Our ears once breathed [evolution of ears]

Nature Magazine ^ | 18 January 2006 | Helen Pearson

[PatrickHenry]

Our ears could have started evolutionary life as a tube for breathing, say scientists, after examining the ancestral structure in a 370-million-year-old fossil fish.

Evolutionary biologists are intrigued by how complicated sensory organs evolved from structures that may have had completely different uses in ancestral creatures. The bony structures in ancient fish, which at some point turned into ears, for example, appear to have had mainly a structural function, bracing the cheek and holding up the jaw. How exactly they made the transition to their role in hearing has proved a bit of a mystery.

The ear is a relatively easy organ to study. Its evolving bones have been preserved as fossils, whereas the soft tissues of other specialized features, such as eyes and noses, have long decayed.

So Martin Brazeau and Per Ahlberg of Uppsala University in Sweden decided to take a close look at the ear-like features of an ancient, metre-long monster from the Latvian Natural History Museum in Riga. Panderichthys was a fish, but is thought to be closely related to the earliest four-limbed tetrapods that eventually climbed on to land and gave rise to modern vertebrates.

The researchers examined Panderichthys and found that the bony structures in its head combine features of fish and tetrapods, capturing a snapshot of evolution in action. "It's neat to see that transition," says Hans Thewissen who studies the evolution of the ear and other organs at Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine, Rootstown.

Half-way house

Ancient fish have a narrow channel from the roof of the skull into the mouth, known as a spiracle, which is bounded by a long bone known as the hyomandibula that braces the cheek. In tetrapods, the equivalent bone is stubbier, a step towards the stirrup-like stapes bone that helps to transmit sound waves into our skulls.

The team found that Panderichthys has a wide, straight spiracle rather than a narrow one, and a shortened hyomandibula. They report their findings in Nature¹.

Some have previously speculated that our ancient ears may have had a role in breathing.

On the basis of this new fossil evidence, the team speculates that the widened spiracle may have served Panderichthys much like the breathing holes used by modern-day sharks and rays. These allow the fish to inhale water over their gills while lying on the seabed, and avoid gulping in grit through the mouth.

The demonstration of an organ evolving provides tangible evidence against the idea, put forward by some proponents of creationism, that sensory organs are so intricate that they must have been designed by a higher being. Brazeau says: "It's a slap in the face to that kind of thinking."

---

Footnote 1: Brazeau M. D.& Ahlberg P. E. Nature, 439. 318 - 321 (2006).

[Just mythoughts]

"Nope. The "Young Earth" idea far preceded Darwin’s time. I cannot interpret what time span "old" means in the Bible."


I would say few if any of us in this flesh body can fully interpret what time span is covered under the "old", ancient, foundation of this world, and other phrases use to describe events that took place before man was formed in flesh. I expect that full remembrance and understanding will not take place until the soul returns to the Maker.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"I do not believe this is historically correct, I think the theory of a young earth got rooted about the same time as darwin's plantings."

Exactly opposite. The idea that the earth was older than 6-10 thousand years starting taking shape in the later 1700's and early 1800's. Before that time, it was assumed that that the Earth was 6-10 thousand years old. By the time of Darwin, the idea that the Earth was very old (hundreds of thousands if not millions of years old) was the norm. The creationists that Darwin had to deal with were almost never YEC's.

"Biblically speaking Moses, David, Solomon, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Peter and Paul and others, knew and wrote about a very very OLD earth. Peter called it the earth that WAS."

6-10 thousand years old seems like a long time in human terms.

[wallcrawlr]

I understand sometimes our ears dont hear?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!


evolution?

[Just mythoughts]

Sorry you do not know what you are talking about. The writers of the Bible knew this earth was ancient they wrote about it over and over and over again.

Now the Heavenly Father did say that if his little children desired to believe a lie he would send them strong delusion to believe said lie.

[Rudder]

lol! Certainly appropo

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Sorry you do not know what you are talking about."

Sorry, I do. The idea that the Earth was young did not develop in Darwin's time, the opposite happened. This is basic scientific history, of which you obviously know nothing.

"The writers of the Bible knew this earth was ancient they wrote about it over and over and over again."

Citations.

"Now the Heavenly Father did say that if his little children desired to believe a lie he would send them strong delusion to believe said lie."

God would make us delusional? This isn't about lying, it's about your ignorance of what people believed. It's a FACT that up until the late 1700's the Earth was considered to be about 6-10 thousand years old, and in the ensuing decades scientists realized the Earth was far older than that. Please provide any citations to dispute this.

[Tokra]

People go to such extremes just to not believe in the creation

And some people go to extremes to not believe in evolution!

Yes a tree grows from a seed. Then dies. It does not evolve into lizard, monkey, fish, dog or anything else. Just like a human being is created by the external influence of Sperm on an egg. It too grows in to a human being.

Many of the stages that embryos pass through are proof of their evolutionary past. One example is the fact that the embryos of all placental mammals (including humans) form a yolk sac during their development. Why is this important? Because the eggs of these organisms do not have large amounts of stored yolk, and therefore their yolk sacs are empty! Nontheless, the persistence of a yolk sac stage makes perfect sense when one considers that these animals are descended from egg-laying reptiles in which the sac encloses a massive amount of yolk to support embryonic development.

