He gave a very clear precise answer if you know how to read the questions.
Common Ancestors?
- Thread starter IceAgeCivilizations
- Start date
He gave a very clear precise answer if you know how to read the questions.
Can't understand that. Try to express yourself clearly in future.
It depends entirely on which fish.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
Why do you use the word "supposed" in front of scientific terms? Are you not a scientist? Why do you call scientists "Darwinists"? Darwin's theory has been amplified and adjusted by more than a century of research, but it remains the basis of modern evolutionary biology. All evolutionary biologists are "Darwinists" because there is no competing scientific theory. "Intelligent design," "creationism," etc. are religious beliefs, not scientific theories.
If you dispute science you are not a scientist and you don't belong here. There is a religion forum for you.
Humans split off from the other apes about ten million years ago. The common ancestor of the human and the chimpanzee, our closest relative, probably looked more like a chimpanzee than a human. We have developed more in those ten million years than they did.
Apes split off from monkey 25 million years ago. The common ancestor was an old world monkey, it would be recognizable as an old world monkey today. Apes went on to undergo some remarkable changes, such as losing their tails.
Mammals split off from reptiles roughly 150 million years ago. The common ancestor was a reptile. Mammals went on to develop advanced characteristics, whereas reptiles have not changed much. Crocodiles have been around in very much their modern form for about 70 million years.
Reptiles split off from amphibians about 350 million years ago. The common ancestor was an amphibian. Amphibians haven't changed much, whereas reptiles went on to develop lungs, claws, and a wide variety of forms. Amphibians aren't much older than reptiles, the sources I've found put them both around 350 million years.
Amphibians split off from fish. The amphibians were the first vertebrates to undero an almost larval form of post-natal development. When frog eggs hatch, the young animals are tadpoles, which have only hind legs and no lungs. They are basically fish with two legs. As they mature, they develop their front legs and their lungs, and they can come out of the water.
You're looking for a tree structure where amphibians and fish both descended from an older ancestor, but that's not how it worked. Amphibians descended from fish.
Similary, reptiles descended from amphibians. They did not have a common ancestor. Reptiles are newer than amphibians.
Similarly, mammals descended from reptiles. The shrew was one of the earliest types of mammals and primates descended from shrews. Apes descended from monkeys. Humans are apes, but we descended from a creature that could be reasonably classified as a chimpanzee.
We don't have common ancestors. We are descended from creatures who did not evolve as quickly as we did.
BTW, you can get much better answers to your questions much more quickly from Wikipedia. Their biology articles are excellent.
And some didn't "evolve" into anything new, such as bacteria, viruses, frogs, fish, never changed, why is that?
By the way Frag, there is a big difference between evolution per se and Darwinian evolution, the first is observable, the second has never been.
Species which are well adapted to their environmental niches suffer no particular natural selection pressures, and therefore have no "need" to evolve (although this is importing teleology into the process, and we must be careful with such use of language).
And all the "common ancestors" are "unknown," just great.
Well, actually frogs, bacteria, viruses, fish have evolved too. Even living fossils aren't identical to their ancestors that they resemble.
Viruses are in fact the fastest evolving entities in our world.
And they're all still viruses, frogs, fish, etc.
Yes, but not the same ones.
Just as I am not the same as Thomas Jefferson.
Different individuals, same syngameon.
What is a syngamegoo?
I am quoting certain authors but my post is open to everyone.
That was nicely prepared and concise Fraggle. Some questions an aspiring biologist would ask are:
What is the primary methodoloy for dating fossils?
Does'nt this show the normal life cycle of a frog?
Ultimately couldnt a frog just be a frog? Would the frog mom be offended if you call her offsping fish?
You present that timeline as if you are talking about 1965, but this is 100's of miilions of years. To say "one was here 130 mill. yrs. ago and the other dodnt come about untill 135 mill. yrs...." well should we just accept this?
Can a rock be dated in this way? what environmental factors woud\may inhibit accuracy?
Back to the fish and frog's. It has been observed that fish change sex (male\female) during their lifetime, possibly as a matter of requirement. Does anyone here know why and what other organism's have this ability?
Is this not simply a survival mechanism? The human body does this by rejecting the effect of harmfull drugs, rendering foreign substances useless as best it can.
after all it is still a virus, just as when it began. "Evolving" is a term that can be used to describe paint drying, do you see this as an indication of what is it called? Darwin Evolution.
Thanks guys.
That was nicely prepared and concise Fraggle. Some questions an aspiring biologist would ask are:
What is the primary methodoloy for dating fossils?
Does'nt this show the normal life cycle of a frog?
Ultimately couldnt a frog just be a frog? Would the frog mom be offended if you call her offsping fish?
You present that timeline as if you are talking about 1965, but this is 100's of miilions of years. To say "one was here 130 mill. yrs. ago and the other dodnt come about untill 135 mill. yrs...." well should we just accept this?
Can a rock be dated in this way? what environmental factors woud\may inhibit accuracy?
Back to the fish and frog's. It has been observed that fish change sex (male\female) during their lifetime, possibly as a matter of requirement. Does anyone here know why and what other organism's have this ability?
Is this not simply a survival mechanism? The human body does this by rejecting the effect of harmfull drugs, rendering foreign substances useless as best it can.
after all it is still a virus, just as when it began. "Evolving" is a term that can be used to describe paint drying, do you see this as an indication of what is it called? Darwin Evolution.
Thanks guys.
The ol' "Darwinian drying-paint morphing" analogy, I like that, so thank you John99.
So since you're not suicidal, you're homicidal, great Ophi, you really should watch your language.