[_ Old Earth _] Article of Whale and Dolphin Evolution

[kenmaynard]

http://www.physorg.com/news173031353.html

 

[lordkalvan]

http://www.physorg.com/news173031353.html

An interesting discussion on whale evolution and the evidence that supports it (or otherwise) developed on this thread -

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=36479&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

- but unfortunately the chief proponent of the contra viewpoint decided to abandon the thread leaving a number of questions unanswered.

 

[Crying Rock]

http://www.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/ ... galegu.jpg

http://www.physorg.com/news173031353.html

http://www.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/ ... galegu.jpg

Explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product.

I don’t want small skeletal samples and large conjecture. ;)

 

[Barbarian]

Explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product.

So, if a man leaves Tacoma walking one day, and turns up near Seattle some days later, with thousands of pictures taken along the trail to show you, you wouldn't believe he walked it, unless he could prove every single step he took?

At then end, the creationist refuge is that kind of evasion.

 

[Crying Rock]

Explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product.

So, if a man leaves Tacoma walking one day, and turns up near Seattle some days later, with thousands of pictures taken along the trail to show you, you wouldn't believe he walked it, unless he could prove every single step he took?

At then end, the creationist refuge is that kind of evasion.

Thanks.

However my question was: "Explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product.":

http://www.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/ ... galegu.jpg

http://www.physorg.com/news173031353.html

http://www.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/ ... galegu.jpg

Explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product.

I don’t want small skeletal samples and large conjecture. ;)

So, if a man leaves Tacoma walking one day, and turns up near Seattle some days later, with thousands of pictures taken along the trail to show you, you wouldn't believe he walked it, unless he could prove every single step he took?

Quote published articles that are accepted by the majority of paleontologists that explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product."

http://www.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/ ... galegu.jpg

This should be fairly easy taking into account the confidence you place in macro-evolution.

Imagine when we get into explaining human cognition at the nDNA level.

 

[Barbarian]

Yes, we understand. If you can't track every moment of every change, then you won't believe it.

Holocaust deniers use the same argument. It's the claim that if we don't know everything, we can't know anything.

It might be a comforting dodge, but it really won't convince anyone who isn't already inclined to take your side.

Let's review the evidence.

The first indication that whales were evolved from ungulates was the observation that they had the digestive tract of one. A few other anatomical oddities linked them with the hoofed mammals.

Then, one after another, the predicted transitional whales were found. Confirmed predictions, as you know, are powerful evidence for a theory.

And, of course, the DNA evidence shows whales and ungulates to be closely related. And we know it works, because it has been verified with organisms whose descent can later be checked.

 

[Crying Rock]

And, of course, the DNA evidence shows whales and ungulates to be closely related. And we know it works, because it has been verified with organisms whose descent can later be checked.

What is the nDNA concordance between deer and goats and whales and pigs?

 

[lordkalvan]

Explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product.

I don’t want small skeletal samples and large conjecture.

I would be very interested in your model for the origin of whales and the evidence that supports it. Alternatively, given the balance of evidence that exists, why do you suppose whales haven't evolved from terrestrial ancestors?

 

[Barbarian]

A complete phylogeny of the whales, dolphins and even-toed hoofed mammals (Cetartiodactyla).
Price SA, Bininda-Emonds OR, Gittleman JL.

Department of Biology, Gilmer Hall, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4328, USA. SPrice@virginia.edu

Despite the biological and economic importance of the Cetartiodactyla, the phylogeny of this clade remains controversial. Using the supertree approach of matrix representation with parsimony, we present the first phylogeny to include all 290 extant species of the Cetacea (whales and dolphins) and Artiodactyla (even-toed hoofed mammals). At the family-level, the supertree is fully resolved. For example, the relationships among the Ruminantia appear as (((Cervidae, Moschidae) Bovidae) (Giraffidae, Antilocapridae) Tragulidae). However, due to either lack of phylogenetic study or contradictory information, polytomies occur within the clades Sus, Muntiacus, Cervus, Delphinidae, Ziphiidae and Bovidae. Complete species-level phylogenies are necessary for both illustrating and analysing biological, geographical and ecological patterns in an evolutionary framework. The present species-level tree of the Cetartiodactyla provides the first opportunity to examine comparative hypotheses across entirely aquatic and terrestrial species within a single mammalian order.

 

[Crying Rock]

Explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product.

I don’t want small skeletal samples and large conjecture.

I would be very interested in your model for the origin of whales and the evidence that supports it. Alternatively, given the balance of evidence that exists, why do you suppose whales haven't evolved from terrestrial ancestors?

I'm not obligated to solve your claim: "... An interesting discussion on whale evolution and the evidence that supports it..." Walk me through the nDNA evidence of your proposed whale evolution, from land mammals to marine mammals. Also, please walk me through the morphological evidence.

