Posted on 02/08/2005 3:50:43 AM PST by PatrickHenry
A group of four-footed mammals that flourished worldwide for 40 million years and then died out in the ice ages is the missing link between the whale and its not-so-obvious nearest relative, the hippopotamus.
The conclusion by University of California, Berkeley, post-doctoral fellow Jean-Renaud Boisserie and his French colleagues finally puts to rest the long-standing notion that the hippo is actually related to the pig or to its close relative, the South American peccary. In doing so, the finding reconciles the fossil record with the 20-year-old claim that molecular evidence points to the whale as the closest relative of the hippo.
"The problem with hippos is, if you look at the general shape of the animal it could be related to horses, as the ancient Greeks thought, or pigs, as modern scientists thought, while molecular phylogeny shows a close relationship with whales," said Boisserie. "But cetaceans – whales, porpoises and dolphins – don't look anything like hippos. There is a 40-million-year gap between fossils of early cetaceans and early hippos."
In a paper appearing this week in the Online Early Edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Boisserie and colleagues Michel Brunet and Fabrice Lihoreau fill in this gap by proposing that whales and hippos had a common water-loving ancestor 50 to 60 million years ago that evolved and split into two groups: the early cetaceans, which eventually spurned land altogether and became totally aquatic; and a large and diverse group of four-legged beasts called anthracotheres. The pig-like anthracotheres, which blossomed over a 40-million-year period into at least 37 distinct genera on all continents except Oceania and South America, died out less than 2 and a half million years ago, leaving only one descendent: the hippopotamus.
This proposal places whales squarely within the large group of cloven-hoofed mammals (even-toed ungulates) known collectively as the Artiodactyla – the group that includes cows, pigs, sheep, antelopes, camels, giraffes and most of the large land animals. Rather than separating whales from the rest of the mammals, the new study supports a 1997 proposal to place the legless whales and dolphins together with the cloven-hoofed mammals in a group named Cetartiodactyla.
"Our study shows that these groups are not as unrelated as thought by morphologists," Boisserie said, referring to scientists who classify organisms based on their physical characteristics or morphology. "Cetaceans are artiodactyls, but very derived artiodactyls."
The origin of hippos has been debated vociferously for nearly 200 years, ever since the animals were rediscovered by pioneering French paleontologist Georges Cuvier and others. Their conclusion that hippos are closely related to pigs and peccaries was based primarily on their interpretation of the ridges on the molars of these species, Boisserie said.
"In this particular case, you can't really rely on the dentition, however," Boisserie said. "Teeth are the best preserved and most numerous fossils, and analysis of teeth is very important in paleontology, but they are subject to lots of environmental processes and can quickly adapt to the outside world. So, most characteristics are not dependable indications of relationships between major groups of mammals. Teeth are not as reliable as people thought."
As scientists found more fossils of early hippos and anthracotheres, a competing hypothesis roiled the waters: that hippos are descendents of the anthracotheres.
All this was thrown into disarray in 1985 when UC Berkeley's Vincent Sarich, a pioneer of the field of molecular evolution and now a professor emeritus of anthropology, analyzed blood proteins and saw a close relationship between hippos and whales. A subsequent analysis of mitochondrial, nuclear and ribosomal DNA only solidified this relationship.
Though most biologists now agree that whales and hippos are first cousins, they continue to clash over how whales and hippos are related, and where they belong within the even-toed ungulates, the artiodactyls. A major roadblock to linking whales with hippos was the lack of any fossils that appeared intermediate between the two. In fact, it was a bit embarrassing for paleontologists because the claimed link between the two would mean that one of the major radiations of mammals – the one that led to cetaceans, which represent the most successful re-adaptation to life in water – had an origin deeply nested within the artiodactyls, and that morphologists had failed to recognize it.
This new analysis finally brings the fossil evidence into accord with the molecular data, showing that whales and hippos indeed are one another's closest relatives.
"This work provides another important step for the reconciliation between molecular- and morphology-based phylogenies, and indicates new tracks for research on emergence of cetaceans," Boisserie said.
Boisserie became a hippo specialist while digging with Brunet for early human ancestors in the African republic of Chad. Most hominid fossils earlier than about 2 million years ago are found in association with hippo fossils, implying that they lived in the same biotopes and that hippos later became a source of food for our distant ancestors. Hippos first developed in Africa 16 million years ago and exploded in number around 8 million years ago, Boisserie said.
