Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Saturday, September 01, 2012

"Your Inner Fish" Chapter 1- Finding Your Inner Fish

-
OK a non-believer will review Neil Shubin's book "Your Inner Fish". I have blogged about this being a failed prediction and this time I will add more detail from Neil to support my claim.

Chapter 1 is the set up for Neil's journey to find the origin of limbed organisms. That's right, according to Neil he was "interested in understanding the origin of limbed animals", not just any ole transitional form. And he said, wrongly as it turns out, that to find the origins of limbed animals "we can now restrict our search to rocks that are roughly 375 million to 380 million years old".

First, the set-up:
"In a nutshell, the 'fish–tetrapod transition' usually refers to the origin, from their fishy ancestors, of creatures with four legs bearing digits (fingers and toes), and with joints that permit the animals to walk on land. This event took place between about 385 and 360 million years ago toward the end of the period of time known as the Devonian. The Devonian is often referred to as the 'Age of Fishes,' as fish form the bulk of the vertebrate fossil record for this time."- Jennifer Clack, The Fish–Tetrapod Transition: New Fossils and Interpretations; "Evolution: Education and Outreach", 2009, Volume 2, Number 2, Pages 213-223

Got that- "the transition" refers to an event, a specific event that occurred between two specified time periods, a time when there were fish and no tetrapods and the time when there were fish and tetrapods. (as I said Here and again here- just can't get enough of RichTard's cowardice and ignorance)

With that now firmly established we return to "Your Inner Fish" chapter 1 where Shubin discusses what he was looking for- hint: evidence for the transition, ie the event:

Let's return to our problem of how to find relatives of the first fish to walk on land. In our grouping scheme, these creatures are somewhere between the "Everythings" and the "Everythings with limbs". Map this to what we know of the rocks, and there is strong geological evidence that the period from 380 million to 365 million years ago is the critical time. The younger rocks in that range, those about 360 million years old, include diverse kinds of fossilized animals that we would recognize as amphibians or reptiles. My colleague Jenny Clark at Cambridge University and others have uncovered amphibians from rocks in Greenland that are about 365 million years old. With their necks, their ears, and their four legs, they do not look like fish. But in rocks that are about 385 million years old, we find whole fish that look like, well, fish. They have fins. conical heads, and scales; and they have no necks. Given this, it is probably no great surprise that we should focus on rocks about 375 million years old to find evidence of the transition between fish and land-living animals.- Neil Subin pages 9-10 (bold and italics added)

OK he did it just exactly as described, bracketed the dates. However his dates were wrong, which means he did not find evidence for the transition, which occurred many millions of years earlier.


But anyway near the end of chapter 1 Neil sez:
It took us six years to find it, but this fossil confirmed a prediction of paleontology: not only was the new fish an intermediate between two different types of animal, but we had found it also in the right time period in the earth's history and in the right ancient environment. (italics in original)

Oops. As it turns out Tiktaalik was not found in the right time period for Neil said he was looking for.

In order to find what he was looking for, evidence of the transition, he needed to focus on rocks 400 million years old, as the new data puts terapods in existence about 395 million years ago.

Tetrapod trackways from the early Middle Devonian period of Poland

Back to the review- so chapter 1 is all about setting up the expedition and hindsight being 20/20 we now know it was set up under the wrong premises. But that is the nature of science-> the science of tomorrow can upset or confirm the science of today. In this case it was upset. That just means in order to find what he was looking for he just has to set out again to find the origin of limbed animals.

However I have to wonder is if Neil had the data from Poland would the rocks Tiktaalik was found in have been dated to say 400 million years old? Dating sedimentary rocks isn't as straight-forward and simple as some may want you to believe. Sometimes you could have the sediments dated by index fossils and the index fossils were dated by the sedimentary layer they were found. That makes for a fudge factor. And evolutionists have a lot of fudge.

That said Neil et al., did find a fish-like animal that had more robust fore-limbs than a regular finned fish. Was it a stand-alone population designed for a specific environment? Was it a hybrid? Was it a fish-a-pod transitional, a natural experiment to adapt from purely aquatic life to life on land? Unfortunately neither genetics nor developmental biology can tell us, yet.

Chapter 1, the big set-up was a failure. Not a total failure because genetics and/ or developmental biology can still come through AND he can always find a speciman in the "correct" time period, which can then change again.

end chapter 1

31 Comments:

  • At 5:24 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    You are possibly the biggest retard to ever live for rehashing this *often* debunked trope of yours.

    I also enjoyed your probability fail.

    So keep licking KF's ass and failing, evolution is I think safe, but you are funny to watch at least.

     
  • At 6:14 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Rich,

    YOU are the biggest faggot pathological lying coward for continuing to ignore the argument and instead spew your ignorance.

    Evolution is safe. Evolutionism is for fools like you.