If humans did not evolve - then why on Earth would we have a yolk sac in the womb? Or why would human embryos have 4 slits on the side of their neck resembling gills in their early stage of developement? Or why would human embryos go through a stage with a tail? I'm not talking about Haeckel's theory - just take a look at some actual photos of embryonic development.

And an even bigger question - why would anyone think that this means that God did not design the entire process? Why do creationists automatically think that any belief in evolution precludes a belief in God? They are not mutually exclusive. God created everything INCLUDING the process of evolution. Why is that concept so hard to grasp?

[Just mythoughts]

LOL you are talking in circles, and have elevated this ideology housed in a claim labeled science as coming forth giving light.

Young earth is NOT Biblical, just as evolution is not science. Each ideology are opposite sides of the same coin and both traditions make what the Bible actually says null and void. See the Bible foretold of this coin from the beginning.

This earth as Written and described provides the evidence that this earth is NOT young, there is no need for evolutionary claims to date the earth. Evolutionary claims are to remove a Creator of man in the flesh, cause if it were to be acknowledge that a Creator did as was described then said Creator would have standing in how to live.

Further as is described in the Written Word from the beginning there are some who are NOT going to follow the Creator of their souls.

Citations HA quoting the Bible to you is like speaking to a deaf person or writing to one who is blind. YOu have decided what you want to believe and you have demonstrated that what ever it takes you will promote your belief system.

[RadioAstronomer]

You went far more in-depth than my post #240. :-)

[RadioAstronomer]

Young earth is NOT Biblical

I disagree. Not any different than some primitive counting systems - 1, 2, 3, many.

The historical evidence points to the belief in a young universe, centered on this world and specifically centered on man himself.

Only recently have we been able to truly view our place in this universe. BTW, not only our place, but also just how vast it really is and how "un-centered" we really are in the great scheme of things.

[mlc9852]

Any pictures of these evolved monkeys?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"LOL you are talking in circles, and have elevated this ideology housed in a claim labeled science as coming forth giving light."

You are accusing ME of talking in circles? lol

" Young earth is NOT Biblical,"

Yet it was the accepted position up until the late 1700's and early 1800's. THAT is all I have been saying; you made the claim that the idea of a young Earth came about during Darwin's time; this is demonstrably false. The opposite happened; people began to see the Earth as being far far older than they had thought. You have provided NO evidence to the contrary.

"This earth as Written and described provides the evidence that this earth is NOT young, there is no need for evolutionary claims to date the earth."

I never said there was. Who are you arguing with? I said that it was the accepted position that the Earth was very young up until the late 18th and early 19th centuries. That's a fact.

"Evolutionary claims are to remove a Creator of man in the flesh, cause if it were to be acknowledge that a Creator did as was described then said Creator would have standing in how to live."

That's a lie.

" Citations HA quoting the Bible to you is like speaking to a deaf person or writing to one who is blind."

In other words, you have no citations from the Bible saying the Earth is very very old. You're blowing smoke.

"YOu have decided what you want to believe and you have demonstrated that what ever it takes you will promote your belief system."

I have stated facts, and you have evaded answering my questions. Why can't you just admit that people thought the Earth was very young before the 19th century?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"You went far more in-depth than my post #240. :-)"

Apparently, to no avail.

[jec41]

1H, occasionally called protium. In heavy water, they are a heavier isotope of hydrogen, 2H, also called deuterium. The chemical formula of both, however, is the same.

Thanks professor for pointing out my error. It would not be my intention to mislead anyone by a misstatement of a fact. In my haste to reply it was simply a case of open mouth and insert foot without reviewing my recollection of chemistry studied 45 years past. In retrospect I learned it 2H2O. Heavy water and semi heavy water were only discovered a short time before my birth and mine was not a in depth study.

[Just mythoughts]

"I disagree. Not any different than some primitive counting systems - 1, 2, 3, many."


Disagree all you want you cannot show me scripturally anywhere the Bible declares this earth to be young.

"The historical evidence points to the belief in a young universe, centered on this world and specifically centered on man himself.

Only recently have we been able to truly view our place in this universe. BTW, not only our place, but also just how vast it really is and how "un-centered" we really are in the great scheme of things."

Evolution is the most self centered ideology man has ever divined.

[ForTruthandJustice]

My Grandfather could blow air out his ears. Weird, huh?

[TheWormster]

Evolution is the most self centered ideology man has ever divined.

---

Really? Saying that we are essentially animals, who share family connections with not just all animals but all organisms on the planet is somehow MORE self centred than saying that we are the special product of a God who created us in His Own Image, and breathed life into us?

Thats a pretty strange idea of being self centred.

[PatrickHenry]

My Grandfather could blow air out his ears. Weird, huh?

So could I for a few months, out of one ear, after I was hit in that ear by a softball. But after the punctured eardrum healed, I lost that "ability."

[RightWingAtheist]

Here's an article explaining the process of exaptation, which this is a perfect example of.

[Dimensio]

Oh, look, another creationist is dishonestly equivocating evidence for evolution with atheism. Leave it to creationists to lie so shamelessly and claim that anyone who accepts evolution is an atheist, even though such a claim is clearly false. Creationists have no shame.