Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

[_ Old Earth _] New mammalian transitional adds information on reptile-mammal evolutionNature 472, 181–185 (14 April

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00
; we hypothesize...

Who is glorified by guessing? Sure it's an educated guess, but God is not glorified by that. Only men of science are glorified by that hypothesis.

Boast -To glorify oneself in speech; talk in a self-admiring way.

For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, so that no man may boast before God. But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, so that, just as it is written, “Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord.” 1 Cor 26-31
 
Barbarian cites evidence:
Using this osteological correlate, we concluded that the anterior borders of the brachial plexuses in the stem synapsids were positioned at the level of the fourth spinal nerve, suggesting that the forelimb buds were laid in close proximity of the infrahyoid muscles. The topology of the phrenic and suprascapular nerves of mammals is similar to that of subscapular and supracoracoid nerves, respectively, of the other amniotes, suggesting that the diaphragm evolved from a muscle positioned medial to the pectoral girdle (cf. subscapular muscle). We hypothesize that the diaphragm was acquired in two steps: first, forelimb muscle cells were incorporated into tissues to form a primitive diaphragm in the stem synapsid grade, and second, the diaphragm in cynodonts became entrapped in the region controlled by pulmonary development.
J Anat. 2013 May;222(5):504-17

Who is glorified by guessing?

If you think facts are "guessing", we've located the problem.

Sure it's an educated guess

Nope. It's a prediction, based on evidence.

Hypothesis
A hypothesis Is not an educated guess. Guessing at an answer before the research is done can easily create bias. A good research project should not have even the slightest appearance of bias.
A hypothesis is a proposal for answering the research question which states the basis for the proposal along with criterion for testing. If-then statements are an excellent form for the proposal.

A hypothesis should generally start with a brief discussion of the basis for the proposal. This should include references to a literature search, previous observations, or expert opinion.


A well written hypothesis will state the independent and dependent variables along with possible lurking variable, which need to be controlled. It will also discuss any assumptions that are made in the evaluation criterion, such as assuming that the resistance of wires in an electrical circuit is negligible or that air resistance acting on a falling object is zero.
http://www.intuitor.com/student/MrRscienceFair1.php


but God is not glorified by that.

He is not glorified by "just so" belief stories without scriptural foundation or evidence. He is glorified by men using the gifts He gave them, to figure out the things He left for us to find our for ourselves.

Only men of science are glorified by that hypothesis.

Only if one assumes that God is not the Author of creation. A bit of humility, and being willing to accept that one's ideas might be wrong, pending further evidence, would go a long way. The "just-so" stories don't help.
 
Barbarian observes:
You cited Gish as an authority; and with that, you put his credibility on the table. That's how it works. If you'd rather go with evidence instead of quotes, it won't happen.

And yet, you, quite hypocritically, began this thread with a huge quote from evolutionarily biased palaeontologists.

And their credibility is also on the table, but as you see, they have their facts straight, and Gish got it completely wrong.

Example of Gish's competence to discuss biology:
"But, on the other hand, if you look at certain proteins, you will find that man is more closely related to a bullfrog than he is to a chimpanzee."

Whether Gish said so or not is a moot point.

Nope. It merely demonstrates that Gish is an ignoramus in biology.
"As mentioned earlier, evolutionists believe that as the bones in the reptilian jaw, except for the dentary, gradually became relieved of their function in the jaw they were now free either to evolve out of existence or to assume some new function. "


Gish is apparently unaware that those bones connect to the middle ear, even though they are attached to the lower jaw.

This is again sheer nonsense.

C'mon. It's a fact. It's still there in living reptiles.

“The reptilian middle ear connected to the jaw can pick up the ground vibration, whereas the middle ear fully separated from the jaw is certainly much better at receiving the air-borne sound,” said Luo, who collaborated on the study with experts at the University of Nanjing in China.
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/humans-ear-bones-began-reptile-jaws/

Yet a snake can detect these small ripples. If it rests its head on the ground, the two sides of the lower jaw are brought into vibration by the incoming wave. These vibrations are then transmitted directly into the inner ear by means of a chain of bones attached to the lower jaw. This process is comparable to the transmission of auditory signals by the ossicles in the human middle ear. The snake thus literally hears surface vibrations.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080221105350.htm

As the following diagram shows, the connection is at best tenuous.

See above. No point in denying the fact.

Your diagram is very misleading.

It's a very accurate depiction of the location of these bones.

Here are two better ones.

Another diagram of reptilian ear with the quadrate and articular deleted. But as you see, in reptiles, these bones conduct sound to the middle ear.

You don't learn anything, do you?

Even if you're frustrated, personal attacks are a bad idea. Try to put together a good argument with facts, and you'll do better.

Just look. In the reptile there is a single bone connecting the eardrum to the inner ear. The stapes.

See above, the two bones in the lower jaw of reptiles conduct sound to the middle ear. As you see in the diagram, they connect to the middle ear; if they didn't, they couldn't conduct sound into it.

Notice that the quadrate and the articular are nowhere to be seen.

Because they were deleted. But a more accurate diagram that includes those bones clearly shows how closely they are associated in reptiles.

They perform no function whatsoever in hearing by the reptile.

See above. It's a fact that they do.

Paleontologists from the American Museum of Natural History and the Chinese Academy of Sciences announce the discovery of Liaoconodon hui, a complete fossil mammal from the Mesozoic found in China that includes the long-sought transitional middle ear. The specimen shows the bones associated with hearing in mammals - the malleus, incus, and ectotympanic- decoupled from the lower jaw, as had been predicted, but held in place by an ossified cartilage that rested in a groove on the lower jaw..."People have been looking for this specimen for over 150 years since noticing a puzzling groove on the lower jaw of some early mammals, " says Jin Meng, curator in the Division of Paleontology at the Museum and first author of the paper. "Now we have cartilage with ear bones attached, the first clear paleontological evidence showing relationships between the lower jaw and middle ear."
http://www.amnh.org/science/papers/fossil_2011.php

They may receive vibrations, but it is certainly wrong to say that they play a part in hearing.

