♪alt13
Well-Known Member
UM no they don't.
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7192/full/nature06936.html
Here's a dumbed down image for ya
Science vs. Creationism
- Thread starter dodo
- Start date
UM no they don't.
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7192/full/nature06936.html
Here's a dumbed down image for ya
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
What about this guy....
beat me to it. I should have finished reading the thread before replying. OH well, that link is interesting anyway.
MVP
Well-Known Member
The fact that it can reproduce only with its own kind (underground mosquito ) makes him unique new species - thus with unique new genetic information.
A better question at this point in the discussion. . . . . how do morons evolve from the "best brains in the animal kingdom"????
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
What about this guy....
...glad you brought this critter up...because as you might know...but something "one brow" and "akmvp" refuse to realize or accept is this bad boy is an evolutionist NIGHTMARE!
The duck-billed platypus has always been a thorn in the side of evolutionists. Many evolutionists would like to simply prune it off the evolutionary tree of life, having been forced to place it on a lone branch all to itself. But the thorn has just gotten much larger, and much harder to ignore.
Aside from the fact that this mammal lays eggs and possesses features found only among birds and reptiles, researchers have now discovered that the platypus boasts not two sex chromosomes like most animals, but ten!!!
So to give one brow and his partner in crime "AKMVP" some of there own medicine, I present you with the following: Before you write this off as simply a “non-issue” anomaly, consider for just a moment the implications. Normally, one sex chromosome from a male species combines with one sex chromosome from a female species to make a full compliment of chromosomes. With the duck-billed platypus, this combination suddenly takes on an entirely different level of complexity!
As Elizabeth Pennisi, Science staff writer, admitted:"Many organisms have two sex chromosomes. Women for example have two X chromosomes, and men have one X and one Y. But in the platypus, males have five X and five Y chromosomes, while females have 10 Xs. If the male platypus’s X and Y chromosomes randomly segregated into sperm this would greatly complicate sex determination."
Pennisi observed:"The chain consisted of alternating X and Y chromosomes. During the key step in sperm formation—a division that results in two cells, each with half the number of the original number of chromosomes—the X and Y chromosomes peeled off from the chain one by one and headed into separate cells, all segregating faithfully with their own kind. This ensures that half of the sperm each have five X chromosomes; the other half have five Y chromosomes (2004)."
Was it by accident that these chromosomes formed this chain in alternating order, and then precisely peeled off into separate X and Y groups? This extreme complexity veritably screams “design”!
This latest study helps scientists understand how the duck-billed platypus is able to keep its reproduction from going amiss. In documenting this amazing feat, Grützner and his colleagues watched the ten chromosomes link up into a chain.
Yet researchers are hastily painting an evolutionary picture to try to explain this peculiarity.
Evolutionists, however, face a daunting task! First they must explain the sudden appearance of (and reason for) double homologous sex chromosomes. How is it that at one point in time, “nature” was able to evolve a female member of a species that produces eggs and is internally equipped to nourish a growing embryo, while at the same time evolving a male member that produces motile sperm cells?
And, further, how is it that these gametes (eggs and sperm) “conveniently” evolved so that they each contain half the normal chromosome number of standard somatic (body) cells? And why is this the case? Of the 46 human chromosomes, 44 are members of identical pairs, but two, the X and Y (generally referred to as the “sex chromosomes”), stand apart. Evolutionists thus are faced with the unenviable challenge of explaining not only the origin of sex chromosomes themselves, but also the evolution of two totally different sex chromosomes (X and Y).
I'm going to stop here for now! But if you want to continue your feeble attempt to use the Duck-billed Platypus as proof of evolution....I can add a few more lengthy paragraphs that will further bury your ridiculous idea that no "designer" was involved in this marvelously "designed" creature!
MVP
Well-Known Member
Morons are not evolved. They are just uneducated.
MVP
Well-Known Member
You should watch it and read less creationist crap.
[video]https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/02/090206-dna-missions-video-wc.html
And than read this:
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/05/080507-platypus.html
from article:
"The new genomic data make a water-tight case for platypus egg-laying truly being a primitive retention from reptilian ancestors," said Matt Phillips, an Australian National University scientist who was not involved in the genome project.
On the other hand, the set of mammalian genes responsible for lactation—or milk production—was also found in the platypus genome.
While milk production and giving birth to live young would seem to go hand in hand, the platypus genome shows that the two common mammalian traits evolved at very different points in evolutionary time.