Now a post-doctoral fellow in the Human Evolution Research Center run by integrative biology professor Tim White at UC Berkeley, Boisserie decided to attempt a resolution of the conflict between the molecular data and the fossil record. New whale fossils discovered in Pakistan in 2001, some of which have limb characteristics similar to artiodactyls, drew a more certain link between whales and artiodactyls. Boisserie and his colleagues conducted a phylogenetic analysis of new and previous hippo, whale and anthracothere fossils and were able to argue persuasively that anthracotheres are the missing link between hippos and cetaceans.
While the common ancestor of cetaceans and anthracotheres probably wasn't fully aquatic, it likely lived around water, he said. And while many anthracotheres appear to have been adapted to life in water, all of the youngest fossils of anthracotheres, hippos and cetaceans are aquatic or semi-aquatic.
"Our study is the most complete to date, including lots of different taxa and a lot of new characteristics," Boisserie said. "Our results are very robust and a good alternative to our findings is still to be formulated."
Brunet is associated with the Laboratoire de Géobiologie, Biochronologie et Paléontologie Humaine at the Université de Poitiers and with the Collège de France in Paris. Lihoreau is a post-doctoral fellow in the Département de Paléontologie of the Université de N'Djaména in Chad.
The work was supported in part by the Mission Paléoanthropologique Franco-Tchadienne, which is co-directed by Brunet and Patrick Vignaud of the Université de Poitiers, and in part by funds to Boisserie from the Fondation Fyssen, the French Ministère des Affaires Etrangères and the National Science Foundation's Revealing Hominid Origins Initiative, which is co-directed by Tim White and Clark Howell of UC Berkeley.
"Does the physical resurrection of Christ meet the requirements of your definition of nonsense?"
Stop trying to conflate bronze age superstition with the Gospel. That is exactly the tactic that is so horrific to evangelism.
LOL! Here ya go. :-)
The Celestial sphere:
When we look up at the stars in the night sky they appear to be stationary relative to each other. As the Earth moves from one side of the Sun to the other, the displacement of those stars due to parallax is less than one second of arc even for the nearest star (Proxima Centauri). One way of looking at this is a fixed sphere of stars surrounding the Earth/Sun system. This is often referred to as the Celestial Sphere. This is why some of the ancient civilizations considered the stars to be holes in a tapestry.
Since we are talking distances and parallax, lets briefly take a moment and describe such. The more familiar term for the layman when referring to stellar distances is called a light year. This is the distance light will travel in one calendar year. For example the star Proxima Centauri is approximately 4.22 light years from our solar system. Astronomers use another term that may be not so familiar called the Parsec. The Parsec (parallax-arcsecond) is the distance needed for an object (star) to have a shift of one arcsecond referenced to one astronomical second (AU), the average distance from the Earth to the Sun or approximately 93 million miles. An arcsecond is 1/60 of an arcminute, which is 1/60 of a degree. However, there are no stars that are close enough to exhibit this large a shift. The distance of a Parsec is about 3.26 light years and the nearest star is 4.22 light years.
Even though it appears the stars remain in “fixed” locations in the night sky, over a period of time the stars do move relative to each other and relative to the Earth. This is why the right ascension and declination (star location) changes over the years. If you look at a star catalogue based on the epoch B1950 and one base on the epoch J2000, you will notice some differences.
Another interesting item of note is that the constellations we see are made up of the brightest stars. Even in the same constellation these stars are at different distances from the Earth. Some may be dimmer than the others, however, being closer they are just as bright as a larger one further away. The brightness of a star is called its magnitude. There are two ways astronomers measure magnitude: Apparent Magnitude and Absolute Magnitude.
The Apparent Magnitude is how bright a star appears to us here on the Earth. The Absolute Magnitude is how bright a star would appear if it were exactly ten parsecs away from the Earth. (Close to 33 light years).
Two notes:
1) Apparent magnitude is usually denoted with a small “m” and absolute magnitude uses a capital “M”.
2) The magnitude scale is backwards of what you might think, the larger the number the fainter the object.
Since the Earth is tilted (23.5 degrees) in reference to the path it sweeps out in its orbit about the Sun, this path projected onto the celestial sphere does not fall on the celestial equator. This imaginary plane is called the ecliptic. Note: This angle between the ecliptic and the equatorial plane is called The Obliquity of The Ecliptic.
This imaginary plane crosses the celestial equator in two places (called the equinoxes). The Vernal Equinox falls in the spring as the Sun appears to cross the ecliptic going north and the Autumnal Equinox falls in autumn when the Sun again crosses the ecliptic, this time going south. Note: Vernal comes from the Latin vernalis, meaning spring. Also the term equinox relates to the word equal since both day and night are close to the same, 12 hours during the equinox.