No, that's wrong, as you learned earlier. See the facts noted above, and take a look at a diagram without those bones deleted:
images

As you see, the reptilian jaw is connected to the ear, via the quadrate and articular bones. This is why reptiles put their lower jaws to the ground to better pick up sounds.
Your diagram is duff, and has misled you. In any case, you have failed to notice that the articular is not connected to the quadrate. It is in fact a part of the LOWER jaw.

So your argument is that lower jaws are not connected to upper jaws? Bones are connected by soft tissue. I thought you knew.

Your diagram maker is trying his hardest to falsify the evidence and make it look as if there is a close connection between the tympanic membrane and the quadrate. This is entirely false, as you can see. If the quadrate COVERED the tympanic membrane as in that ridiculous diagram, then the animal simply couldn't hear.
In many reptiles the quadrate supports the lower margin of the tympanium, as this diagram shows. It's not over the tympanium, it's around it. Moreover, some reptiles, even today, lack a tympanium:
http://books.google.com/books?id=h5fIP1X7YvoC&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=reptile quadrate support tympanium&source=bl&ots=fS3Lc6bw4v&sig=D0MEPCjKiFuLnNMisTKZyT_0aPw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OGSuUsiZC-nA2AWB54DgCQ&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=reptile quadrate support tympanium&f=false

First, the quadrate AND the articular are BOTH OUTSIDE THE MIDDLE EAR in reptiles. The articular is firmly attached to the lower jaw, and the quadrate equally firmly attached to the upper jaw.

And, as you just learned, conduct sound to the middle ear. That was, from a very early time, a function of these bones.

Neither is loose, and capable of rattling round in the animal's head. Far less are they capable of "migrating" into the middle ear.

Comes down to evidence. And as you see from the fossil transitionals, that's what happened. Liaoconodon hui has a form precisely intermediate, showing how it happened.

Does it seem possible given that it is only genetic mistakes, otherwise known as mutations, that are responsible for the entire reconstruction of the reptilian ear?

That was Gish's other major goof. He completely forgot about natural selection. You see why most creationists don't quote him, these days? Look at this again, from Gish:

"Thus, the quadrate and articular bones of the jaw became free (they were, by the way, firmly attached to the dentary in Morganucodon) and somehow worked their way into the middle ear to eventually become the incus and malleus, respectively."
"Now the anatomical problems associated with such a postulated process are vastly greater than merely imagining how two bones precisely shaped to perform in a powerfully effective jaw-joint could detach themselves, force their way into the middle ear, reshape themselves into the malleus and incus, which are precisely engineered to function with a remodeled stapes in a vastly different auditory apparatus, while all at the same time the creature continues to chew and to hear! "


Now let's take a look at a very precise drawing of these bones in Morganucodon:
Morganucodontidae05.jpg
Notice the location and connection of the quadrate and stapes. This is why I suggested to you that depending on Gish was a mistake. He hasn't a clue about the anatomy of this animal.

Come Barbarian. Give it up. You're on to another loser here.

I wouldn't call him a loser. "Ignoramus" sums it up nicely.

I'm not going on tonight with this nonsense. I'm going to wax lyrical about evolutionary optimism and general stupidity, and going to get infracted again.

I'll let it pass this time. But try to do better.

Do you notice in your diagram above, THERE IS NO TYMPANIC MEMBRANE (eardrum) in the reptile ear? Where is it?

The gray strip. Take another look. It's not found in all reptiles, of course, but it's in most of them.
We have discussed this before. Gish just didn't realize how it worked.

You obviously don't realise that reptiles have an eardrum!


I just showed you that reptiles generally have a tympanium. Not all of them, of course. We assume that most of the fossil therapsids had them, but it's not absolutely known.
 
Last edited:
As I'm here, let me draw you and the readers' attention to an interesting fact about the mammalian ear, which cannot be attributed to the god natural selection.

Sounds interesting...

Look at the stapes in the human ear. It is resting and attached to a fenestra vestibuli, which is a flexible membrane which moves in and out as the stapes vibrates. With me so far?

I think I know where this is going, and it's probably not where you expect.

Now fluids don't compress at all, or exceedingly little. So if the stapes is trying to vibrate the fenestra, it simply wouldn't work, because the fluid inside the inner ear would prevent it from vibrating in and out as it's supposed to do.

Did you consider that reptiles would have the same problem with the basilar papilla? Guess how that works.

He placed the second fenestra, the round window, just below the stapes. That second fenestra is also flexible, and as the stapes vibrates and pushes the top window in and out, the pressure is relieved by the opposite movement of the round window. Result? The stapes can vibrate, and the vibration can be transmitted to the cochlea and converted into electrical impulses which are sent to the brain for interpretation.

Take look at the arrangement in reptiles. In at the oval window, and out at the round window.
http://tinyurl.com/prrykuz
 
Hypothesis
A hypothesis Is not an educated guess. Guessing at an answer before the research is done can easily create bias. A good research project should not have even the slightest appearance of bias.
Well, well, well!

Am I missing something here, or are all these papers heavily biassed in favour of the evolutionary postulate? They start with the assumption that evolution occurred, and quite naturally say that it did happen at the end of their meanderings.

