Fossil shows how fish made the leap to land

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Sorry for the slight hijacking, Mr Bean. It was too late to post this today (although now it is tomorrow--we just keep on evolving and evolving...) and I'm a bit punchy.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

My apologies as well OP--Insomia and wine = an evolved evolution thread.

Back to your regularly scheduled fish mammal evolution discussion.

 

[Buckalew11]

I was thinking the same thing. I mean, your average sized mouse compared to the Big Cheese?! Whoa! Yep, that hat has really evolved.

And that wardrobe attraction is at MGM. I've been there. Uh...I was wearing pants though.

(went in wearing my pants came out wearing my pants )

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Uh...I was wearing pants though.

(went in wearing my pants came out wearing my pants )

Fish don't wear pants. Wears the fossil of the pants?




(sorry again!)

 

[Buckalew11]

Fish don't wear pants. Wears the fossil of the pants?




(sorry again!)

For some reason I am having visions of SpongeBob SquarePANTS and gang!!!

 

[UnderTheMistletoe]

I was so excited when I saw this headline yesterday that I actually sent it to my Geology professor He's a paleontologist, so this for him was super fun and exciting. Earth and geologic history is totally fascinating to me and we had a huge discussion yesterday about an artist's rendering of the "fish with hands and feet" becuase there was so little information and so much speculation about them. Needless to say, this would have made a world of difference in our debate!

 

[In a hurry]

Any idea how this is different than that fish that walks around looking for water? It seems the face is different, but any other connection?

Babies didn't have tales. That was a fallacy that they never removed from the science books. Will look for the info on it!

 

[UnderTheMistletoe]

The fact is they found something.

Everything else is theory.

Technically, not. There's a huge fossil record and we've been able to put together a lot more than what the average citizen would believe based on sea-floor spreading zones and the rock record.

During the Devonian, this little guy appeared. It was the first time in the rock record that we've found vertebrates. The logical reason they appeared was to take advantage of the new forests and trees that had developed on the land surface. It was easy food. Again, we kow this is the first time vascular plants and forests developed based on the rock record.

You would think the transition from tadpole to frog would provide a simple-yet quick explanation. Why dig in dirt?

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why people dig in dirt (someone had asked): Becuase some of us just want to know what was out there and realize how insignificant a human lifespan is in comparison to geologic time. The tadpole/frog thing is not that much different than a human evolving through their life from an infant to a toddler to a child, etc. This is a horse of a different color.

 

[UnderTheMistletoe]

Any idea how this is different than that fish that walks around looking for water? It seems the face is different, but any other connection?

It had joints and was amphibuous. It's importance and difference is that it's the FIRST suggestion of land vertebrates. That's why it's so important.

 

[In a hurry]

It had joints and was amphibuous. It's importance and difference is that it's the FIRST suggestion of land vertebrates. That's why it's so important.

Thanks! Def. not my area of study, but alway interesting!

 

[POB14]

Babies didn't have tales. That was a fallacy that they never removed from the science books. Will look for the info on it!

Embryos and young fetuses most certainly do have tails:

That's a four week old embryo. There it is, right there, big as life: a tail.

You have a tail, too. Google "coccyx."

The concept of recapitulation is what has been discredited, and removed from modern textbooks. We don't "repeat" any "ladder of life" in the womb, because there ain't no ladder; that isn't how evolution works. If that concept is still in a book, your school district is probably underfunded and hasn't bought new ones in over twenty years.

 

[In a hurry]

Thanks! I thought the "tail" was just the tail bone structure working its way into place.

Yes, we do still have texts in our school with the pics!

 

[MosMom]

The bones in a whales fin look like bones in a hand but they are still a fin.

The bones in a whales fin do look like a hand (so do the bones in a bats wing...that is simply an effective bone structure for an appendage that needs to thrust through air/water) but most species of whale also have remnants of hip bones remaining. Some species have a femur attached. One also has the tibia. I've always found that VERY interesting.

I just think it is so funny how both sides think the other explanation is just ridiculous when in actuality, both sides seem a little "out there". Animals morphing form over time or an invisible man in the sky making it all go "poof".

 

[POB14]

Thanks! I thought the "tail" was just the tail bone structure working its way into place.

Well, yeah, that's kind of the point . . . why is there a tail bone at all, unless it's a vestigal tail?

Never confuse textbook authors -- especially high school textbook authors -- with scientists. Bad textbooks bear much of the responsibility for the sad state of science literacy in the US. Try this: Go find a high school bio text, and look up where it discusses Eohippus. I could get rich betting everybody on this board that their books compare its size to a fox terrier. Lots of copying going on there.