- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,695
- 52,520
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
So the indigenous peoples of Ellesmere Island never saw a fishapod before?
Upvote
0
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.
Out of respect for the indigenous peoples of Ellesmere Island, Shubin let the tribal council name Tiktaalik. Roseae is after his daughter.
Correct.
So the indigenous peoples of Ellesmere Island never saw a fishapod before?
I can't find anything on these last finds. I know what the first one was but the other two are being difficult to find. Do you have one?
Yes, and I understand that it is assumed that it is a relic. However, how do we determine that?
When it first was found it was claimed to be the missing link.
Then it was a transitional that fit right in the middle where it should and then it comes down as a relic.
All this shifting cause one to conclude that we don't know exactly where it sits until something falsifies the first claim, then the next and then the next. I imagine you can understand how that might look?
So the indigenous peoples of Ellesmere Island never saw a fishapod before?
Perhaps then you would care to explain to us the role the Innuits played in Tiktaalik getting its name?
The same way that we determine that egg laying in mammals like the platypus is a relic of our shared ancestry with reptiles. You look at phylogenies and the fossil record to determine which features are ancestral and which are derived. In Tiktaalik, it is quite apparent that the fish features are ancestral and the tetrapod features are derived since there are only fish before Tiktaalik and there are tetrapods afterwards.
Funny but it would still be classified as being the missing link if it were considered to be so.Are your keys still missing after you find them?
No I was saying that it was said to be an intermediate right in the middle yet it was found not to be the case.Once again, you are assuming that transitional means ancestral. It doesn't. Transitionals just means that the species has a mixture of features from two different taxa. It says nothing about whether that species is in the direct ancestral line. Please learn the difference between transitional and ancestor, and quit using them as synonyms.
It was considered a transitional yes, and remains so. However, it has been the missing link, the exact prediction and an ancestor to tetrapods.It has been transitional from the very start, and remains so. Tiktaalik has a mixture of modern tetrapod and ancestral fish features which makes it transitional, whether or not any living organism is a direct ancestor of Tiktaalik.
I think all three were found during the third and last excavation.
I am trying to find out what the fossil bones were in each one.
I don't recall exactly, but it's in the book.
There were not only fish before Tiktaalik. There were tetrapods before Tiktaalik.
Funny but it would still be classified as being the missing link if it were considered to be so.
No I was saying that it was said to be an intermediate right in the middle yet it was found not to be the case.
It was considered a transitional yes, and remains so. However, it has been the missing link, the exact prediction and an ancestor to tetrapods.
You explain it to us. You are the one making claims about it.
You're not following the conversation, are you?
HitchSlap has already disappointed you in Post 39.
Sorry to disappoint you, but it turns out you're Homo s. and a fish.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm Linnaeus emancipata.
My mom and dad do, and they've been dead for years.Sorry, but you're not able to live apart from reality, no matter how much you believe it to be so.
But we digress... did you vote?
We are talking 10 million years compared to a much more vast time span before that. We are talking about a handful of years in geologic terms where we see an explosion of early tetrapods.
The platypus is still transitional between placental mammals and reptiles even though we find early mammals hundreds of millions of years before the platypus.
Fine.How can it be considered missing if we have found it?
You don't have to be right in the middle in order to be transitional. That is just silly, and completely arbitrary.
A missing link does not need to be an ancestor. There is abosolutely no way that we can determine if a fossil has any living relatives. None. What we can determine is if a species has the mixture of characteristics that evolution says they should have, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE FIND.
What's Your Inner Fish?
That sounds like something Hackel would have written; or some New Ager.
There were not only fish before Tiktaalik. There were tetrapods before Tiktaalik.
.
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?