A well written hypothesis will state the independent and dependent variables along with possible lurking variable, which need to be controlled. It will also discuss any assumptions that are made in the evaluation criterion, such as assuming that the resistance of wires in an electrical circuit is negligible or that air resistance acting on a falling object is zero.
http://www.intuitor.com/student/MrRscienceFair1.php

Hm. I don't see any discussions of the assumptions made in these papers. They merely carry on where the previous wrong hypothesisers left off. Not one of them shows any critical faculty when it come to evolution, and are prepared to produce such junk as saying that the diaphragm arose/evolved/whatever from the shoulder muscles. Why not the big toe for example?
He is not glorified by "just so" belief stories without scriptural foundation or evidence. He is glorified by men using the gifts He gave them, to figure out the things He left for us to find our for ourselves.
Richard Lewontin:

‘Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense

[Well, well well, Richard!]


is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,

[you don't say, Richard!]

in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories,

[ Really? Why do you say such a thing? Did you read that stupid paper Barbarian just quoted? Or what?]

because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.


Now there's the truth.

Evolution is a tissue of just-so stories - and the ear evolution story is a magnificent example of what Lewontin just said about just-so stories!

There are plenty of others - the whale evolution fantasy, the reptile-bird fantasy, the fish-amphibian fantasy, the chimp - human fairy tale. Do I need to go on?

Fairy-tale did I just say? Yes. Once upon a time, there was this great-great-great grandaddy of all chimps. And one day, a few million years later, his children turned into handsome human beings - MOST unlike their great great gran-daddy.

Signed: Hans Christian Asyncritus

Only if one assumes that God is not the Author of creation. A bit of humility, and being willing to accept that one's ideas might be wrong, pending further evidence, would go a long way. The "just-so" stories don't help.

Is that really your attitude? I see no evidence whatsoever of it. Merely your willingness to go on concocting or peddling the just-so stories others have invented.

I mean, seriously, can you really see a reptile sprouting wings, and flying 2 800 miles across the Pacific from Hawaii to Alaska, or 7000 miles from Alaska to new Zealand and back?

Or 10,000 miles one way from the Arctic to the Antarctic, and back again? Or 26,000 km from New Zealand round the Pacific ocean and back to New Zealand, arriving there more or less the same date every time? Or the young who make all the same journeys without a parent in sight?

That's the indefensible position you put yourself in. You are compelled to invoke miraculous powers for this god called natural selection and his angels called mutations.

But it hasn't got any such powers: in fact, as like Elijah, I keep pointing out, there's serious doubt about its very existence - and certainly about its powers to generate even a small fraction of the miracles obvious in creation.

Isn't it far more sensible to whip off your hat, bend your knees and worship the Great God who performs these incredible creative miracles every year, year on year? And abandon this intellectual idol you keep on invoking?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds interesting...

I think I know where this is going, and it's probably not where you expect.

Did you consider that reptiles would have the same problem with the basilar papilla? Guess how that works.

Take look at the arrangement in reptiles. In at the oval window, and out at the round window.
http://tinyurl.com/prrykuz

Do the reptiles have the same arrangement? Good to hear. :salute

But how did that arrangement 'evolve' in the first place?:horse
 
And rather than going through your previous post but one, can you answer Gish's question?

How did the quadrate and the articular bones manage to migrate THROUGH the eardrum, re-shape and re-arrange themselves into the mammalian arrangement?

The mammalian stapes, you may have noted, is shaped entirely differently from the reptilian one. How did that happen?

jaw-bones.jpg

You will also have noted (or ignored) the simple fact that ALL THREE bones in the middle ear are completely differently shaped to the reptilian ones.

The quadrate looks nothing like the incus or the malleus.

The articular looks nothing like the incus or the malleus either.

The stapes (reptile) looks nothing like the mammalian stapes either.

Hmmm.

And the question still stands. Just how did those 2 bones get THROUGH the eardrum, re-shape themselves and the reptile's stapes, and position themselves in the correct places for the great hearing abilities we have, to be produced?

That's Gish's question. Try answering it.
 
(Barbarian points out that the oval window didn't evolve in mammals; it's much older)

Did you consider that reptiles would have the same problem with the basilar papilla? Guess how that works.

Take look at the arrangement in reptiles. In at the oval window, and out at the round window.
http://tinyurl.com/prrykuz

Do the reptiles have the same arrangement? Good to hear.

Well, not quite. As you saw, the evolution of the inner ear went a little farther in mammals than in reptiles.

But how did that arrangement 'evolve' in the first place?

Sounds like an interesting question. Start a new thread. This one is about the way the evidence shows mammals evolved from reptiles.
 
Hypothesis
A hypothesis Is not an educated guess. Guessing at an answer before the research is done can easily create bias. A good research project should not have even the slightest appearance of bias.


Am I missing something here, or are all these papers heavily biassed in favour of the evolutionary postulate?
Yep. You're missing something here. Evidence. The papers are about evidence. And as you know, the evidence for common descent (according to the guy you were touting) is "overwhelming."

A well written hypothesis will state the independent and dependent variables along with possible lurking variable, which need to be controlled. It will also discuss any assumptions that are made in the evaluation criterion, such as assuming that the resistance of wires in an electrical circuit is negligible or that air resistance acting on a falling object is zero.
http://www.intuitor.com/student/MrRscienceFair1.php


Hm. I don't see any discussions of the assumptions made in these papers.
That's because the process is about evidence.

and are prepared to produce such junk as saying that the diaphragm arose/evolved/whatever from the shoulder muscles. Why not the big toe for example?
The "E" word, again. As you see, the anatomical and embyrological evidence shows the origin of the diaphragm in adjacent tissues of the shoulder girdle.

Barbarian, regarding creationist assumptions:
He is not glorified by "just so" belief stories without scriptural foundation or evidence. He is glorified by men using the gifts He gave them, to figure out the things He left for us to find our for ourselves.