The points where this plane is the farthest above (north) and below (south) the celestial equator is called the solstices. In the northern hemisphere of the earth, the most northern point of the ecliptic is called the Summer Solstice and the southern most is called the Winter Solstice. In the Southern hemisphere of the Earth the reverse is true.
The zodiac lies along the plane of the ecliptic. Since the Earth is orbiting the Sun, the Sun appears to follow the plane of the ecliptic, making one complete circle in one calendar year. The name “zodiac” comes from the Greek meaning animal circle. Note: The path of the Moon and the other planets fall pretty much on this plane as well. Since it takes 365 days for the Earth to orbit the Sun and there are 360 degrees in a circle, the Sun moves pretty close to 1 degree per day.
If you were to draw a line out from the Earth intersecting the Vernal Equinox, that line would be referred to as The First Point of Aries. The reason it was called this is that this line pointed to the first star in the constellation of Ares in March of 1950.
The celestial sphere is tied to the Earth for its coordinate system. Project the Earth’s equator out to infinity and you have the equator of the celestial sphere. Likewise the north and south poles of the Earth points to the north and south poles of the celestial sphere respectively. This makes it very easy to map the sky referenced to the Earth. This coordinate system is called the Equatorial Coordinate System. It ties in closely with our own geographic coordinate system here on the surface of the Earth.
There is one fundamental difference however. The geographic coordinate system is fixed upon the surface of the Earth (Lat Long) so it rotates with the rotation of the Earth. The celestial coordinate system is fixed to the celestial sphere and appears to rotate due to the Earth’s rotation. The “latitude” of the celestial sphere (the angle of an object above or below the celestial equator) is called declination with zero being on the equator. This is pretty easy since the celestial’s equator and poles appear to be fixed like our own earth. Unlike the Earth, since the celestial sphere appears to be rotating, the “longitude”, called right ascension, is not a “fixed” reference to the Earth. So instead of using degrees, hours were used for this measurement. First there needed to be a “fixed” direction to measure from. The Vernal Equinox was selected as the zero reference for the right ascension. Since there are 360 degrees in a circle, the Earth rotates about 15 degrees every hour. So you will note right ascension is measured in hours/minutes/seconds as apposed to degrees.
Remember that for declination Zero is on the equator and for right ascension zero is at the Vernal Equinox. So the Vernal Equinox will have the coordinates of 0 degrees and 0 hours. This then becomes the center point for an Equatorial Sky Chart.
On to the Earth-Sun system:
It takes one year for the Earth to rotate around the Sun one time and 24 hours to rotate on its axis. Think about this relationship. Not only is the Earth revolving on its axis, it is in motion about the Sun. (I know this is really basic grade school stuff, however, it will help in visualizing the concepts I am about to explain) Therefore the Earth moves 1/365th of its orbit about the Sun every day.
Ok, here is where that visualization will come in handy. Since a “day” is described by one complete rotation of the Earth on its axis, this equates from noon to noon (when a point on the Earth is directly pointed at the Sun). The term for this is called the Mean Solar Day. But here is the rub; the Earth has moved during this period of time we called a day. So the Earth must turn a tiny bit more to have the same spot facing the Sun every day.
Now let us think of this celestial sphere we have been chatting about. Remember the stars appear fixed in one location (at least on a daily basis). This means that one complete revolution of the Earth referenced to a star does not take that little bit of extra time to be over the same spot on the Earth. This “day” is referred to as a Sidereal Day. It takes approximately four extra minutes for the Earth to have the Sun over the same location on the Earth than a star.
This is the difference between a Sidereal Day and a Mean Solar Day.
Also the Earth is tilted on its axis from the plane of the ecliptic by 23.5 degrees. That tilt causes the North Pole to be currently pointed towards Polaris. As the Earth moves around the sun its pole stays pointed at Polaris. This is the cause of the seasons we experience. Note. This tilt varies back and forth from 21.6 degrees to 24.5 degrees approximately every 41,000 years.
There is also a precession of our pole and it sweeps a complete circle in the sky (think of the Earth as a top wobbling as it rotates) about every 26,000 years. (Hard to explain without a diagram). This gives us different pole stars as the north pole of the Earth sweeps out a circle on the celestial sphere.
