[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re:Gilgamesh and US DINOS
> The fish was disected and there was no indication that it had
> evolved for a land enviroment, and gave no indication to tell us how
> became an amphibian.
What? Just as an lizard when dissected, probably doesn't give us
any indication of how a lizard became a mammal!.... probably
because it never did. A bit of a chicken and egg story. The egg came
first because the parent non-chickens produced an egg containing a
mutation that developed into a chicken. In the same way, I wouldn't
expect any extant animal to give any physical evidence of mutations
that evidently didn't happen in their direct line. (For mutation read
any equivalent evolutionary developmental concept applicable to
your own pet theory (of which there are many variations on details)).
Does this make sense? And where are the dinosaurs in this?
I will be in Washington from the 3rd August and hope to visit the new
exhibition on dinosaurs in New York as well as the Smithsonian while
I am over. I will be bringing a replica of the Scottish caudal vertebra
with me to compare with some of the specimens there. I also hope to
write a short piece for the UK branch of the Dinosaur Society on the
exhibitions, so if there is anyone from these establishment listening
in, can I have a contact please?