Take The Tiktaalik Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Out of respect for the indigenous peoples of Ellesmere Island, Shubin let the tribal council name Tiktaalik. Roseae is after his daughter.

So the indigenous peoples of Ellesmere Island never saw a fishapod before?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Correct.

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?

 

[HitchSlap]

So the indigenous peoples of Ellesmere Island never saw a fishapod before?

I don't know. Did they?

 

[HitchSlap]

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?

I think all three were found during the third and last excavation.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes, and I understand that it is assumed that it is a relic. However, how do we determine that?

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.

When it first was found it was claimed to be the missing link.

Are your keys still missing after you find them?

Then it was a transitional that fit right in the middle where it should and then it comes down as a relic.

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.

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?

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.

 

[Loudmouth]

So the indigenous peoples of Ellesmere Island never saw a fishapod before?

You tell us. It is your claim. Or were you just making it up as you went?

 

[Loudmouth]

Perhaps then you would care to explain to us the role the Innuits played in Tiktaalik getting its name?

You explain it to us. You are the one making claims about it.

 

[Oncedeceived]

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.

There were not only fish before Tiktaalik. There were tetrapods before Tiktaalik.

Are your keys still missing after you find them?

Funny but it would still be classified as being the missing link if it were considered to be so.

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.

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 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.

It was considered a transitional yes, and remains so. However, it has been the missing link, the exact prediction and an ancestor to tetrapods.

 

[Oncedeceived]

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.

 

[HitchSlap]

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.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I don't recall exactly, but it's in the book.

I don't have the book.

 

[Loudmouth]

There were not only fish before Tiktaalik. There were tetrapods before Tiktaalik.

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.

Funny but it would still be classified as being the missing link if it were considered to be so.

How can it be considered missing if we have found it?

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.

You don't have to be right in the middle in order to be transitional. That is just silly, and completely arbitrary.

It was considered a transitional yes, and remains so. However, it has been the missing link, the exact prediction and an ancestor to tetrapods.

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.

Again, you are trying to mash ANCESTOR with TRANSITIONAL.

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING!!!!

 

[AV1611VET]

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.

 

[HitchSlap]

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.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry to disappoint you, but it turns out you're Homo s. and a fish.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm Linnaeus emancipata.

 

[HitchSlap]

Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm Linnaeus emancipata.

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?

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry, but you're not able to live apart from reality, no matter how much you believe it to be so.

My mom and dad do, and they've been dead for years.

Weird, isn't it?

But we digress... did you vote?

No.

My choice isn't on there.

 

[Oncedeceived]

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.

That really isn't the issue. You said that there were no tetrapods before Tiktaalik.

The platypus is still transitional between placental mammals and reptiles even though we find early mammals hundreds of millions of years before the platypus.

I'm curious why it is considered a transitional between placental mammals and reptiles when in fact the eggs it lays are closer in structure to birds. It bill is closer to a duck (I know I know it is not like a duck bill other than appearance) it has a tail like a beaver so is it a representative of reptile to rodent, reptile to bird, reptile to mammal?

How can it be considered missing if we have found it?

Fine.

You don't have to be right in the middle in order to be transitional. That is just silly, and completely arbitrary.

I didn't say that.

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.

Ok I stand corrected. I thought that for a missing link to be a true missing link it had to be a an ancestor to the following fossil form.

 

[Split Rock]

What's Your Inner Fish?

That sounds like something Hackel would have written; or some New Ager.

Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body: Neil Shubin: 9780307277459: Amazon.com: Books

 

[Split Rock]

There were not only fish before Tiktaalik. There were tetrapods before Tiktaalik.
.

The tetrapods before Tiktaalik were also fishapods. The tetrapods after Tiktaalik were also fishapods. There are at least 14 named genera. Was is it not transitional?