Quick question on evolution

[anyathesword]

We do have a few modern examples of land-based turning into water-based-mammals living today, like seals and sea lions. Seals took to the before sea lions, and as such they have more aquatic adaptations. For example:

• Seals are slimmer and more aerodynamic that seal lions
• Seals, unlike sea lions, don't have external ears.
• Seals have smaller fore-fins than seal lions.
• Seals hind-fins are angled backwards, like a fish or a dolphin. They cannot walk and instead flop on their bellies. A Sea lion's hind-fins are angled forwards, and they can still walk on land (albeit somewhat awkwardly).
• Although both species have fur, seal's fur is much thinner and less dense than a sea lion's.

Other examples include the manatee and dugong - which, surprisingly, are more closely related to elephants than seals or sea lions. In fact in some ways their evolution is more similar to that of the whale: like whales, manatees and dugongs only have rudimentary hip-bones and have completely lost their hind legs. Also like whales (but unlike seals or sea lions), they are practically hairless.

Seals and sea lions vs. manatees and dugongs are also a nice example of covergent evolution.

Yes these might be the same kind of animal or species. But how do we know what they were previously?

And how do we know the manatees lost their hind legs?

Have we seen them develop these features in human history? And do we find fossils of seals in the fossil record?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Yes these might be the same kind of animal or species. But how do we know what they were previously?

And how do we know the manatees lost their hind legs?

Have we seen them develop these features in human history? And do we find fossils of seals in the fossil record?

Manatees still have some of the bone structures for legs.

 

[HitchSlap]

Yes these might be the same kind of animal or species. But how do we know what they were previously?

And how do we know the manatees lost their hind legs?

Have we seen them develop these features in human history? And do we find fossils of seals in the fossil record?

Because it's generally accepted that when scientists don't know something, they make it up as they go along.


















JK

I kid, I kid.

 

[anyathesword]

What makes them nonsense?



That is a logical fallacy known as an argument from incredulity.

Argument from incredulity - RationalWiki

Perhaps you want to try again, this time with evidence?

That's what I am asking here. How many changes, how much time for each change, etc. I am asking YOU (evolutionists) for the evidence..

Just a lot of explainations on how something is different, but not saying enough on HOW it really changes with EVIDENCE//

 

[HitchSlap]

That's what I am asking here. How many changes, how much time for each change, etc. I am asking YOU (evolutionists) for the evidence..

Just a lot of explainations on how something is different, but not saying enough on HOW it really changes with EVIDENCE//

Why do you want evidence?

 

[anyathesword]

Argument from incredulity: "my evidence against evolution is that I don't understand it".

Does it seem "probable or possible" to you that time is relative? That it goes slower relative to the observer as peed goes up?

Or that particles can be in two places at the same time?



True. MOST of the time, they are NEUTRAL.
This has multiple causes... It can be because the change was made in inactive DNA or because lots of genetic things are actually "synonymous". A gene changes but it still does the exact same thing as before.

Evolutionary mechanisms only needs some beneficial changes.
I have designed several genetic algoritms for use in optimisation systems. NEVER in a GA do you "control" the mutation. It's completely random. Most of the time, it will be harmfull to your solution. But they are discarded rather quickly in the selection process. The beneficial ones are selected and spread throughout the population a lot faster then you might think.


Mutation + selection.

Really, it's not rocket science.

What is peed?

Yes, small changes, but not massive changes and in a continous process. All I hear is one or two changes, but not the whole basis of a land animal to a whale.

Sure I don't understand. Do you understand the Bible and Creationism?

 

[anyathesword]

Why do you want evidence?

To convince me a land animal changed into a whale...

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes these might be the same kind of animal or species. But how do we know what they were previously?

By comparing their DNA and morphology to other species. When we do this, we find that seals form a single clade, Phocidae:

Phocidae

The Phocidae clade is part of the Carnivora clade that includes bears, cats, dogs, weasels, etc.

Carnivora

The Carnivora clade belongs to the larger Mammalian clade.

What we find with all of these common ancestors is that they have legs and are built for running around on land. Therefore, the aquatic adaptations we see in seals are a derived trait that evolved in their clade after it branched off from the other terrestrial mammals.

 

[anyathesword]

Because it's generally accepted that when scientists don't know something, they make it up as they go along.

Gosh! I thought you were serious!

(I think that's the case in some areas...)










JK

I kid, I kid.

Gosh! I thought you were serious!

(I think that's the case in some areas...)

 

[Loudmouth]

To convince me a land animal changed into a whale...