Evolution is a tissue of just-so stories - and the ear evolution story is a magnificent example of what Lewontin just said about just-so stories!

As you know, evolution is directly observed to happen, and even Koonin, endorse here by creationists, admits that the evidence for common descent is "overwhelming." So hand-waving won't remove the evidence, nor will it support the "just-so" stories of creationism, in the absence of any evidence for that.
Barbarian suggest that one should let God decide how He will do creation:
Only if one assumes that God is not the Author of creation. A bit of humility, and being willing to accept that one's ideas might be wrong, pending further evidence, would go a long way. The "just-so" stories don't help.
Is that really your attitude?

Yep. If creationists were willing to let Him decide, there wouldn't be a problem.
I mean, seriously, can you really see a reptile sprouting wings, and flying 2 800 miles across the Pacific from Hawaii to Alaska, or 7000 miles from Alaska to new Zealand and back?

You're wandering off-topic, again. But remember, evolution happens to populations, not individuals. Many creationists think they hate evolution, when they don't even know what it is.
That's the indefensible position you put yourself in. You are compelled to invoke miraculous powers for this god called natural selection and his angels called mutations.

That's a good example. You'd be more effective against science, if you knew what it was about.
Isn't it far more sensible to whip off your hat, bend your knees and worship the Great God who performs these incredible creative miracles every year, year on year? And abandon this creationist idol you keep on invoking?
 
And rather than going through your previous post but one, can you answer Gish's question?

How did the quadrate and the articular bones manage to migrate THROUGH the eardrum, re-shape and re-arrange themselves into the mammalian arrangement?

You missed it the first time? Here:
Morganucodontidae05.jpg

Take a look at this early mammal, (notice the stapes and quadrate are connected). Just what Gish claimed could not be.

The mammalian stapes, you may have noted, is shaped entirely differently from the reptilian one.

(Barbarian looks again) Nope. You're wrong about that. Morganucodon has a stapes which is more reptilian than mammalian.

How did that happen?

Morganucodon was an early mammal, and had only recently diverged from reptiles. You would expect to see some features that were more like those of reptiles. And so there were.

i-3eb93a1cb756629ca01749bda86ba16b-yanoconodon_jaw.jpg
,
a, Mammaliaform Morganucodon (medial view); a-1 and a-2 label schematic transverse sections at the levels of the malleus and the ectotympanic. In Morganucodon, the middle ear maintains both an anterior connection to the mandible via the Meckel’s cartilage, and a mediolateral contact to the mandible. b, Eutriconodont Yanoconodon (medial view, composite restoration of mandible and middle ear from NJU-P06001A and B). b-1 and b-2 label transverse sections at the levels of the malleus and the ectotympanic. The middle ear retains the anterior connection to the mandible via ossified Meckel’s cartilage (yellow), but is mediolaterally separated from the posterior part of the mandible because of the twist and curvature of Meckel’s cartilage (red arrows in b). c, the ectotympanic (blue), malleus (green) and incus (brown) of modern Ornithorhynchus: the shape and proportion of the ear bones are similar in Ornithorhynchus and Yanoconodon. d, Eutriconodont Repenomamus: ossified Meckel’s cartilage connected anteriorly to the mandible (similar to Yanoconodon). e, Ossified Meckel’s cartilage of Repenomamus (ventral view, isolated). f, Ossified Meckel’s cartilage of Yanoconodon (ventral view, isolated, composite restoration of both the left and the right elements). g, Middle ear of Yanoconodon (composite restoration, ventral view): the ectotympanic and malleus are connected anteriorly to the mandible via ossified Meckel’s cartilage; but these are mediolaterally separated from the posterior part of mandible, facilitated by curvature of the Meckel’s cartilage (yellow). h, Middle ear bones of adult Ornithorhynchus (ventral view) and similarity to those of Yanoconodon. i, Embryonic Ornithorhynchus: the tympanic ring and the partially developed manubrium and goniale (‘prearticular’) of the malleus are anteriorly connected via Meckel’s cartilage to the mandible, but separated mediolaterally from the posterior region of mandible, facilitated by the curved cartilage (red arrow). Yanoconodon retains the embryonic pattern of Ornithorhynchus owing to the timing change of earlier ossification of Meckel’s cartilage, but otherwise its ectotympanic, malleus and incus are nearly the same as in adult Ornithorhynchus.
What we see here is that the three Mesozoic mammals all retain Meckel’s cartilage as a slender, ossified splint clinging to the inner side of the jaw. In b and c, we can see that middle ear bones of both Yanoconodon and the platypus are remarkably similar, but there is one significant difference. In the platypus, those bones are not connected to the jaw at all—they have the standard mammalian middle ear, with the bones suspended remotely from other bones of the jaw and skull. In Yanoconodon, we are almost at that point. The middle ear bones are clearly delicate and specialized for function in hearing, but they retain one last tentative, delicate connection with the jaw through a contact with Meckel’s cartilage. In this animal, we’ve caught the mammals just before they’ve taken that last step of fully separating the middle ear bones from the jaw.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/03/16/yanoconodon-a-transitional-fos/

Gish crashes and burns yet another time.
 
Last edited:
Um, you haven't answered Gish's question again.

HOW DID THE QUADRATE AND THE ARTICULAR BONES, FIRMLY FIXED OUTSIDE THE REPTILE'S MIDDLE EAR, burrow their way into the middle ear, push out the stapes from its attachment to the eardrum, align themselves in the correct positions, reshape thamselves and the stapes into their proper new shape, to produce the mammalian ear?

If you had an answer, I think we'd have heard it by now. So am I correct in assuming that you don't have such an answer?
 