 

[lordkalvan]

[quote="Crying Rock":2n9z1y5d]Explain to me the nDNA evolution, step by step, that resulted in the end product.

I don’t want small skeletal samples and large conjecture.

I would be very interested in your model for the origin of whales and the evidence that supports it. Alternatively, given the balance of evidence that exists, why do you suppose whales haven't evolved from terrestrial ancestors?

I'm not obligated to solve your claim: "... An interesting discussion on whale evolution and the evidence that supports it..." Walk me through the nDNA evidence of your proposed whale evolution, from land mammals to marine mammals. Also, please walk me through the morphological evidence.[/quote:2n9z1y5d]
And I'm not obligated to meet your demand for a step-by-step explanation of the mDNA evolution of whale ancestry, an explanation that you would no doubt reject anyway if it failed to meet some as yet unspecified qualification that you would subsequently impose. Why are you so afraid of sharing your 'model' of the origins of whales and the 'evidence' that supports it? Would it be because you have neither?

 

[Crying Rock]

...And I'm not obligated to meet your demand for a step-by-step explanation of the mDNA evolution of whale ancestry...

Then your claim is unsubstantiated.

 

[lordkalvan]

...And I'm not obligated to meet your demand for a step-by-step explanation of the mDNA evolution of whale ancestry...

Then your claim is unsubstantiated.

Only in the context of your narrowly specific demands. The evidence that exists beyond said narrowly specific demands is more than persuasive to anyone approaching it free of pre-existing ideas and assumptions. Can you provide your own model of the origins of whales? Your continued silence on the subject suggests that you are quite unwilling to do this.

 

[Crying Rock]

Only in the context of your narrowly specific demands. The evidence that exists beyond said narrowly specific demands is more than persuasive to anyone approaching it free of pre-existing ideas and assumptions

Then please do demonstrate via nDNA and morphologically the the "evolution" of whales from land dwelling critters.

more than persuasive to anyone approaching it free of pre-existing ideas and assumptions

Please...

 

[lordkalvan]

Only in the context of your narrowly specific demands. The evidence that exists beyond said narrowly specific demands is more than persuasive to anyone approaching it free of pre-existing ideas and assumptions

Then please do demonstrate via nDNA and morphologically the the "evolution" of whales from land dwelling critters.

How do you expect DNA evidence to be recovered from fossils? What morphological evidence do you require? You have elsewhere rubbished morphological evidence that you do not find persuasive. If the evidential conditions that you demand are at this stage of knowledge not available, I can only assume that you will settle for nothing short of certainty. In cases such as this, science is rarely about certainty, it is about the balance of evidence.

more than persuasive to anyone approaching it free of pre-existing ideas and assumptions

Please... [/quote][/quote]
Please, what? What is your model for the origins and developments of whales? Why are you so coy about sharing it with us?

 

[Barbarian]

That's always been the demand: "To convince me, you need to present whatever proof can't possibly be found."

We sometimes later get the means to get such proof. The classic was one prominent creationist declaring that if they found a whale with legs, he'd become an evolutionist.

Later, when several different ones were found, he said that they couldn't be whales, because by definition, whales don't have legs.

Fun, but futile.

 

[Crying Rock]

Show me the morphological proof that whales evolved from land dwelling mammals. Then we'll move on to nDNA.

 

[lordkalvan]

Show me the morphological proof that whales evolved from land dwelling mammals. Then we'll move on to nDNA.

We've been here before. What do you mean by 'proof'? What do you regard as a persuasive amount of evidence? If whales did not evolve from land-dwelling animals, why do you suppose they have morphological and physiological features that are typical of land-dwelling animals? What is your own model for the origins of whales?

 

[Crying Rock]

Show me the morphological proof that whales evolved from land dwelling mammals. Then we'll move on to nDNA.

We've been here before. What do you mean by 'proof'? What do you regard as a persuasive amount of evidence? If whales did not evolve from land-dwelling animals, why do you suppose they have morphological and physiological features that are typical of land-dwelling animals? What is your own model for the origins of whales?

All I'm asking for is you to lay out your evidence for marine whales being derived from land dwelling mammals. Is that so hard if you believe it it is true. You seem to keep dodging the questions to your original claim. I have no obligation to negate your claim if you can't provide positive evidence.

...An interesting discussion on whale evolution and the evidence that supports it...

 

[lordkalvan]

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=36479&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=135[/url]

- yet chose to abandon it leaving several points and questions unanswered on the grounds that it had been 'beaten to shreds.' I am happy to present the same evidence again and continue the discussion, but it seems reasonable to ask that if you considered that evidence unacceptable in the first place, despite failing to respond to several points arising from aspects of that evidence, what evidence you would actually consider acceptable? Should we start with vestigial features again?