    So keep you head up your ass and oleg's balls on your chin. And thanks, your continued cowardice and ignorance is entertaining.

     
  • At 6:51 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Yes RicchTARD has FAILED before:

    Here and again here- just can't get enough of RichTard's cowardice and ignorance)

     
  • At 7:03 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    LOL. click on the links in the first one. You got owned but are too stupid to realise it, gimpy ass-licker.

     
  • At 7:10 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Owned by an ignorant faggot who quotes himself to support his ignorant claims and has yet to deal with the argument?

    How does that work, exactly?

     
  • At 7:16 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    RichTARD references RichTard to support his own TARD.

    That is a classic...

     
  • At 7:34 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Relive your ass-whupping here:

    http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=488

    Gimpy-ass-licker. You love it when KF corrects you.

     
  • At 7:40 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAA


    No RichTARD FAIL, that is you, spewing tard, referenving your tard and tucking your tail between your legs like the coward you are.

    And that you still cannot deal with the argument proves that you are still a little faggot coward. Thank you.

     
  • At 7:45 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    RichTARD references RichTard to support his own TARD.

    And the classic TARD continues.

    So RichTARDs "idea" of debunking someone is to spew lies and bullshit, don't actually deal with the argument and then reference his tard and ignorance as support.

    Wipe off your chin when oleg is finshed...

     
  • At 7:46 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    actually, the Tard I'm referencing is a post by habitual coward / KF ass licker / YEC... JOE G.

    At least by trying again here after your mega-fail, you wont get booted for posting pics of ladies genitalia. What a crappy person you are! Funny re-reading you getting whupped there, though.

     
  • At 8:02 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    I had a mega-fail because you are a fucking ignorant faggot coward liar?

    How does that work? Your mega-failure to deal with my arguments = a mega-failure for me? EvoTARD ignorance means I had a mega-fail?

    How does any of that work?

    All these false accusations and still nothing to back it up but more cum-spewage from richie the weak-eyed mega-fail.

    Go figure.

     
  • At 8:16 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    And as predicted, into cry-baby mode.

    You're so pathetic. Watching that retard KF bully you, and you cower and lick his ass. Have you no pride, man?

    Here we have you getting it very wrong (as usual):

    Rich: How would anyone know (universal negative) that there was “no tetrapods-> 385 mya”?

    JoeTARD: Ask Shubin- he wrote it. It’s his thing- read the book.

    Also - thanks for this recent classic:

    Joe: "As for the authors of the books in the Bible, well the OT was authored by Moses and the NT was authored by various people."


    You can't even get your fundy shit right! BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!

     
  • At 8:35 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    As predicted, faggot coward liar mode who still doesn't make its case.

    Again SHUBIN said it in his book. This is a review of that book.

    SHUBIN said he was looking for the ORIGIN of terapod limbs- I quoted him you pathetic imp.

    SHUBIN made the case that the ORIGIN of tetrapod limbs was in rocks 375-380 million years old.

    Again that you think your cowardly ignorance refutes what SHUBIN said proves that you are beyond help.

    Also what I said about the Bible is spot on. Again your false accusations mean nothing here but your inability to make a case proves that you are a coward.

    I made my case using SHUBIN's words. You make your "case" by questioning him and thinking that refutes me.

     
  • At 8:36 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And now I'm in cry-baby mode because you are an ignorant faggot coward and pathological liar?

    How does that work?

    Why is it taht you never support anything you say?

     
  • At 8:48 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Oh wait, I get it. I said OT and not Torah.

    It was supposed to be Torah by Moses and the rest of the Bible by various authors.

    But that wasn't even the point. dr who thinks that God was the author. And I was refuting that bit of tard.

    Not that you would understand that.

     
  • At 8:50 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    "Also what I said about the Bible is spot on"

    Priceless:

    1) How do you "know"
    2) Deuteronomy 34

    So here we have 'Moses' writing about his dead self (in the third person, in the old testament.

    You don't see any problem with this, ass-licker?

     
  • At 8:53 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Umm Richie- already taken care of:

    Oh wait, I get it. I said OT and not Torah.

    It was supposed to be Torah by Moses and the rest of the Bible by various authors.

    But that wasn't even the point. dr who thinks that God was the author. And I was refuting that bit of tard.

    Not that you would understand that.

    As I said I knew you wouldn't even understand.

     
  • At 8:56 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    So you were wrong. No suprises there. Much like this. Or mols. or Gravity. Or Clades. Or thinking you were scary.

    Stick to being Kiros Focus' ass-licker. at least you're good at that.

     
  • At 9:03 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Wow, only a little faggot coward could go from me making a little mistake correcting an evoTARDs nonsense and make that into me being wrong about what SHUBIN said.

    Do you have EVERY evoTARDs' dick in your mouth?