"The presence of the full repertoire of milk genes confirms that lactation evolved at least 166 million years ago, way before live-bearing," Graves said.
Last edited:
The Speical Theory of Relativity is called that because there are extra limitations built into it (no gravity, no acceleration), while the General Theory allows for both. This does not apply to evolutionary theory. The develpment of the London underground mosquito is handled in exactly the same was as the development of legs on fish.
I'd say using a new food source is new information.
the source of this new information is genetic drift, a process that creates new information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_mosquito
Did you do any research at all before you posted?
No, it isn't. The platypus fits well into evolutionary theory.
False. The platypus has a well-respected clade on the tree, near other monotremes, like the echidna.
Monotremes are all egg-laying mammals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotremata
I like the teast of your medicine, it has a good lemon-lime favor.
https://www.nature.com/news/2004/041025/full/news041025-1.html
So, one set similar to the mammalian method, another set similar to the non-mammalian reptile method. It's almost like a transitional system, frozen in time. Why would this be a problem for *me*?
Pennisi was wrong. At least part of the system is ZW, not XY.
Actually, extreme complexity screams a lack of design. Designers do things simply.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction
Good, it will save you further embarrassment.
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
....well, you asked for it!
Once evolutionists overcome that gargantuan hurdle, they then must answer why this creature possesses ten chromosomes, and how it evolved the ability to recombine them. Some of the researchers point out that maybe this is a link between birds and mammals. Commenting on their findings, Grützner and his coworkers lamented: “This suggests an evolutionary link between mammal and bird-sex chromosome systems, which were previously thought to have evolved independently” Yet, Darwinians place mammals on the planet 100 million years before birds! Grützner’s suggestion requires evolutionists to explain how a mammal—the duck-billed platypus—evolved its sexual reproduction from birds—a change in the evolutionary tree that would require chainsaws, massive splicing, rolls and rolls of duct-tape, and a good dose of Miracle Grow. Most evolutionary biologists are unwilling to even “go there.” (And of course the obvious question then becomes why did this process not evolve in other mammals?)
Commenting on the new discovery, Steve Rozen, of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts, remarked: “Mammals are pretty boring when it comes to sex chromosomes. The platypus is a huge exception.” Khamsi asks the obvious question: “What is the advantage of having so many sex chromosomes?” To which Rozen replied: “It’s hard to speculate on how that could have evolved” (see Khamsi, 2004). Hard to speculate indeed! What could this creature possibly gain by “evolving” such a complex and costly reproductive method? Sexual reproduction in animals with two sex chromosomes has a “selective disadvantage” of at least 50%—a disadvantage that will not budge! The duck-billed platypus has ten sex chromosomes, each of which would lose 50% of their genetic material.
Evolution cannot explain the origin of two sex chromosomes—much less ten! What is the “purpose” of so many chromosomes? And how can evolution via natural selection explain it? Would “Nature” (notice the capital “N”) “select for” sexual reproduction? As it turns out, the common “survival of the fittest” mentality cannot begin to explain the high cost of first, evolving, and then maintaining, the sexual apparatus. Sexual reproduction requires organisms to first produce, and then maintain, gametes (reproductive cells—i.e., sperm and eggs). Yet the duck-billed platypus has five times the number of sex chromosomes, and still is able to link them in a chain and then faithfully segregate them in order to maintain the correct number!
Surely, to an open and honest mind, this beautiful complexity points to a Great Designer.
MVP
Well-Known Member
All wrong.
I would expect you to read scientific articles and watch videos we post here if you want some answers, now you post outdated crap and think we will take you seriously?
Platypus egg laying retained not from birds - it is from reptiles. And they are not the only mammals with this ability. Echidnas split from Platypuses millions of years ago but still retained same egg laying ability.
MVP
Well-Known Member
Carolina Jazz owning again.
@AKMVP;
Kanter > JV, BTW!
lol, I know you just kidding but to remind you what happened their last meeting:
"The only other Jazz player in double figures was Enes Kanter, who scored 10 points, but he only played 19 minutes because of his lack of defense on Toronto center Jonas Valanciunas, who had eight early points on him and finished with 18 points and nine rebounds.
“Whatever it was, Enes didn’t have the energy tonight and Valanciunas got going early on him,’’ Corbin said".
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
...outdated? Everything you guys produce is "outdated" with wild speculation, extravagant time elements, and ridiculous assumptions that have already been disproved, discredited and proven outright falsehoods!
