FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-29-2002, 06:31 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 588
Angry Creationists Carping on about the Coelecanth

Can anyone please give me the TRUTH about the Coelecanth fish? I've searched and searched the web, and all I can find is these creationist websites. They are claiming since this fish was supposed to be extinct, and since there were some found a few years ago; that that disproves evolution. Since I always check out everything; every source when it comes to their ridiculous claims; I've tried to make some sense of all this regarding the Coelecanth (Ceel-la-kanth =pronounced) fish, and I'm sick of wading through all the creationist websites.
I would appreciate any help. Thanks.

oh, just in case anyone hasn't seen or read this; this is an excellent read regarding the deceptive practices by creationists; Please read the entire page:

<a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/snrfab.html" target="_blank">http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/snrfab.html</a>
MsChutzpah is offline  
Old 09-29-2002, 06:48 PM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NCSU
Posts: 5,853
Post

Coelecanth refers to a family (?) that Europeans thought was extinct. The two (?) extant species are not found in the fossil record and in fact represent a genus that is not found in the fossil record either.

It's like thinking that canids are extinct, but you discover dingos in Australia.

[ September 29, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]</p>
RufusAtticus is offline  
Old 09-29-2002, 06:50 PM   #3
pz
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Morris, MN
Posts: 3,341
Post

The coelecanth is a modern descendant of an ancient lineage of lobe-finned fish. Its existence is no disproof of evolution; that argument is of the same type as that made by people who are baffled by the 'fact' that if evolution were true, there wouldn't be any monkeys today. In other words, by people who don't understand the basic idea.

Scientists were excited about the coelecanth because it was previously thought that the lobe-fins were extinct. It's nice to see that at least one species of this old line has managed to survive to the modern day.
pz is offline  
Old 09-29-2002, 07:45 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Orion Arm of the Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 3,092
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by MsChutzpah:
<strong>Can anyone please give me the TRUTH about the Coelecanth fish? I've searched and searched the web, and all I can find is these creationist websites. They are claiming since this fish was supposed to be extinct, and since there were some found a few years ago; that that disproves evolution. Since I always check out everything; every source when it comes to their ridiculous claims; I've tried to make some sense of all this regarding the Coelecanth (Ceel-la-kanth =pronounced) fish, and I'm sick of wading through all the creationist websites.
I would appreciate any help. Thanks.
</strong>
Just by luck there has been a very good post on this in the talk.origins newsgroup that addresses this. <a href="http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=visl9.348736%245r1.15993225%40bin5.nnr p.aus1.giganews.com" target="_blank">Click Here.</a>

Quote:
<strong>
oh, just in case anyone hasn't seen or read this; this is an excellent read regarding the deceptive practices by creationists; Please read the entire page:

<a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/snrfab.html" target="_blank">http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/snrfab.html</a></strong>
Yep. The <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/" target="_blank">other supernova FAQ</a> actually documents far worse misquoting.

An alter ego of the pontifex of the planet Majipoor used those misquotes an example <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/#s2-2" target="_blank">here</a>. ;-)
Valentine Pontifex is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 05:41 AM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 4,140
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by MsChutzpah:
<strong>Can anyone please give me the TRUTH about the Coelecanth fish? I've searched and searched the web, and all I can find is these creationist websites. They are claiming since this fish was supposed to be extinct, and since there were some found a few years ago; that that disproves evolution. </strong>
It was precisely this topic that first drew me into this board, when it was discussed at length a year or two ago. In <a href="http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=42&t=000153" target="_blank">this discussion</a> the creationist claims are dismantled and the differences between modern and fossil coelacanths are expliclitly enumerated.
MrDarwin is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 10:43 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 588
Post

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> THANK YOU all for your help. Looks like I have lots of reading to do. It truly is great to have a place to go to; read, ask questions; and know that you can get honest answers. <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />
MsChutzpah is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 02:20 PM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Alaska, USA
Posts: 1,535
Post

Coelacanth was also mentioned in <a href="http://www.positiveatheism.org/mail/eml9153.htm" target="_blank">Arkansas HB 2548</a> last year, which was basically a legalese version of Jack Chick's "Big Daddy." It claims that evolution is false because coelacanths, which are still living, are used as "index fossils" to date certain strata. Except that they're not.

Ironically, since the bill would have required school children to cross out scientific inaccuracies in textbooks, the bill itself would've been filled with red marks.

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: Grumpy ]</p>
Grumpy is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 04:04 PM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: St. John's, Nfld. Canada
Posts: 1,652
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Grumpy:
<strong>Coelacanth was also mentioned in <a href="http://www.positiveatheism.org/mail/eml9153.htm" target="_blank">Arkansas HB 2548</a> last year, which was basically a legalese version of Jack Chick's "Big Daddy." It claims that evolution is false because coelacanths, which are still living, are used as "index fossils" to date certain strata. Except that they're not.

Ironically, since the bill would have required school children to cross out scientific inaccuracies in textbooks, the bill itself would've been filled with red marks.

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: Grumpy ]</strong>
That bill was a major joke. But what can you expect from Kent Hovind?

I should be surprised that so many actually voted for it but I can't be.

On This hour has 22 minutes, Rick Mercer told the goverorner of Arkansas that we had a national ignloo that was modeled after their parliament building. He believed it.

I loved that.
tgamble is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 06:36 PM   #9
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Minneapolis, MN US
Posts: 133
Post

Also try:

<a href="http://www.dinofish.com/" target="_blank">http://www.dinofish.com/</a>
notto is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:54 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.