Can you say, 'strong evidence of speciation'?

[bradybaker]

I like articles. Here's another. Creationists will enjoy this one. ----------------------------------------------- WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An especially well-preserved specimen of Archaeopteryx shows the first known bird had feet like a dinosaur -- made not for perching but for running on the ground, scientists said on Thursday. The first toe on the fossil turns inward, similar to a human thumb and most like the hunting dinosaurs known as deinonychosaurs -- notably the Velociraptor with its long claw for disemboweling prey. Gerald Mayr of the Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg in Frankfurt, Germany, and colleagues at the Wyoming Dinosaur Center in Thermopolis, say their findings strengthen theories that birds descended directly from dinosaurs. The 150 million-year-old fossil, found in Germany's Bavaria region, suggests the magpie-sized creature could hyperextend its second toe in a dinosaur-like way, the researchers report in Friday's issue of the journal Science. "By all measures, it is a treasure," Peter Dodson of the University of Pennsylvania was quoted by Science as saying. The feathered fossils were long believed to be representative of the first birds and this one now links Archaeopteryx to dinosaurs. "Contrary to virtually all existing reconstructions of Archaeopteryx, the new specimen shows that the first toe was not fully reversed as in extant birds," the researchers wrote. "Most workers consider Deinonychosauria to be the sister taxon of Aves, and the presence of a hyperextendible second toe in Archaeopteryx supports a close relationship between deinonychosaurs and avians." ----------------------------------------------------------- Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051201/sc_nm/...nce_dinosaur_dc Sounds like an pretty prime example of a transition fossil to me...but wait, God just put fossils here to fuck with our heads and test our faith right? That prankster... -- I'm not sure if this is alright in here or if it should go in the other forum, or Extended Discussion...sorry if it's in the wrong spot.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Sounds like an pretty prime example of a transition fossil to me...but wait, God just put fossils here to fuck with our heads and test our faith right? That prankster...[/b] I thought it was pretty obvious without this article..... Why do people continue to talk about this fantasy entity with a white beard known as "god" like the being is someone that exists in the sky somewhere watching us? That perhaps he is the only thing that can be called god, cause he is beyond magical and infinitely powerful and apparantly created the earth with his magical powers in a couple of days. There is no male with this ability up on a cloud nine that fits this descripton of this 'god'.....that watches earth, and nor does such a being put big bones in the ground, perhaps with his giant bare hands, to trick us into not believing in him. Nor did he sculpt the earth with his bare hands or infinite magical powers. I did not need this article to confirm that to me. Faith is something you have in order to know a thing is true, not something you have in order to ignore a thing that is true.

[bradybaker]

Please keep replies on the topic of evolution...not faith and God. I'm sorry I made that joke. Originally posted by Nirvana I did not need that article to confirm that to me This is article is about proof of evoution, not proof that faith and God is ridiculous.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Proof of evolution....... Don't you mean study of evolution? Evolution is a pretty much understood concept. No-one is trying to prove the existence of it. But we are studying it's processes. As is evident in the article. Anyway thanks for posting it.

[bradybaker]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed Proof of evolution....... Don't you mean study of evolution? Evolution is a pretty much understood concept. No-one is trying to prove the existence of it. But we are studying it's processes. As is evident in the article. Anyway thanks for posting it. Actually, one of the biggest arguments against evolution is the lack of transition fossils.

[Placebo]

Originally posted by bradybaker -- I'm not sure if this is alright in here or if it should go in the other forum, or Extended Discussion...sorry if it's in the wrong spot. It should be okay here - If it somehow turns religious then we can revise it Actually, one of the biggest arguments against evolution is the lack of transition fossils.[/b] Agreed. And thanks for the article, for that reason.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Originally posted by brady Actually, one of the biggest arguments against evolution is the lack of transition fossils. Well however matter and life exists. It exists from a process right? We know that it didn't just apear out of no-where for no reason because that is impossible, there is an explaination for why it exists, and we don't need to prove that there is. We understand It is present because of cause and effect processes of the universe, and the purpose behind that cause and effect. IF I bend a spoon for example. The spoon did not suddenly just become bent. There is a reason. There is no need to prove that it didn't just apear that way. It came about because of what I did to it. If you see the spoon is bent. And I tell you that I bent it. You do not concerntrate on proving that I bent it. People who argue that the spoon just apeared like that or that evolution does not exist are merely being foolish. And that is not our concern. Instead you study the process of how it happened. Like you study the process of evolution. Then you see the reason behind why it exists the way it does, And you understand the laws behind the process. The same process applies to life the universe and what it contains. Evolution does not need to be proved, just understood.

[bradybaker]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed Well however matter and life exists. It exists from a process right? We know that it didn't just apear out of no-where for no reason because that is impossible, there is an explaination for why it exists, and we don't need to prove that there is. We understand It is present because of cause and effect processes of the universe, and the purpose behind that cause and effect. IF I bend a spoon for example. The spoon did not suddenly just become bent. There is a reason. There is no need to prove that it didn't just apear that way. It came about because of what I did to it. If you see the spoon is bent. And I tell you that I bent it. You do not concerntrate on proving that I bent it. People who argue that the spoon just apeared like that or that evolution does not exist are merely being foolish. And that is not our concern. Instead you study the process of how it happened. Like you study the process of evolution. Then you see the reason behind why it exists the way it does, And you understand the laws behind the process. The same process applies to life the universe and what it contains. Evolution does not need to be proved, just understood. Agreed.

[Neruo]

Evolution is logic. Creation by a god in not-logic becouse of lack of proof, lack of existance of examples besides those in the minds of people. AND. The fact that we have managed to breed dogs such a way that they look SILLY (poodles) i GREAT proof allso... =D Allthough the real evolution lays in lager chormosone DNA-alterations by radiation of the sun and such.