But to satisfy your need for "updated" stuff I give you this!
The platypus poses some interesting problems for evolutionary scientists. Here is a creature that appears to be right in the middle of a supposed evolutionary transition, yet fossils dated to millions of years ago look almost identical to the modern animal.
If the platypus is a transitional specimen, why did it seemingly stop evolving? Why has it remained virtually unchanged for its entire existence?
Even the minor changes are disappointing to scientists, as they could more aptly be considered de-evolution. For instance, the fossilized adult platypus had functioning teeth. Yet modern platypuses lose their teeth at an early age, leaving only a horned plate with which to grind and mash their food to a pulp, prior to swallowing.
Hardly advancement at all!
Further, consider the watery environment in which a platypus survives—in fact, thrives. (When a platypus is removed from its natural habitat, its lifespan is greatly abbreviated.)
As with many other mammals, it has eyes, ears and a nose. All three are fully functioning and would serve a platypus well if it spent much time on land. On the other hand, its heavily webbed front feet mean that it is forced to walk on its knuckles, or risk damaging the somewhat fragile webbing. In the water, the beauty of the animal’s design becomes apparent. It maneuvers gracefully with speed and precision while foraging for food.
Though it spends the majority of its time in water, the platypus never evolved an ability to hold its breath for very long, typically no more than 30 seconds. How is it that an animal living primarily in the water for “millions” of years still cannot hold its breath for more than half a minute?
Imagine the hypothetical evolutionary path of this extraordinary creature. Suppose there was a time before all of the animal’s features were fully formed. (The fossil record demonstrates no such instance.) These early platypuses would have had no webbed feet or electrolocation system. Instead of gliding skillfully through the water, this poor animal would have flailed about, with no method to navigate or find food. (Yet, somehow, over millions of years, it would have managed to survive drowning, starvation and predators.)
Over time, the platypus would have “decided” that webbed feet were needed, and evolved a version unlike that of any other creature. Then, instead of its eyes, nose and ears adapting to work underwater, it evolved a device that looks like a duck’s bill, but instead is the most advanced electrolocation system found on any mammal.
Given this unlikely scenario, this must have happened another way. The fossil record indicates that the platypus appeared fully formed, with all of its “adaptations” perfectly balanced.
MVP
Well-Known Member
All the answers to your ignorant questions were in the links I posted. If you at least clicked links and read scientific articles from National Geographic site instead of trying to talk nonsense here I would give you at least credit for trying to understand. Now you already have an answer in your head and you do not need me to give you any kind of links, videos or scientific proof.
Sorry, but it is impossible to have dialogue with you cj when all you doing is monologue. You did not read neither article about platypus evolution nor watched video about it. So why bother?
Sorry, but it is impossible to have dialogue with you cj when all you doing is monologue. You did not read neither article about platypus evolution nor watched video about it. So why bother?
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Monotremes having a zw chromosome like those found in birds does not mean they got it from birds!!! It means that the zw type of sex chromosome found in birds was already present(at least a proto form of it) in the common mammal-bird ancestor. It strengthens the argument for evolution. You see it pushes back the date of the sex chromosome and gives it more time than previously thought to evolve into it's modern types.
You are correct in one regard we don't fully understand the process of the meiotic chain and chromosome segregation in the platypus. We do know that it contains both bird like zw chromosomes and mammalian like xy. This fact tells us that by understanding monotreme sex chromosomes we may further our understanding of the evolution of mammalian sex chromosomes. So it deserves more study.
Your conclusion that because we don't yet understand 100% of how something works we should just say "god did it." is dangerously stupid. If all people had thus far surrendered themselves to your kind of medieval thinking then thor would surely still be wielding lightning bolts in the sky.
It most certainly does not. The translocation and duplication of sex chromosomes in the platypus and other monotremes points to the messy process of evolution.
Let's not be vague. I would very much like to know what it is that I have posted that you think falls into this category.
First There is no such thing as de-evolution. There is only successfully passing on genes.(changed or not) Advancement is another misnomer advantage is what matters. Advantage can be deceiving. For instance a stubborn simple minded person may at first appear to be at a disadvantage, but the calories saved means he may survive with less foraging. So it's a trade off. In modern times it means he is more likely to spend his afternoons in a trailer park making the beast with two backs. You see not only does evolution explain where mankind came from it explains how the Carolinas came to be what they are today.
Last edited:
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
Try convincing "DEVO" of that!!!