You are already inventing reasons to ignore the evidence, such as your rant about fossils not being evidence.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

And how do we know the manatees lost their hind legs?

Because, like whales, they still have the remnants of pelvic bones.

[EDIT] I see PsychoSarah beat me to it.

But how do we know what they were previously?
...
Have we seen them develop these features in human history? And do we find fossils of seals in the fossil record?

We do have fossils of creatures related to seals and sea lions (or "pinnipeds"), but naturally these were around long before mankind itself, let along recorded history.

Reconstruction of the earliest known pinneped, Enaliarctos mealsi: A) Original fossil material; B) Reconstruction of Enaliarctos mealsi (USNM 374272); C) Life restoration of B; D) comparison with the closest living relative, the Southern Sea Lion, Otaria flavescenes (redrawn from Blainville). Illustrations by Mary Parrish under the direction of Annalisa Berta and Clayton Ray. Published in the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. The stipple technique (A, B) and graphite pencil technique (C) were used to render the illustration.

(SOURCE: paleobiology.si.edu)​

 

[Loudmouth]

That's what I am asking here. How many changes, how much time for each change, etc. I am asking YOU (evolutionists) for the evidence..

The maximum amount of changes needed is half the difference in DNA between whales and hippos. About half of those differences will be mutations from the hippo's lineage.

Just a lot of explainations on how something is different, but not saying enough on HOW it really changes with EVIDENCE//

Species are different because their DNA is different. It's not exactly a secret.

 

[anyathesword]

By comparing their DNA and morphology to other species. When we do this, we find that seals form a single clade, Phocidae:

Phocidae

The Phocidae clade is part of the Carnivora clade that includes bears, cats, dogs, weasels, etc.

Carnivora

The Carnivora clade belongs to the larger Mammalian clade.

What we find with all of these common ancestors is that they have legs and are built for running around on land. Therefore, the aquatic adaptations we see in seals are a derived trait that evolved in their clade after it branched off from the other terrestrial mammals.

Similar DNA is not solid evidence for common ancestor. Similar DNA just means all animals had the same Creator.

But have we SEEN a something change into a seal? Or have seals always been seals? Are they in the fossil record? Do we find them in there?

 

[Loudmouth]

Similar DNA is not solid evidence for common ancestor.

The nested hierarchy of DNA similarities and differences is solid evidence for common ancestry, and that is exactly what we observe.

Like I said, it is dishonest of you to ask for evidence when you have no intention of accepting it.

Similar DNA just means all animals had the same Creator.

Really? So the DNA that you share with your siblings and cousins is not due to common ancestry? You were each magically poofed into being?

But have we SEEN a something change into a seal? Or have seals always been seals? Are they in the fossil record? Do we find them in there?

We can determine common ancestry by comparing DNA.

 

[Armoured]

Similar DNA is not solid evidence for common ancestor. Similar DNA just means all animals had the same Creator.

But have we SEEN a something change into a seal? Or have seals always been seals? Are they in the fossil record? Do we find them in there?

*sigh* if someone posts you yet another list of observed speciation events, would you bother to read it this time?

 

[HitchSlap]

Similar DNA is not solid evidence for common ancestor. Similar DNA just means all animals had the same Creator.

But have we SEEN a something change into a seal? Or have seals always been seals? Are they in the fossil record? Do we find them in there?

Was Dr. Shubin lucky when he found a "fishapod," or was did he successfully use the ToE to predict where he might find one?

 

[HitchSlap]

To convince me a land animal changed into a whale...

Why?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Why?

Because oddly enough that is what happened.

 

[anyathesword]

The nested hierarchy of DNA similarities and differences is solid evidence for common ancestry, and that is exactly what we observe.

Like I said, it is dishonest of you to ask for evidence when you have no intention of accepting it.



Really? So the DNA that you share with your siblings and cousins is not due to common ancestry? You were each magically poofed into being?



We can determine common ancestry by comparing DNA.

Well of course we have the same DNA if we were in the family, but guess what? We are still humans!

Did you know men can trace back their DNA to a common man a few thousand years ago?

Same with women and their mitochondria can be traced to 'eve'?

But how do you link different species of animals and the DNA similarities?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Well of course we have the same DNA if we were in the family, but guess what? We are still humans!

Did you know men can trace back their DNA to a common man a few thousand years ago?

Same with women and their mitochondria can be traced to 'eve'?

But how do you link different species of animals and the DNA similarities?

Ah yes, the mitochondrial Eve, you do realize it isn't human DNA we use to do that, right?