Your top diagram fails entirely to support your POV.

Note:

1 There is no tympanic membrane. That alone disqualifies this creature as being relevant to the discussion, or merely demonstrates the poverty of the artist. Which?

2 The quadrate is optimistically named as such. I very much doubt it is is. Therefore, again the integrity of the artist is being shown as questionable.

The quadrate is attached to the upper jaw in the reptile, and it is merely an assumption that this bone, presumably in the middle ear, is the quadrate. In fact, the whole thing is so completely different from either the reptilian arrangement or the mammalian arrangement, I seriously doubt its relevance to this discussion.

3 The articular is absent

4 There is nothing faintly resembling the malleus and the incus.

5 There's nothing like the middle ear present,

As a transitional therefore, this is a total failure, but of course, has been latched on to, and clung to for dear life by the evolutionist brigade, who cannot answer Gish's simple, penetrating and decisive questions.

I'm not sure what that new quotation, pseudo-evidence as it may be, has to do with answering the question.

Perhaps you could demonstrate its relevance to the question being asked by Dr Gish, which, just to repeat, is:

HOW DID THE QUADRATE AND THE ARTICULAR BONES, FIRMLY FIXED OUTSIDE THE REPTILE'S MIDDLE EAR, burrow their way into the middle ear, push out the stapes from its attachment to the eardrum, align themselves in the correct positions as malleus and incus, reshape thamselves and the stapes into their proper new shape, to produce the mammalian ear? Magic, or natural selection + mutations??? :confused:sleep

Simple enough, isn't it?

Mind you, the HOW question pales into insignificance when we ask WHY should it do so? Any ideas?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Um, you haven't answered Gish's question again.

Several times. But I'll try to make it simpler.

HOW DID THE QUADRATE AND THE ARTICULAR BONES, FIRMLY FIXED OUTSIDE THE REPTILE'S MIDDLE EAR

As you learned, they weren't firmly fixed outside. The quadrate, for example, was the lower margin for the tympanium in the advanced therapsids. It was already "inside" topologically. So no new fenestration was required. As you also learned, these bones were already connected to the middle ear before mammals evolved.

, burrow their way into the middle ear,

See above. No burrowing necessary.

push out the stapes from its attachment to the eardrum

Notice the stapes and quadrate in Morganucodon. Surprise.

, align themselves in the correct positions, reshape thamselves and the stapes into their proper new shape, to produce the mammalian ear?

Remember, they were always aligned, even when they were part of the jaw joint. Still are today, in most reptiles. I think you're looking for magic, when it was nothing more than a reduction in size, and a retention of the connections already there.
 
Several times. But I'll try to make it simpler.

Thanks. I appreciate that.
As you learned, they weren't firmly fixed outside. The quadrate, for example, was the lower margin for the tympanium in the advanced therapsids. It was already "inside" topologically. So no new fenestration was required...

You're dreaming again.

The quadrate is not a floating bone. It is a solid part of the skull/ upper jaw of the reptile.

We're not discussing 'fenestration'. We agree, I suppose, that the quadrate WAS outside the reptile's ear? Not INSIDE it? Just in case you missed that little point, here's wiki:
The quadrate bone is part of a skull in most tetrapods, including amphibians, sauropsids (reptiles, birds), and early synapsids. In these animals it connects to the quadratojugal and squamosal in the skull, and forms part of the jaw joint (the other part is the articular bone at the rear end of the lower jaw).

It is a solid part of the skull. q = quadrate. See?

300px-Skull_anapsida_1.svg.png


As you also learned, these bones were already connected to the middle ear before mammals evolved.

Only in your fake-diagram-maker's mind! They were OUTSIDE the middle ear, firmly fixed to the upper and lower jaws!!!! 'Connected' does not mean INSIDE!!! Slight difference there.
See above. No burrowing necessary.

No? Let's see. Your jaw bones are outside your middle ear. Suppose we want the condylar process of the maxilla to become a part of the middle ear. What do we do? We somehow separate it, shrink it, and BURROW IT into the middle ear. Gish said as much.

99196-004-B91F3F9B.jpg


But how do we do that little miracle? Easy. We call upon the god natural selection and his angel mutation, wait a few million years, and bingo! condyle is inside the middle ear.

I guess what you're saying is something like that, isn't it?

Remember, they were always aligned, even when they were part of the jaw joint. Still are today, in most reptiles. I think you're looking for magic, when it was nothing more than a reduction in size, and a retention of the connections already there.

We're not talking about 'alignment'. Whether they are so or not, is irrelevant to the issue. The important point is that they are OUTSIDE THE MIDDLE EAR, and have no way of getting in. Gish says so, and he's right.

And yes, I am looking for magic. The touch of the Creator can readily be classified as magic. No fudging, fiddling or faking the diagrams is necessary. Just a bit of faith in His powers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
1 There is no tympanic membrane.

In reality, the tympanium is never preserved in fossils. Where you see representations of it in fossils, it is because the artist has put it where it would be if it existed there. Since the ossicles of the middle ear are connected to the tympanium in living tetrapods, it's not hard to figure out. But in real fossils, there's no tympanium present. It's a very fragile soft tissue, and it would be remarkable if it was present. I thought you knew.

2 The quadrate is optimistically named as such. I very much doubt it is is.

Since people who spent a lifetime in anatomy have determined that it is, and since you don't seem to know much at all about anatomy, that's really not relevant to the discussion. You don't need a degree in anatomy, but you do need to put in the time to learn how it works. Do that, and you'll have some credibility.

3 The articular is absent

No, this is a ventral view of the upper jaw and skull. The articular is on the lower law, connected to the quadrate by ligaments. Look at the diagram of Moranucodon's lower jaw in the same post. It's there.