There are also a number of other motions that must be taken into consideration over the years such as the precession of the aphelion. Our Earth’s orbit around the Sun is not a perfect circle. It is an ellipse with the closest point of the orbit called the perihelion and the furthest point the aphelion. Currently the aphelion falls on the fourth of July. However, this is not always the case. The aphelion and perihelion change over the centuries and sweeps thru the calendar year with a periodicity of around 22,000 years. The amount of “squishing” (now that’s a scientific term :-)) of an ellipse is called its eccentricity. If the eccentricity is equal to zero the orbit will be a perfect circle. Between zero and one the path of an orbit is an ellipse. Note: A circle is also known as a degenerate ellipse. However, should the eccentricity equal exactly one, the path becomes a parabola and finally, if the eccentricity is greater than one, the path then becomes a hyperbola.
The Earth’s eccentricity is very small. However, even this changes over time. Its eccentricity varies periodically about every 100,000 years. There are also other motions caused by the Moon, Jupiter and the Sun called Nutations. One of the major nutations has a period of 18.6 years. Now that we have taken a cursory look at the Earth/Sun system, there is another big factor in all of this. It is called the Moon.
The reason the Moon keeps one face to the Earth (Its rotation on its axis matches the period of its orbit) is it is tidally locked to the Earth. This tidal locking will eventually cause the Earth and Moon to keep one face to each other.
Here is a more in depth explanation. The total angular momentum of the earth moon system, which is spin angular momentum plus the orbital angular momentum, is constant. (The Sun plays apart also) Friction of the oceans caused by the tides is causing the Earth to slow down a tiny bit each year. This is approximately two milliseconds per century causing the moon to recede by about 4 centimeters per year. As the Earth slows down, the Moon must recede to keep the total angular momentum a constant. In other words as the spin angular momentum of the earth decreases, the lunar orbital angular momentum must increase. Here is an interesting side note. The velocity of the moon will slow down as the orbit increases.
Another example of tidal locking is the orbit period and rotation of the planet Mercury. What is interesting about this one is that instead of a 1:1 synchronization where Mercury would keep one face to the Sun at all times, it is actually in a 2/3:1 synchronization. This is due to the High eccentricity of its orbit.
There also can be more than one body “locked” to each other. Lets take a look at the moon Io. Io is very nearly the same size as the Earth’s moon. It is approximately 1.04 times the size of the moon. There is a resonance between Io, Ganymede, and Europa. Io completes four revolutions for every one of Ganymede and two of Europa. This is due to a Laplace Resonance phenomenon. A Laplace Resonance is when more than two bodies are forced into a minimum energy configuration.
And finally a look at the asteroid belt:
The asteroid belt has an estimated total combined mass of less than 1 tenth of the Earth’s moon. Jupiter also has a profound effect on the asteroid belt. Since Jupiter has a semimajor axis of 5.2 AU (I AU is the distance from the Sun to the Earth) it has an orbital period of 11.86 years. Since the asteroids are not all at the same distance from the sun, some of them have an orbital period of one half of Jupiter. This puts that asteroid in a 2:1 orbital resonance with Jupiter. The result of this resonance is gaps called Kirkwood’s gaps. So here is the rub; why did not these asteroids for a planet? The reason is the gravitational force of Jupiter. It perturbs the asteroids giving them random velocities relative to each other. Another effect of both Jupiter and the Sun on the asteroid belt is a group of asteroids that both precede and follow Jupiter in its orbit by 60 degrees. These asteroids are known as the Trojans.
Since we are now talking about orbiting bodies, let us digress just a wee bit further and briefly talk about orbits:
There are different sizes and shapes of orbits. We use the term Semi-Major Axis to measure the size of an orbit. It is the distance from the geometric center of the ellipse to either the apogee or perigee (The highest (apo) and the lowest (peri)). Apoapsis is a general term for the greatest radial distance of an Ellipse as measured from a Focus. Apoapsis for an orbit around the Earth is called apogee, and apoapsis for an orbit around the Sun is called aphelion.
Periapsis is a general term for the smallest radial distance of an Ellipse as measured from a Focus. Periapsis for an orbit around the Earth is called perigee, and periapsis for an orbit around the Sun is called perihelion.
The terms Gee and Helios comes from the Greek words “Ge” (earth) and “Helios” (Sun) respectively.
First lets talk a bit about “where it is”. An orbit is a nothing more than an object falling around another object. Both Kepler and Newton came up with a set of laws that describe this phenomenon.
Kepler’s three laws of planetary motion:
1) The orbit of a planet is an ellipse with the sun at one of the foci.
2) The line drawn between a planet and the sun sweep out equal areas in equal times.
3) The square of the periods of the planets is proportional to the cubes of their mean distance from the sun.
