Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

@rosborne979,

we do know that the animal part occupied only the last of the Hermetically sealed "rings". The rest of the swirl was eithr ballast or served some other purposes.

A small number of the belmnites and ammonites have some soft part fossilized in what was then deep ocen sediments that were very fine and formed these really teeny layers called laggersta(MIT UMLAUT) tten

1 Reply

@farmerman,

There's no ballast in evolution fm. Evolution wastes no energy on ballast.

Which is an interesting thought I think.

1 Reply

@spendius,

tell that to the fish with swim bladders, they didnt know that fact.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I don't know what you mean. Perhaps you will explain. Ballast is a human concept to me.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Obviously we are, in fact, the only ones who have a word for "ballast" that is true. Very few animals even speak English.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

I know some fm.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Forgot another one, Pachycetus was a long bosied relative of horses that ultimately was the evolutionary precursor to whales. They had very short and very dense bones of their extremities. These acted as ballast so the animals kept their ba;lance in tidal waters into which it was venturing.

THey uses the concept, even though they dont know its name.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I knew you didn't understand evolution fm. There you go proving it.

Read Goethe. Not only did they not know its name but they neither knew they were venturing in tidal waters nor that they were keeping their balance in them. They didn't know what tidal waters were either.

And when they went to the toilet they had no inkling of how American education taught the procedure.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Theres a whole vast world of things you dont know spendi. I have neither the time nor interest to point you in the proper direction.
Sad really, you probably had a life that could best be depicted by Pyetr Bruegel.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Oh, yeah, Goethe. There's real evolutionary science for you.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

He wrote several works on plant morphology, and colour theory.

His focus on morphology and what was later called homology influenced 19th century naturalists, though his ideas of transformation were about the continuing flux of living things and did not relate to contemporary ideas of "transformisme" or transmutation of species. Homology, or as Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire called it "analogie", was used by Charles Darwin as strong evidence of common descent and of laws of variation.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Sad really, you probably had a life that could best be depicted by Pyetr Bruegel.

I think having a lady wife impaling her head on a rusty nail stuck in a beam in a barn whilst delivering a sheep of its offspring is a lot closer to Bruegel's world than I have ever been.

1 Reply

Wow I came in here hoping to learn a little and read that last page and I kind of don't want to venture on if the discussion is anything like the last bit. The fact that one wants to start an argument on the fact that "evolution" (put in " " as to give it human form) has no knowledge of scientific terms blows my mind. That for a fact shows me that survival of the fittest is something that needs a little more tweaking.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
He wrote several works on plant morphology, and colour theory.

His focus on morphology and what was later called homology influenced 19th century naturalists, though his ideas of transformation were about the continuing flux of living things and did not relate to contemporary ideas of "transformisme" or transmutation of species. Homology, or as Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire called it "analogie", was used by Charles Darwin as strong evidence of common descent and of laws of variation.

Do you have any knowledge that comes from the 20th and 21st Centuries?

0 Replies

@spendius,

My wife and anything else is off limits . Try to be a bit more civilized and keep your insults focused at me alone.
I keep forgetting that your childishness has no bounds of propriety.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

I keep forgetting that your childishness has no bounds of propriety.

Could this be signs of evolution and or de-evolution?

1 Reply

@Seed,

No, in this particular case, it's evidence of the long term mental deterioration attendant upon alcoholism.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

My wife and anything else is off limits .

It was you who introduced your wife to the threads. And not for the first time. And I did not insult your wife either. Quite the contrary. I enjoined you to take better care of her.

What's a rusty nail doing sticking out at head height?

First I'm like Breugel and you are more inclined that way and then I'm ill-mannered for mentioning your wife and it was you would did so first.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Mutuum muli scabunt.

Set sounds like a chap who has to walk past pubs with a bag over his head.

0 Replies

@spendius,

EACH THREAD is a separate community open to subjects of that thread. Please do not conjoin topics or individuals in order to inflate your own egoist needs .

1 Reply

Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know