Post Reply
Page 1 of 8  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next
Switch to Forum Live View And the devastating evidence keeps rolling in …
2 years ago  ::  Jun 01, 2012 - 1:05PM #1
rsielin
Posts: 4,700

The devastating evidence keeps rolling in …  this time from a Harvard research group looking at modern birds and their reproductive history and published in the professional peer reviewed journal, Nature.


Interesting stuff. Devastating information for creationists, their made up science, and an expected consequence of their self-inflicted intellectual straitjacket. LOL


Excerpts from In Skull Analysis, Charting the Path From T. Rex to Falcon By JAMES GORMAN


It is well accepted that birds evolved from dinosaurs


One part of that transformation has just been traced in detail


[T]he skulls of birds look like those of baby dinosaurs. This kind of change is at the heart of the current understanding of how evolution proceeds, … this new research shows how it occurred in two kinds of animals— dinosaurs and birds


The change from dinosaur to bird is one of those grand evolutionary shifts. The smart, quick theropod dinosaurs that gave rise to birds may have had feathers, but they did not fly and they certainly didn’t resemble birds today.


[A] change in speed and agility requiring not only wings and flight feathers but sharp senses and sophisticated brains for long-distance vision and high-speed action. Sure enough, birds’ skulls have room for relatively huge eyes and for a brain that has expanded in the part devoted to the visual sense. And they are the same shape as the skulls of juvenile dinosaurs, not those of adults.


That similarity is what prompted the research by a group of [Harvard] investigators. … They trained their attention on the evolution of skull shape in dinosaurs and birds, with the working hypothesis that as birds


To test the idea, the group used CT scan information on all the known fossils of theropod dinosaurs that show skull growth, as well as skulls of birds and crocodilians. They identified 45 points called landmarks on the skulls, and used a computer analysis to see how the areas defined by those points changed both during an individual life and over evolutionary time.


The analysis showed that in dinosaurs like Coelophysis and in crocodilians, the shape of the skulls changed significantly during an individual animal’s growth. The juveniles had short faces, and large brains and eyes. The adults had a longer snout and less room, relative to skull size, for eyes and brain. In primitive birds, however, there was very little change in skull shape during growth, so the skull retained its juvenile form.


Dr. Abzhanov [Harvard Dept Organismic and Evolutionary Biology] said the skull evolution was apparently a result of a change in the relative pace of two processes, body growth and sexual maturation. Crocodilians and dinosaurs, he said, may reach sexual maturity in 7 to 10 years. But modern birds become sexually mature 15 to 20 times as fast, and their body growth stops when their skulls are still like those of juvenile dinosaurs.


www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/science/skull...

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 01, 2012 - 5:30PM #2
teilhard
Posts: 51,869

EVERYTHING we presently know about present-Day Living Things on The Earth -- EVERYTHING in Anatomy and Physiology, Genetics and Embryology, Ecology and Paleontology -- vividly demonstrates that St. Chuck Darwin got it **spot**on** RIGHT, i.e., that ALL Living Things on The Earth are related by Descent with Modification from Common Ancestry ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 02, 2012 - 3:40PM #3
Thetanager
Posts: 1,570

Forgive me for being a greenhorn in discussions like this, but what specific point(s) from the article support evolution against alternative views?  I'm not saying there aren't any, I'm just trying to pinpoint the connection you are making.  Is it that the skull shapes are the same or something else?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 02, 2012 - 4:26PM #4
d_p_m
Posts: 10,120

One of the common routes for evolution is neotony - the preservation of juvenile attributes in mature individuals.


This appears to indicate that the skulls of birds were derived from dinosauroid species through neotony.

"If you aren't confused by quantum physics, you haven't really understood it."

― Niels Bohr



"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 02, 2012 - 7:06PM #5
rsielin
Posts: 4,700

Jun 2, 2012 -- 3:40PM, Thetanager wrote:

... what specific point(s) from the article support evolution against alternative views?  I'm not saying there aren't any, I'm just trying to pinpoint the connection you are making.  Is it that the skull shapes are the same or something else?


The hypothesis is that modern birds are descendants of dinosaurs. There is an accumulating body of evidence now supporting that hypothesis.


The above research on skulls provides additional evidence for another credible pathway leading from dinosaurs to modern birds. It's one more piece of corroborating evidence to be added to the accumulating body of knowledge supporting the hypothesis. 


If you're interested here's some links:


Science Daily: www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/12...


Professional peer review research published in the journal Nature: www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurr...

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 02, 2012 - 7:10PM #6
d_p_m
Posts: 10,120

Or to look at it another way, this is phenotypical information indicating a probable link between the dinosaur genotypes and avian genotypes.

"If you aren't confused by quantum physics, you haven't really understood it."

― Niels Bohr



"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 03, 2012 - 8:49AM #7
Thetanager
Posts: 1,570

I don't have the money to spend on the one link, perhaps my questions would be answered there, but I was wondering what the alternative theories looked at are, which could also explain the similarities.  I was also wondering how progenesis works.  What factors/mechanism would cause the speeding up of maturity in a species.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 03, 2012 - 12:34PM #8
Midutch
Posts: 4,399

Jun 3, 2012 -- 8:49AM, Thetanager wrote:


I don't have the money to spend on the one link, perhaps my questions would be answered there, but I was wondering what the alternative theories looked at are, which could also explain the similarities.  I was also wondering how progenesis works.  What factors/mechanism would cause the speeding up of maturity in a species.


There are NO "alternative" scientific theories that explain this sort of evidence.

"creationism" ... 2000+ years worth of ABYSMAL FAILURE ... and proud of it.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 03, 2012 - 1:18PM #9
d_p_m
Posts: 10,120

Jun 3, 2012 -- 8:49AM, Thetanager wrote:


I don't have the money to spend on the one link, perhaps my questions would be answered there, but I was wondering what the alternative theories looked at are, which could also explain the similarities.




Further to Midutch's comments... when you get a complete, well investigated, mature theory such as evolution, the big bang, quantum physics, or relativity, there is often no credible scientific alternative, because every other alternative that can be thought of has already been falsified, and those theories do a very complete job of explaining known phenomena and predicting new ones in their realm of applicability. Since you have millions of very smart people spending their lives trying to think of those aternate explanations for decades or centuries, they do a pretty thorough job of it. As Midutch says, in this case, there are no surviving alternatives - every one anyone has managed to think of has failed the test.

"If you aren't confused by quantum physics, you haven't really understood it."

― Niels Bohr



"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 03, 2012 - 1:19PM #10
Thetanager
Posts: 1,570

So, for instance, why is it not possible that these species just happen to have similar skull features?  Are there no other species unrelated that have similar features?

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 8  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook