Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Eggy Toast · 07-03-2002, 12:04 PM

from <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/07/03/early.walker.ap/index.html" target="_blank">cnn.com</a>,

A fossil found in 1971 has been newly identified as the earliest known animal built to walk on land, a salamanderlike creature that marked a previously unknown stage in the evolution of fish into the ancestors of all vertebrates alive today.
--------------

Pretty cool stuff. The article sort of speaks for itself, although it is ironic that it was sitting in a museum for 30 years

[ July 03, 2002: Message edited by: Eggy Toast ]</p>

kookiejar · 07-03-2002, 12:35 PM

Thanks for the link Eggy Toast!

But haven't you heard...the ARE no transitional fossils.

Blinn · 07-03-2002, 01:39 PM

Very cool. I'll be sure to check out Clack's article. And Welcome to II, Eggy Toast!

Duvenoy · 07-03-2002, 01:53 PM

Thanks Eggy, and Welcome to II!

I found that interestiong and I'm now looking for a link into the literature.

Here's a link describing more of the same. Jenny Clack is Madam Tetrapod!

<a href="http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/~reffland/anthropology/origins/comingonto.html" target="_blank">http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/~reffland/anthropology/origins/comingonto.html</a>

Edited beacuse Big Dummy forgot to add the link.

doov

[ July 03, 2002: Message edited by: Duvenoy ]</p>

Eggy Toast · 07-03-2002, 02:09 PM

Hi there, I'm glad to be here!

07-03-2002, 02:27 PM

Impossible. It's either the species before or the species after, there's no such thing as a transitional fossil!

Duvenoy · 07-03-2002, 04:22 PM

"Impossible. It's either the species before or the species after, there's no such thing as a transitional fossil!"
------------------------

Synaesthesia, of course it's possible.

Transitional fossils can be easily identified by the bus ticket stubs in their pockets. Which is what it woulkd take to convince most if not all of our creationist friends.

doov

Valentine Pontifex · 07-03-2002, 04:57 PM

I might point out that according to the article it was mistaken as a fish. That is until many
years latter when someone just so happen to find legs on it. While this does not "prove" anything in the scientific science it is useful in the rhetorical sense since it illustrates the reality of the transition in a way accessible to someone who is not versed in comparative anatomy. This is something that structured like a fish even to a professional eye, but it has legs. And what could be a better transition than this?

tgamble · 07-03-2002, 05:08 PM

Predicted creationist response:

IS NOT! IS NOT! IS NOT!

lpetrich · 07-03-2002, 06:41 PM

So Acanthostega was a sort of "Darwin Fish"?

07-03-2002, 12:04 PM	#1
Eggy Toast New Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 3	New transitional fossil identified from <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/07/03/early.walker.ap/index.html" target="_blank">cnn.com</a>, A fossil found in 1971 has been newly identified as the earliest known animal built to walk on land, a salamanderlike creature that marked a previously unknown stage in the evolution of fish into the ancestors of all vertebrates alive today. -------------- Pretty cool stuff. The article sort of speaks for itself, although it is ironic that it was sitting in a museum for 30 years [ July 03, 2002: Message edited by: Eggy Toast ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-03-2002, 12:35 PM	#2
kookiejar Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 104	Thanks for the link Eggy Toast! But haven't you heard...the ARE no transitional fossils.

07-03-2002, 01:39 PM	#3
Blinn Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Ohio, USA Posts: 1,162	Very cool. I'll be sure to check out Clack's article. And Welcome to II, Eggy Toast!

07-03-2002, 01:53 PM	#4
Duvenoy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Just another hick from the sticks. Posts: 1,108	Thanks Eggy, and Welcome to II! I found that interestiong and I'm now looking for a link into the literature. Here's a link describing more of the same. Jenny Clack is Madam Tetrapod! <a href="http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/~reffland/anthropology/origins/comingonto.html" target="_blank">http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/~reffland/anthropology/origins/comingonto.html</a> Edited beacuse Big Dummy forgot to add the link. doov [ July 03, 2002: Message edited by: Duvenoy ]</p>

07-03-2002, 02:09 PM	#5
Eggy Toast New Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 3	Hi there, I'm glad to be here!

07-03-2002, 02:27 PM	#6
Synaesthesia Guest Posts: n/a	Impossible. It's either the species before or the species after, there's no such thing as a transitional fossil!

07-03-2002, 04:22 PM	#7
Duvenoy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Just another hick from the sticks. Posts: 1,108	"Impossible. It's either the species before or the species after, there's no such thing as a transitional fossil!" ------------------------ Synaesthesia, of course it's possible. Transitional fossils can be easily identified by the bus ticket stubs in their pockets. Which is what it woulkd take to convince most if not all of our creationist friends. doov

07-03-2002, 04:57 PM	#8
Valentine Pontifex Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Orion Arm of the Milky Way Galaxy Posts: 3,092	I might point out that according to the article it was mistaken as a fish. That is until many years latter when someone just so happen to find legs on it. While this does not "prove" anything in the scientific science it is useful in the rhetorical sense since it illustrates the reality of the transition in a way accessible to someone who is not versed in comparative anatomy. This is something that structured like a fish even to a professional eye, but it has legs. And what could be a better transition than this?

07-03-2002, 05:08 PM	#9
tgamble Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: St. John's, Nfld. Canada Posts: 1,652	Predicted creationist response: IS NOT! IS NOT! IS NOT!

07-03-2002, 06:41 PM	#10
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	So Acanthostega was a sort of "Darwin Fish"?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.