    And that you can spew a bunch of cowardly false accusations doesn't mean anything other than you are a spewing little faggot.

    Richie the coward- debunking an argument by not addressing it and questioning SHUBIN.

    You rock, cupcake...

     
  • At 9:15 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Go reread the last time you tried (and failed), ass-licker.

     
  • At 9:18 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    I didn't fail, ballchinian cupcake. Just because you can baldly decalre I failed doesn't make it so, sperm spewer.

    Anyone can read this review and see I am posting what SHUBIN said. And I supported it with what CLACK said.

    OTOH you and your mental midget minions have yet to deal with what SHUBIN said and I have dealt with all of your spewage.

    So again, in what way is your ignorant cowardice a refutation of what I posted?

     
  • At 9:33 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Shubin: "we can now restrict our search to rocks that are ROUGHLY 375 million to 380 million years old".

    Shubin: ". Given this, it is probably no great surprise that we should focus on rocks ABOUT 375 million years old to find evidence of the transition between fish and land-living animals"

    Internet retard: "
    In order to find what he was looking for, evidence of the transition, he needed to focus on rocks 400 million years old"

    You misinterpreting his soft ranges (ROUGHLY, ABOUT) and giving a point estimate of 400 million years. You're a retard, and understand nothing.

    Less than 3% variance from the soft range he gave, for a process that undoubtedly took millions of years and was still happening in the period he CORRECTLY PREDICTED.

    To be clear, he found the evidence he was looking for in the period he thought. Only an IDist could see that as a failure.


     
  • At 9:42 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Rich, Thank you for PROVING that you are fucking retarded.

    Shubin did NOT know that tetrapods appeared well before 375 million years ago. He was looking for the ORIGIN of animals with limbs and that occurred before 395 million years ago.

    His WHOLE thing was that he said he nailed 375 million years ago and if he can just change the date by 25 million years, arbitrarily, well that fits in with what I said in the OP. Roughly never means +/- 25 million you ignorant fuck.

    To be clear he did NOT find the evidence in the period he was looking for. Only a dishonest coward could say such a thing.

     
  • At 9:52 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    "He was looking for the ORIGIN of animals with limbs and that occurred before 395 million years ago."

    WRONG. He was looking for an example. The origion doesn't make any sense, unless you believe dogs giving birth to cats... oh wait, its intenet ass-licking creationist retard Joe G. Carry on.

    and your claim he was looking in rocks ROUGHLY 375 million to 380 old for something that "occurred before 395 million years ago" just highlights how little you know.


    He found what he was looking for. Deal with it.

    "Roughly never means +/- 25 million you ignorant fuck" citation please?

    ROUGHLY - how old is the universe?


    BITCHSLAP!

     
  • At 9:58 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    WRONG. He was looking for an example.

    You fucking piece of shit I quoted him saying he was looking for the ORIGIN.

    It's in the fucking book you ignorant fuck.

    and your claim he was looking in rocks ROUGHLY 375 million to 380 old for something that "occurred before 395 million years ago" just highlights how little you know.

    It's the fucking fact of the matter. We have evidence for tetrapods in rocks 395 million years old. That means the transition had to occur millions of years before that. Even more than 400 million years ago. I was being generous you ignorant punk.

    ROUGHLY - how old is the universe?

    No one knows.

     
  • At 10:14 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    "No one knows."

    WRONG. But it chaps you're creationist nipples they do. Is there any part of science you don't get wrong, YECBOI?

    its a bit like Shubin saying he expects to find an example of summer between July and August and then you stop sucking off KF to say "No No summer is in June" - well that doesn't stop him correctly finding examples of summer in July, does it?


    RETARD.

     
  • At 10:17 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    No one knows how old the universe is, Richie. But the Creationists were the ones who predicted the universe had a beginning. Your position doesn't make any predictions.

    Not even Tiktaalik is a prediction of blind and undirected processes.

    And SHUBIN said he was looking for the ORIGIN of tetrapod limbs. Not any ole example of something that looks like a transitional.

    Fucking ignorant coward

     
  • At 10:30 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    *points and laughs*

    MELTDOWN COMPLETE.

     
  • At 8:30 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Yes your cowardly metdown is complete...

    Thank you.

     
  • At 8:58 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    From the OP:

    However I have to wonder is if Neil had the data from Poland would the rocks Tiktaalik was found in have been dated to say 400 million years old? Dating sedimentary rocks isn't as straight-forward and simple as some may want you to believe. Sometimes you could have the sediments dated by index fossils and the index fossils were dated by the sedimentary layer they were found. That makes for a fudge factor. And evolutionists have a lot of fudge.

    And Richie loves his fudge packed...

     
  • At 2:29 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And to top it all off Shubin doesn't even know if the transition occurred in the Devonian. That means he doesn't know if he was even looking in the right period, period.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home