A real advantage is that promising “biomarkers” may be found in fossils that are too fragmentary to make it into the display collection. If so, expect to hear expressions like “unexpected,” “remarkable,” “earlier than thought” and “more complex than expected” quite frequently.
Remote vehicles and autonomous vehicles may have a huge role to play in exploring the vast proportion of the ocean that is currently largely unknown. We will probably see stranger stuff yet.
We are told no. But just a minute. According to the story, some dinos evolved into birds. If so, massive changes ARE possible. It’s not clear why changed circumstances could not cause some of those changes to be reversed.
Now how would the sarcoptergians have come to be “already primed for living on land”? Did they know they were going to move to land? Or is there an underlying pattern? Can we call this “preparatory evolution?”
The authors claim that their find proves the “theory of evolution.” It’s certainly strong evidence for a theory of evolution – but that theory would not be Darwin’s. It would be great to get some insight into how these built-in capacities for identical adaptation are carried from one generation to the next.
Devolution, of which this is an example, may be more common than we suppose and will probably have precisely the effect of creating “exceptions” like this. Note that we are told, “they likely steal energy from their host using some type of proteins.” It makes sense that many devolved creatures are parasites. They can afford to throw away equipment if they are using the host’s toolbox anyway.
So can that French scientist Didier Raoult, who discovered the mimivirus, come out of the doghouse now? He was confined for doubting Darwin. But who really has time for Darwin now?
It’s absurd? Yes, so? One thing we’ll need to get more used to is unblinking absurdities spouted in the name of “science.”At least this one isn’t particularly harmful.
The Firstborn hypothesis (we achieved intelligence before extraterrestrials) lines up with the view that humans are unique but sees that status as temporary.
Researchers: F. primaevus’ powerful shoulders and elbows that are similar to today’s living burrowing animals … Furthermore, the animals found were a mixture of multiple mature adults and young adults, suggesting these were truly social groups as opposed to just parents raising their young.
Already complex? No intermediate forms? Where have we heard that before?
So was there a single “ancestral mammal” or is it a common design (convergent evolution)? Either is quite plausible today.
Researchers: “It was previously thought that the only genes that could spread through a population were those that caused a benefit ‘right now’ (in the environment that the population is experiencing at that point in time).” That’s Darwinism. And Darwinism is becoming comprehensively out of date.
New Scientist: “Today, evolution remains one of the most powerful ideas in science but, as with all good ideas, it is evolving ” Sure, but if evolution is evolving, Darwinism is dead. Which is fine with us. It’s a big world out there. Making everything sound like Darwin said it is not the way to explore that world.
Eric Holloway argues that the evidence does not really support common descent, not the way Talk Origins believes and we were taught in school.