4 There is nothing faintly resembling the malleus and the incus.

Only functionally. The quadrate, as you see, is connected to the stapes, and eventually (as is does in mammalian embyryos) becomes the incus, and the articular similarly becomes the malleus, as happens to the embyro before birth.

5 There's nothing like the middle ear present,

It's probably difficult, if you don't know much about comparative anatomy, but there it is. Here's a diagram of the bones with the lower jaw in place:
11420972105_1c1ace4a80_b.jpg

You can check it out at:
http://books.google.com/books?id=oXFDAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=morganucodon middle ear&source=bl&ots=TC06UuQB4V&sig=bIbV7yBbwTM4T8XNaoe0pq-FqDM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=o3KwUoyzA_P7yAHrlYCwDA&ved=0CF4Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=morganucodon middle ear&f=false

Notice that the three bones are closely connected, and in the proper mammalian order. If you go to the site, you can see the transition from Morgonucodon to modern mammals.

As a transitional therefore, this is a total failure,

As you now see, the transitions are well-documented in the fossil record.

but of course, has been latched on to, and clung to for dear life by the evolutionist brigade, who cannot answer Gish's simple, penetrating and decisive questions.

And once again, it makes clear that Gish's degree in hydrology won't help one much in anatomy. Gish is an ignoramus, who had no idea of the things I'm showing you now.


HOW DID THE QUADRATE AND THE ARTICULAR BONES, FIRMLY FIXED OUTSIDE THE REPTILE'S MIDDLE EAR

As you now see, they are well-connected to the middle ear, even in reptiles, and the connection gets better in the mammal-like reptiles.

, burrow their way into the middle ear,

See above. No need to open another fenstration. They were already connected.

push out the stapes from its attachment to the eardrum, align themselves in the correct positions as malleus and incus

See above. They were already connected in the proper order.

Simple enough, isn't it?

One would think so, but as you now understand, Gish had no idea about any of this. So he confabulated a story that seemed right to him. That is the creationist way, after all.

Mind you, the HOW question pales into insignificance when we ask WHY should it do so?

Mammals have more acute hearing, particularly in the higher frequencies. Turns out, being able to hear such sounds, particularly at night, is a big advantage.
 
Barbarian observes:
As you learned, they weren't firmly fixed outside. The quadrate, for example, was the lower margin for the tympanium in the advanced therapsids. It was already "inside" topologically. So no new fenestration was required...

You're dreaming again.

See the diagrams above. It's just a matter of fact. No way to deny it.

The quadrate is not a floating bone.

It is, however a bone in therapsid reptiles, that is connected to the stapes of the middle ear. As you see, it became reduced in size over time, ceased to function as a part of the jaw joint, but maintained it's function as a way of transferring vibration to the middle ear.

We're not discussing 'fenestration'.

You were. As you see, the quadrate was already in place, and had no need to "bore" another fenestration.

We agree, I suppose, that the quadrate WAS outside the reptile's ear?

To be precise, it was connected to the middle ear.

Async quotes Wiki:The quadrate bone is part of a skull in most tetrapods, including amphibians, sauropsids (reptiles, birds), and early synapsids.
Yep. Early synapsids. You missed the point, because you don't know what a synapsid is.

Synapsids (Greek, 'fused arch'), synonymous with theropsids (Greek, 'beast-face'), are a group of animals that includes mammals and every animal more closely related to mammals than to other living amniotes.[1] They are easily separated from other amniotes by having a temporal fenestra, an opening low in the skull roof behind each eye, leaving a bony arch beneath each; this accounts for their name. You posted a diagram of an anapsid skull.

300px-Skull_anapsida_1.svg.png


Barbarian observes:
As you also learned, these bones were already connected to the middle ear before mammals evolved.

Only in your fake-diagram-maker's mind!

And the last resort of the creationist: "All those scientists are just lying!" Sorry, not credible.

They were OUTSIDE the middle ear, firmly fixed to the upper and lower jaws!!!!

No, that's wrong. Over time, the connection became less and less firm. The animal in the OP has only a tenuous connection via a very reduced Meckel's cartilage. And Morganucodon has lost even that.

No? Let's see. Your jaw bones are outside your middle ear. Suppose we want the condylar process of the maxilla to become a part of the middle ear. What do we do?

Nothing to do. It's one bone with the maxilla. Can't come loose, because there's no connection to come loose.

We somehow separate it, shrink it, and BURROW IT into the middle ear.

Can't seperate it. Unlike the articular and the quadrate, it's just one bone. And as you learned, no burrowing necessary. The quadrate was already connected to the stapes.

Gish said as much.

He did. But as you learned, Gish was an ignoramus when it came to anatomy. Here, take a look. One bone, not several. No way to disconnect and move. Gish, of course, didn't realize that so, he confabulated another story. It's the creationist way.

99196-004-B91F3F9B.jpg


But how do we do that little miracle? Easy. We call upon the god natural selection and his angel mutation, wait a few million years, and bingo! condyle is inside the middle ear.

I'm sure you're as surprised as Gish would have been, if he bothered to actually check it out.

I guess what you're saying is something like that, isn't it?

There may be a case where a bone that starts out as one piece in utero, later separates, but I can't think of one. Can you?

Remember, they were always aligned, even when they were part of the jaw joint.

More to the point, the condyle is one with the rest of the jaw, not a different bone. The articular and the quadrate were separate bones, and as you learned, directly connected to the stapes.

The important point is that they are OUTSIDE THE MIDDLE EAR, and have no way of getting in.

See the diagram above. No way of denying what's there.

Gish says so,

But as you see, Gish doesn't know what he's talking about.

