- another species or set of species (which might or not include G1)

There is a step between the Common goldfish (~1000 A.D.) and the Telescope/ Globe eye (1592) which is the Fantail  (1368) which is the ancestor of all egg shaped fancy breeds.

But other than that there are no other species,

For one all other species of carp have barbels on their mouth so if goldfish somehow got "Contaminated" with another species goldfish would have barbels today. Second fantails started the eggshaped/two tailed line. There are no other carp with egg shape and no other fish that has two tails. (BTW two tails aren't better than one, One tails breeds are faster and better swimmers). And finally Goldfish genetics and history are well known.  

- no ancestors ("they were always there but not seen") Well I totally agree yith you - let's exclude the last possibility because as you say "those features wouldn't survive in the wild".

Yes, And there is another reason even if the couldn't show up in the wild they would have showed up in captivity way before 1908 and not only that there are English (Bristol & London Shubunkins) and American (Comet & Veiltail) only breeds that if the bubble eye or telescope "Was always there" it would have shown up in them but it never has.

Since we assume it was created, there are two posssibities concerning its creation (we exclude natural evolution) :- no genetic manipulation : as you write, human-engineered hybrid, selectively bred to enhance specific characteristics, by the chinese in 1908. So the same way CHIHUAHUAS were alledgly created from WOLVES in a few thousand years or whatever time it took.

Even though it is done by humans the evolution of goldfish is still natural. It's the same as evolution of male birds like the peacock and birds of paradise where the prettiest gets to breed, The only difference with goldfish is humans are deciding what's the prettiest instead of female birds.

Let's live now aside the discussion of what could make (goldfish -> bubble eyes) more impressive than (WOLVES -> CHIHUAHUAS), i.e. velocity of evolution, differences in form.

Make that (Gibel carp > Bubble eye goldfish)

To evolutionist there isn't a difference in impressiveness, But to a creationist it counters their arguements

1) All animals kinds were created "As is" as describe in Genesis: Since we know the history of goldfish we know it wasn't created "As is" and if goldfish were able to evolve from another species other organisms could have to.

2) All mutations are harmful: There are many documented in the goldfish that show otherwise and if beneficial mutations can happen it goldfish they can happen in other organisms

3) Evolution can't explain complex structures(Irructable complexity):Again the bubble eye, Oranda/Lionhead structures show otherwise and if they can evolve in goldfish other structures could have evolved in other organisms .

4) Microevolution vs Macroevolution:The differences between the Bubble eye and the Gibel carp are far to great to be explained by simple variation i.e. microevolution.

5) Lack of Transititional Forms:OK granted we don't have many actual goldfish fossils per say, But we do have a historical record of writings, paintings, photographs, etc and since Goldfish as a whole basically live isolated from each other so new forms don't compete with old forms and/or only a relatively short time has past so many (most) of the older transititional forms still exist and haven't gone extinct (yet?).  

- genetic manipulation (like cherry tomatoes) (including selectively breed or not)

Well all evolution comes down to selective breeding in one sense or another.

Since it's not clear, based on photo evidence, in which category your "bubble eyes" example belongs,

It's clear enough

I will leave it out of the list.

What list?