Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
so you ok with the 15234 scenario? by this logic any fossil cant be consider as "out of place". even human with a dino.
so a dolphin isnt a fish. thanks.All vertebrates are descendants of a distant fish ancestor, but when the descendant species no longer have the distinguishing characteristics of fish, it is no longer useful or helpful to describe them as fish.
Dolphins are cetaceans of the class mammals, of the subphylum vertebrates, which includes all fish, and in particular, the ancestral fish from which they evolved.
please answer my question; can you prove that such event is impossible?
Dolphins, like all other tetrapods (including humans), evolved from a finned organism which lived in the water, not from what in modern popular speech is called a fish.so a dolphin is a fish or not?
so even if we will find a human fossil with a dino its ok according to this.
why not? if we get the number of mutations that are needed for such a transition its possible.
but do you agree that if such a event will happen we can say that the fact that it happened prove that its possible?
A population of dogs might, under the right conditions and over many generations, evolve to become cat-like in their habits and appearance, but they still would not be cats.why not? if we get the number of mutations that are needed for such a transition its possible.
no its not. lets represent fossils by numbers. so in this case instead of finding the order 12345 we find 15234. this doesnt fit with the evolutionery order.
Xianghua has absolutely no interest in learning about the theory of evolution. He's just looking for a "gotcha" because he sees evolution as an existential threat to his religion, whatever that may be.
Depending upon how one defines those terms the answer could be yes. The problem is that our old terminology was made before we understood that life is the product of evolution.so you are still a fish and a mammal is still a reptile and a dolphin is still a fish since its ancestor was a fish?
Not as such; but it evolved from a fishy ancestor, as did we all.so a dolphin isnt a fish. thanks.
Some species are definitely extinct. Species take populations and it would be all but impossible to hide populations of large dinosaurs for millions of years. So a human with a T-Rex would be a rather large problem. But as to humans and dinosaurs, I am eating dinosaur eggs as I post this. Yummy.so even if we will find a human fossil with a dino its ok according to this.
no its not what im saying. please read again.
if a fish can evolve into a cat (something that already happened according to evolution) why a dog cant evolve into a cat?
No, that would be weird because humans evolved long after dinosaurs disappeared from the Earth.
For a population of canines to evolve to have a genetic makeup indistinguishable from felines would be a genetic convergence of astronomically unlikely odds, even given the necessary timescale and environmental conditions. Note that no only would it require all the functional genome to match indistinguishably, but all the non-coding DNA, including incidental mutations and all viral insertions back to their shared ancestor... That really would be a miracle!why not? if we get the number of mutations that are needed for such a transition its possible.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?