And yes, I am looking for magic.

The creationist creed. But God does most things in this world by natural means.

The touch of the Creator can readily be classified as magic.

Anything one does not understand, looks like magic. But that doesn't make it so.

Have a little faith in God; He's a lot more powerful than you think He is.
 
Last edited:
This is a very long, and I'm afraid irrelevant answer.

Gish asked you, and I have now repeated the question several times,

Just how did those 2 bones get THROUGH the eardrum, re-shape themselves and the reptile's stapes, and position themselves in the correct places for the great hearing abilities we have, to be produced?

That's Gish's question. Try answering it.

And this nonsense about tympanum not being preserved is really rather silly. They have found jellyfish in the preCambrian. Can't get much more fragile than that. Poor excuse, and lousy diagram-drawing.

You can't tell me that the artist was that dim. He knew exactly what he was doing - fraudulently misrepresenting the facts which he knew were adverse to his position, or to the position of the person who was paying him.

If they can produce this from a wild pig's tooth, then what's a tympanic membrane?

188.jpg
 
Let me again quote your favourite author, Dr Gish:

Reptiles have six bones in each half of the lower jaw. Articulation of the jaw with the skull is indirect, with the articular (one of the bones of the jaw) articulating with the quadrate bone of the skull, a bone not found in mammals. Another fundamental difference between reptiles and mammals is the fact that all reptiles, living or fossil, have a single bone in the ear, a rod-like bone known as the columella, which connects the tympanum (eardrum) to the inner ear.

Mammals possess three bones in the ear called the stapes, incus, and malleus, which connect the cochlea to the tympanum. Evolutionists maintain that the stapes corresponds to the columella and that the quadrate and articular bones of the reptile somehow moved into the ear to become, respectively, the incus and malleus bones of the mammalian ear. No explanation is given how the intermediates managed to hear while this was going on.

Another difficulty with the above notion is the fact that while thousands of fossil reptiles have been found which possess a single ear bone and multiple jaw bones, and thousands of fossil mammals have been found which possess three ear bones and a single bone in the jaw, not a single fossil creature has ever been found which represents an intermediate stage, such as one possessing three bones in the jaw and two bones in the ear.

Morganucodon3 and Kuehneotherium4 each possessed a full complement of the reptilian bones in its lower jaw.



[If that is correct, then you have a serious problem. If they possessed the full complement of jawbones, THEN NONE HAVE BECOME THE EAR BONES]

Furthermore, there was no reduction in the functional importance of the reptilian (quadrate-articular) jaw-joint, even though these creatures are supposed to be intermediates between reptiles and mammals, allegedly possessing a mammalian (squamosal-dentary) jaw-joint in addition to the reptilian jaw-joint.

Kermack, et al., state "The most striking characteristic of the accessory jaw bones of Morganucodon is their cynodont character. Compared with such a typical advanced cynodont as Cynognathus, the accessory bones present show no reduction, either in size or complexity of structure.
In particular, the actual reptilian jaw-joint itself was relatively as powerful in the mammal, Morganucodon, as it was in the reptile Cynognathus.

This was quite unexpected."3 (We would interject here that we emphatically reject the idea of calling Morganucodon a mammal.)
endquote

So we have a reptile, Morganucodon,. with the full complement of jaw bones! None have turned into any of the 3 earbones. Your use of M. is therefore mistaken and irrelevant. It is not a 'transitional' of any sort between reptile and mammal.

Wiki:

Morganucodon is regarded as very basal (= primitive). Its lower jaw has some of the bones found in its synapsid ancestors in a very reduced form. Mammals have a jawbone composed solely of the dentary.

Furthermore, the primitive jaw joint between the articular and quadrate bones, which in modern mammals has moved into the middle ear and become part of the ear ossicles as malleus and incus, is still to be found in Morganucodon.[8]p107/112


So all this hoo-hah you're making about M's earbones is pure rubbish!

Gish says so, wiki says so, and I say so too.

How much anatomy did you say you know?
 
This is a very long, and I'm afraid irrelevant answer.

It nicely demonstrate that Gish didn't know what he was talking about. He was, as you know completely unaware of the way that the quadrate and articular were already connected to the middle ear.

Gish asked you, and I have now repeated the question several times,

And for the third time, I'll answer. You're entitled to an answer, but you're not entitled to have reality fit your hopes.

Just how did those 2 bones get THROUGH the eardrum

As you learned, they didn't have to. The articular was part of the bony support for the tympanium, and therefore needed no new route to the middle ear.

re-shape themselves and the reptile's stapes, and position themselves in the correct places

As you saw, they were already connected in the proper order. They just became smaller.

And this nonsense about tympanum not being preserved is really rather silly.

You could support your claim by showing a therapsid or early mammal fossil with a preserved ear drum. Let's see what you have. I'm guessing that you don't have anything, but I'd be willing to take a look if you have one.

You can't tell me that the artist was that dim. He knew exactly what he was doing - fraudulently misrepresenting the facts which he knew were adverse to his position, or to the position of the person who was paying him.

And we're back to "All those scientists are lying!" Sorry, not credible.

If they can produce this from a wild pig's tooth

(Newspaper with a caveman drawing)

It wasn't a scientist. It was an artist for a London Newspaper. Surprise.
 
Let me again quote your favourite author, Dr Gish

Sure. He's a lot of fun, if you're in the right mood...

Gish holds forth:
Reptiles have six bones in each half of the lower jaw. Articulation of the jaw with the skull is indirect, with the articular (one of the bones of the jaw) articulating with the quadrate bone of the skull, a bone not found in mammals.

