chadn737 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderful_Life_(book) Actually i think we can say that evolution doesn't repeat it's self, can you show two identical groups that evolved separately? Yes but they don't arise twice, behavior and body plans are not the same thing... Gould was wrong about a great many things. Amongst other things, he often let his politics shape his science. I can show highly similar traits that evolved similarly. I never stated that evolution produces identical organism, but I do maintain that it will produce identical traits. In Biology this is known as homoplasy and convergent evolution is a long recognized fact. Let take flight for example. Birds fly, but so do bats. They even have similar body plans that allow them to fly. Yet they are obviously not related. Rather, they evolved the same traits under selective pressure. Another example can be found in whales in dolphins, which possess bodies remarkably similar to fish. C4 photosynthesis in plants appears to have evolved multiple times. Rerun the clock and would you get humans? No. Would you get something similar enough to humans that we would recognize the similarities? I don't see why not. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 (edited) Gould was wrong about a great many things. Amongst other things, he often let his politics shape his science. I can show highly similar traits that evolved similarly. I never stated that evolution produces identical organism, but I do maintain that it will produce identical traits. In Biology this is known as homoplasy and convergent evolution is a long recognized fact. Let take flight for example. Birds fly, but so do bats. They even have similar body plans that allow them to fly. Yet they are obviously not related. Rather, they evolved the same traits under selective pressure. Another example can be found in whales in dolphins, which possess bodies remarkably similar to fish. C4 photosynthesis in plants appears to have evolved multiple times. Rerun the clock and would you get humans? No. Would you get something similar enough to humans that we would recognize the similarities? I don't see why not. I guess the question is how similar, I say superficially maybe... If the dinosaurs hadn't become extinct you would have neither bats or primates much less humanoids... Edited February 9, 2014 by Moontanman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I might be new to the thread (admittedly, I skimmed it), but I'm a bit confused. The original post shows an article from some unsupported blog post (the reference points to a nonexisting blog and a YouTube video) and a quick search in Google shows no other references for this. In fact, the first result was Wikipedia's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_cranial_deformation which, by the mere fact that this is a known phenomenon that was proven to exist (even today) is, by Occham's Razor alone, much more probably than either "other types of humans" or "aliens" hypotheses. .... I'm not entirely sure what this discussion is about, then. Are we discussing the theoretical possibility that other branches of humans existed, regardless of the nonscience article given, or are we really discussing a non proven, non substantiated bombastic-article rumor as if it's science..? I'm confused. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arc Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Hi mooeypoo! Your choice. I guess the question is how similar, I say superficially maybe... If the dinosaurs hadn't become extinct you would have neither bats or primates much less humanoids... But then if that extinction event was complete and wiped the slate clean with all life gone, Including deep ocean. I would expect the repropagation of life could select a cartilage to vertebrae evolution as a simple bio-mechanical solution to the competition a deep ocean aquatic life form would be subjected to. I would think the evolution of vertebrae is as likely a choice of competition as is legs or wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unity+ Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I might be new to the thread (admittedly, I skimmed it), but I'm a bit confused. The original post shows an article from some unsupported blog post (the reference points to a nonexisting blog and a YouTube video) and a quick search in Google shows no other references for this. I admit that I assumed that it was a credibly article due to Moontanman posting it. And I think we are discussing the theoretical. It went from the article to what could be possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michel123456 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 (edited) I might be new to the thread (admittedly, I skimmed it), but I'm a bit confused. The original post shows an article from some unsupported blog post (the reference points to a nonexisting blog and a YouTube video) and a quick search in Google shows no other references for this. In fact, the first result was Wikipedia's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_cranial_deformation which, by the mere fact that this is a known phenomenon that was proven to exist (even today) is, by Occham's Razor alone, much more probably than either "other types of humans" or "aliens" hypotheses. .... I'm not entirely sure what this discussion is about, then. Are we discussing the theoretical possibility that other branches of humans existed, regardless of the nonscience article given, or are we really discussing a non proven, non substantiated bombastic-article rumor as if it's science..? I'm confused. Yes. And first of the Macrocephali or Long-heads; a Nation whose Heads are different from all the world. At first the length of their Heads was owing to a Law or Custom, but now Nature herself conforms to the Custom; it being an opinion among 'em, that those who have the longest Heads are the most noble. The Custom stood thus. As soon as the Child was born, they immediately fashion'd the soft and tender Head of it with their Hands, and, by the use of bandages and proper arts, forc'd it to grow lengthwise; by which means the sphærical figure of the Head was perverted, and the length increas'd. ("Of Air, Water, and Situation", trans. Francis Clifton) http://books.google.gr/books?id=a2-XlKZAIU8C&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22&dq=And+first+of+the+Macrocephali+or+Long-heads;+a+Nation+whose+Heads+are+different+from+all+the+world.&source=bl&ots=XaFYBJI2-4&sig=1GT9CBHvD_7sG8zk1b0xVR95Hu8&hl=el&sa=X&ei=NFf3UvvMLMzY0QXm6oDoCA&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=And%20first%20of%20the%20Macrocephali%20or%20Long-heads%3B%20a%20Nation%20whose%20Heads%20are%20different%20from%20all%20the%20world.