So what is that telling us? In a nutshell, all orbits are ellipses, the close to the body you are orbiting the faster you go (e.g. if you have a highly elliptical orbit the satellite or planet’s velocity will increase as it approaches the object being orbited and decrease as it get further away).
These laws not only apply to planets and satellites, but to any orbiting body.
Note: Super geek alert #1:
For an orbiting body this is not entirely correct. It turns out that both bodies end up orbiting a common center of mass of the two-body system. However, for satellites, the mass of the Earth is so much greater than the mass of the satellite, the effective center of mass is the center of the Earth.
Newton’s three laws (and law of gravitation):
1) The first law states that every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force. (Commonly known as inertia)
2) The second law states that force is equal to the change in momentum (MV) per change in time. (For a constant mass, force equals mass times acceleration F=ma)
3) The third law states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, if an object exerts a force on another object, a resulting equal force is exerted back on the original object.
Newton’s law of gravitation states that any two bodies attract one another with a force proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
Note: Super geek alert #2:
Actual observed positions did not quite match the predictions under classical Newtonian physics. Albert Einstein later solved this discrepancy with his “General Theory of Relativity”. There are four classical “tests” that cemented General Relativity:
1. In November of 1919, using a solar eclipse, experimental verification of his theory was performed by measuring the apparent change in a stars position due to the bending of the light buy the sun’s gravity.
2. The changing orientation of the major axis or Mercury not exactly matching classical mechanics.
3. Gravitational Redshift
4. Gravitational Time Dilation
So what is all this trying to tell us? Planets, satellites, etc orbit their parents in predictable trajectories allowing us to “know” where they will be at any given time. A set of coordinates showing the location of these objects over a period of time is called its ephemeris.
Sorry, the site wouldn't come up the first time.
I don't hate creationists. I am dismayed by their distraction from Christianity.
possibly.
genetic compatability is not.
give it a few decades: molecular biology WILL clear up the lingering gray areas.
What the heck does all that have to do with biological evolution of the whale?
Side conversation on the thread. Sorry you don't like it.
Note: Super geek alert #2:
Actual observed positions did not quite match the predictions under classical Newtonian physics. Albert Einstein later solved this discrepancy with his “General Theory of Relativity”.
Tesla early on stated that '...the relativity theory, by the way, is much older than its present proponents. It was advanced over 200 years ago by my illustrious countryman Boskovic, the great philospher, who, not withstanding other and multifold obligations, wrote a thousand volumes of excellent literature on a vast variety of subjects. Boskovic dealt with relativity, including the so-called time-space continuum...', (1936 unpublished interview, quoted in Anderson, L, ed. Nikola Tesla: Lecture Before the New York Academy of Sciences: The Streams of Lenard and Roentgen and Novel Apparatus for Their Production, April 6, 1897, reconstructed 1994).
Tesla also stated that 'I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.', (New York Hearald Tribune, September 11, 1932)
Tesla was later sharply critical of Einstein's relativity work, '...[a] magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king...., its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists...', (New York Times, July 11, 1935, p23, c.8).
Maybe he was crazy after all, but then maybe not.
"suppressed placemarker" placemarker
a noble sentiment, but virtually impossible in practice
Kepler's laws would be false in a Geo-Centric system.
Actually, W bought T's patents for $1 million plus $1 per installed horsepower but Tesla blew his own money by bad management.
However, often geocentric models are used for celestial navigation by spacecraft.
I sense your inability to answer the question. Why can't evos answer the simplest of questions without resorting to elaborate ritual of gamblers fallacies?
Unfortunately he blew it here. However, I do have a great respect for his work and his inventions.
Before I can honor your request, you'll have to tell me what you believe “the Gospel” is and how you know what it is. You've already stated that it is possible that Christ was mistakenly quoted in the Bible (“Another explanation is that someone else said this and it was attributed to Christ.”) and that the Genesis account of the Flood is “nonsense”. What else in Scripture do you consider to be nonsense? What is your basis for rejecting the Old Testament testimony concerning the physical reality of the Flood, and for rejecting the New Testament testimony concerning the physical reality of the Flood (including your tentative rejection of the words of Christ), but accepting the Old and New Testament testimony concerning the physical reality of the resurrection of Christ?
For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
I have no idea what you are saying ...
Agreed. I stay amazed at what a fantastic job NASA does at putting probes 'money on the spot' years out into space.
The Chinese writings that were done at the time of the flood.
Yes, and especially since they use your "falsified gravity" theories.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.