Actually, the quadrate in mammals is called the incus. How do we know this? Because we can watch it as it develops in utero in mammals. The fetal mammal has quadrate and articular bones, just as adult reptiles do. Only in mammals, the bones become relatively smaller, and fit into the middle ear, just as we see this happening in the transitional reptiles and mammals I showed you.

In the course of the development of the embryo, the incus and malleus arise from the same First Pharyngeal arch as the Mandible and Maxilla, and are served by mandibular and maxillary division of the Trigeminal Cranial nerve.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_mammalian_auditory_ossicles#cite_note-isbn0-87893-258-5-6

Another fundamental difference between reptiles and mammals is the fact that all reptiles, living or fossil, have a single bone in the ear, a rod-like bone known as the columella, which connects the tympanum (eardrum) to the inner ear.

And now genetics is weighing in. The genes responsible for the change have been identified.

Can you hear me now? Understanding vertebrate middle ear development.
Chapman SC.
Front Biosci (Landmark Ed). 2011 Jan 1;16:1675-92

Abstract
The middle ear is a composite organ formed from all three germ layers and the neural crest. It provides the link between the outside world and the inner ear, where sound is transduced and routed to the brain for processing. Extensive classical and modern studies have described the complex morphology and origin of the middle ear. Non-mammalian vertebrates have a single ossicle, the columella. Mammals have three functionally equivalent ossicles, designated the malleus, incus and stapes. In this review, I focus on the role of genes known to function in the middle ear. Genetic studies are beginning to unravel the induction and patterning of the multiple middle ear elements including the tympanum, skeletal elements, the air-filled cavity, and the insertion point into the inner ear oval window. Future studies that elucidate the integrated spatio-temporal signaling mechanisms required to pattern the middle ear organ system are needed. The longer-term translational benefits of understanding normal and abnormal ear development will have a direct impact on human health outcomes.

Mammals possess three bones in the ear called the stapes, incus, and malleus, which connect the cochlea to the tympanum. Evolutionists maintain that the stapes corresponds to the columella and that the quadrate and articular bones of the reptile somehow moved into the ear to become, respectively, the incus and malleus bones of the mammalian ear.

See above. Now there's genetic information that supports the fossil, embryological, and anatomical evidence.

No explanation is given how the intermediates managed to hear while this was going on.

It's not hard to understand. As you learned, reptiles have always used their lower jaws, which are connected to the middle ear, to hear. As the fossil evidence shows, these connections were maintained as the bones got smaller, and eventually lost contact with the lower jaw. As you saw, the fossil mentioned in the OP is almost completely there, only a tiny bridge of tissue connects it to the lower jaw. But the connection with the ear was never lost.

Another difficulty with the above notion is the fact that while thousands of fossil reptiles have been found which possess a single ear bone and multiple jaw bones, and thousands of fossil mammals have been found which possess three ear bones and a single bone in the jaw, not a single fossil creature has ever been found which represents an intermediate stage, such as one possessing three bones in the jaw and two bones in the ear.

And couldn't, if the evolutionary evidence is correct. The quadrate and articular, as they do in mammalian embryos, just get smaller, and lose contact with the lower jaw, while still transmitting vibrations to the inner ear.

Morganucodon3 and Kuehneotherium4 each possessed a full complement of the reptilian bones in its lower jaw.

Yep. But the articular no longer served as the primary joint for the lower jaw. It had become quite small and another joint at the dentary had taken over.

[If that is correct, then you have a serious problem. If they possessed the full complement of jawbones, THEN NONE HAVE BECOME THE EAR BONES]

As you see, that's wrong, too. If you had both at the same time, it would refute what we see in the fossil record, the quadrate and articular becoming the incus and malleus. The quadrate, for example, is directly connected to the stapes in Morganucodon. And the articular is connected to the quadrate, just as the incus is directly connnected to the stapes, and the malleus is directly connected to the incus in modern mammals.

Furthermore, there was no reduction in the functional importance of the reptilian (quadrate-articular) jaw-joint, even though these creatures are supposed to be intermediates between reptiles and mammals, allegedly possessing a mammalian (squamosal-dentary) jaw-joint in addition to the reptilian jaw-joint.

Well, let's take a look...
Turns out that the reptilian joint got progressively smaller as therapsids evolved.
http://books.google.com/books?id=YI...page&q=morganucodon articular smaller&f=false

Kermack, et al., state "The most striking characteristic of the accessory jaw bones of Morganucodon is their cynodont character. Compared with such a typical advanced cynodont as Cynognathus, the accessory bones present show no reduction, either in size or complexity of structure.
In particular, the actual reptilian jaw-joint itself was relatively as powerful in the mammal, Morganucodon, as it was in the reptile Cynognathus.

Well, let's take a look...

Although the articular, pre-articular, and angular bones are small, they seem sufficiently large for insertion of the anterior pterygoid
http://books.google.com/books?id=E3...epage&q=cynognathus smaller articular&f=false

They were already reduced in Cynognathus.
So we have a reptile, Morganucodon,. with the full complement of jaw bones!
Only with the quadrate and angular reduced in size, and the angular now in the middle ear, still connected to the stapes. As would have to be if they became the ossicles of the middle ear.

None have turned into any of the 3 earbones. Your use of M. is therefore mistaken and irrelevant. It is not a 'transitional' of any sort between reptile and mammal.
Surprise.

So all this hoo-hah you're making about M's earbones is pure rubbish!

See above. Surprise, again.

Gish says so

But as you learned, Gish doesn't know what he's talking about.

wiki says so

You're wrong there. Wiki says that these bones became the incus and the malleus.

and I say so too.

But you were completely unaware of the anatomical basis for the transition, as well.

How much anatomy did you say you know?

More than enough to dispose of Gish's claims.
 

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00
Back
Top