&f=false --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hmm the "geneticists" who sequenced the genome of "Big Foot" is in Texas. In reality the samples were just contaminated, degraded, and then poorly analyzed. Anyone want to make a bet with me that the person doing the sequencing is Melba Ketchum? Its BS. Correct. You win In two places, Clemens notes he HOPES the “geneticist” was not Ketchum but the way this is being presented to the public is strangely reminiscent of Melba’s way of making an end run around the scientific community. Ah, Martin, your senses serve you well – because it is indeed Melba’s handiwork. We find this via a few routes that connect Foerster to Melba. It’s admitted here as part of the Genesis Project: The head of our genetics study, who wished to remain anonymous until now, is Dr. Melba Ketchum. http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/02/foerster-pye-and-ketchum-collaborate-paracas-elongated-skull-exposed-its/ Edited February 9, 2014 by michel123456 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 I might be new to the thread (admittedly, I skimmed it), but I'm a bit confused. The original post shows an article from some unsupported blog post (the reference points to a nonexisting blog and a YouTube video) and a quick search in Google shows no other references for this. In fact, the first result was Wikipedia's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_cranial_deformation which, by the mere fact that this is a known phenomenon that was proven to exist (even today) is, by Occham's Razor alone, much more probably than either "other types of humans" or "aliens" hypotheses. .... I'm not entirely sure what this discussion is about, then. Are we discussing the theoretical possibility that other branches of humans existed, regardless of the nonscience article given, or are we really discussing a non proven, non substantiated bombastic-article rumor as if it's science..? I'm confused. Hey Mooeypoo, long time no hear from you, yes my OP was so fatally flawed the thread had kind of drifted around, I think the idea of aliens looking like humans was the point of no return and the prospect of parallel evolution of alien life or even life on this planet... just wondering around like a rat in a maze I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popcorn Sutton Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I don't know if this is possible, but it would be really interesting to see if they could clone this species. I'd like to see if the structure of their brain is similar to what we know. I'd actually like to see everything about the creature, organs, skin color, stuff such as that. I'd clone it if it's possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unity+ Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) I don't know if this is possible, but it would be really interesting to see if they could clone this species. I'd like to see if the structure of their brain is similar to what we know. I'd actually like to see everything about the creature, organs, skin color, stuff such as that. I'd clone it if it's possible. It is possible, but current laws prevent it from occurring. EDIT: Not scientific laws. Edited February 10, 2014 by Unity+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arc Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I don't know if this is possible, but it would be really interesting to see if they could clone this species. I'd like to see if the structure of their brain is similar to what we know. I'd actually like to see everything about the creature, organs, skin color, stuff such as that. I'd clone it if it's possible. Popcorn, those are human skulls. They have been reshaped by a tight binding applied when they were infants. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringer Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Once eukaryotes came into existence and then complex animals you might be able to make that assertion with worms and maybe arthropods but vertebrates were on a razors edge for a while after the Cambrian explosion. Even if you assume vertebrates, some vertebrates didn't have a spinal cord, just a stiff rod of cartilage. All vertebrates have spinal cords, dorsal hollow nerve cords are a characteristic of chordates which all vertebrates are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tar Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Thread, Starchild? Seems even the questionable science is made worse by the non-sequitor of the possibility of a species with which we cannot breed, being our parent..and existing concurrently, both. Regards, TAR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tar Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Like finding the skull of Christ as a 6 year old. Just can't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trumptor Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) I think convergence can have the uncanny ability to converge the physical characteristics of animals in order to fill a niche. Look at all the marsupials that evolved through convergent evolution into the marsupial cat, tiger, wolf, etc. I find it incredible. Flies have also evolved to mimic other insects such as moths and bees, to the point where it is incredibly difficult to tell the difference unless you know what to look for. There's even a moth called a hummingbird clearwing that mimics the hummingbird. Edited February 11, 2014 by Trumptor 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popcorn Sutton Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Why would it be illegal to clone one of these things? Should we make a petition? The government and the military shouldn't be the only ones allowed to do that type of thing. I just don't see how it could bring harm to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 All vertebrates have spinal cords, dorsal hollow nerve cords are a characteristic of chordates which all vertebrates are. Where to sea squirts keep their spinal cords? It's important to acknowledge that vertebrates only evolved once, no other "convergent" evolutionary species are found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trumptor Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) Yes, I wonder if the vertebrates wouldn't have survived after they evolved if, at a later point, through evolution it would arise again. If not, who knows how alien our world would look. I watched a show on TV bringing up the intelligence of squid and how if we weren't around anymore, it could be imagined that they could evolve to fill our spot with their intelligence and ability to manipulate their environment with their tentacles. When the crocodilians ruled the land, before the dinosaurs, they evolved into all sorts of crocodile species, including herbivorous crocodiles, bipedal crocodiles, etc. When the dinosaurs took over, they evolved into such diverse species ranging from chicken sized, bipedal dinosaurs to the towering Brachiosaurs. When mammals took over, the same thing happened all over again. It would be interesting to imagine what a invertebrate, squid-like world would look like if the squid were to dominate the world and diverge into a great many different species. Edited February 11, 2014 by Trumptor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringer Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Where to sea squirts keep their spinal cords? It's important to acknowledge that vertebrates only evolved once, no other "convergent" evolutionary species are found. Tunicate larva have a dorsal hollow nerve cord as larva and lose it during metamorphosis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 You can also have animals with internal skeletons but no back bones, in some areas of the deep sea they have become swimming animals... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now