Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Hard-shelled dinosaur eggs “evolved” three times?

Soft turtle eggshells | Credit: © Salty View / stock.adobe.com
Soft turtle eggshells (stock image).
Credit: © Salty View / stock.adobe.com

If so, is this really “evolution” or is there a library of possibilities that the dinos could reach into?

New research suggests that the first dinosaurs laid soft-shelled eggs — a finding that contradicts established thought. The study, led by the American Museum of Natural History and Yale University and published today in the journal Nature, applied a suite of sophisticated geochemical methods to analyze the eggs of two vastly different non-avian dinosaurs and found that they resembled those of turtles in their microstructure, composition, and mechanical properties. The research also suggests that hard-shelled eggs evolved at least three times independently in the dinosaur family tree.

“The assumption has always been that the ancestral dinosaur egg was hard-shelled,” said lead author Mark Norell, chair and Macaulay Curator in the Museum’s Division of Paleontology. “Over the last 20 years, we’ve found dinosaur eggs around the world. But for the most part, they only represent three groups — theropod dinosaurs, which includes modern birds, advanced hadrosaurs like the duck-bill dinosaurs, and advanced sauropods, the long-necked dinosaurs. At the same time, we’ve found thousands of skeletal remains of ceratopsian dinosaurs, but almost none of their eggs. So why weren’t their eggs preserved? My guess — and what we ended up proving through this study — is that they were soft-shelled.”

American Museum of Natural History, “First dinosaur eggs were soft like a turtle’s” at ScienceDaily

Paper. (paywall)

Darwinism = Natural selection acting on random mutation just happens to produce this outcome three times in a row. But what if soft or hard shells are an encoded pattern that displays depending on circumstances?

Jawa, yes, ... evolved, devolved (lost), and re-evolved again ... by random mutations... Have you noticed my other post on lizards? Live birth and eggs in the same litter ? Darwinian evolutionary theory - it is like from some mental hospital Jawa, if lizards would be some rare case, but here is another example of "evolved, lost, re-evolved": "Have Wings Come, Gone and Come Again? " "Can complex traits be re-evolved by lineages that have lost them? Phylogenetic study now suggests that wings may indeed have reappeared several times within the ancestrally wingless stick insects. " https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12781152/ martin_r
Martin_r, “A family of lizards has achieved something very unexpected, evolving to give birth to live young, before going back to egg laying. Most remarkably, the zoologists who observed this think it is possible they rediscovered laying eggs multiple times.” Wow! “A family of lizards has achieved something very unexpected” “they rediscovered...” Wow! Those lizards could make great contributions to evo-devo. Any chance they can be hired by a research institution? They seem to know a lot more than our best scientists. Just make a juicy offer that it’s hard to decline. :) jawa
some expert here? We were told by evolutionists, that pseudogenes are the ultimate evidence for common descent (shared mistakes blah blah blah). Recently, i came across the following article, and i learned that pseudogenes can arise independently (not shared) Some expert here? Did i misunderstand something ? See the text below (from a mainstream paper): HUMAN AND NON-HUMAN PRIMATE PSEUDOGENES A pseudogene is defined to be a gene that has lost its function, especially it has lost the ability of coding protein. In general, a pseudogene is generated by gain of premature stop codons due to point mutations or flame-shift mutations. The acceptance of premature stop codons in a gene depends strongly on a functional constraint or functional importance of the gene product. In most cases, premature stop codons are accepted only when a gene is functionally compensated by duplicates. However, pseudogenization of single copy genes (a single-copy pseudogene) has been sometimes found in humans and non-human primate genomes. Furthermore, in some cases, deterioration of a gene has taken place independently in different primate lineages. This might be “convergent evolution in pseudogenization.” For example, urate oxidase gene, of which product converts purine to allantoin in a purine catabolic pathway, was deteriorated independently in grate-apes/humans and gibbons. Further, a search of human specific pseudogenes reveals 14 cases of independent loss of function in single-copy genes in human and non-human primate lineages. These single-copy pseudogenes might reflect changes in functional significance in biosystems by some particular reasons. These reasons could be related to species-specific traits in morphology and physiology. In this introduction, I review these single-copy pseudogenes and the convergent evolution of pseudogenization in humans and non-human primates and argue the biological significance of psuedogenizations. http://primate-society.com/ips/public/ips_program/IPS10-534.pdf martin_r
it evolved 'three times'... so what... let me add some other repeated evolution miracles to Bornagain's list: Myrmecochory (seed dispersal by ants) allegedly evolved 150 times independently !!! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myrmecochory A placenta (very complex organ which requires the co-operation of both, the mother and fetus) allegedly evolved at least 100 times independently !!! https://theconversation.com/using-the-placenta-to-understand-how-complex-organs-evolve-70107 in regards to evolutionary theory - this is absurd: "Lizards Re-Evolve To Lay Eggs, After Having Already Evolved To Give Birth To Live Young" "A family of lizards has achieved something very unexpected, evolving to give birth to live young, before going back to egg laying. Most remarkably, the zoologists who observed this think it is possible they rediscovered laying eggs multiple times." https://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/lizards-reevolve-to-lay-eggs-after-having-already-evolved-to-give-birth-to-live-young-/ or this is crazy: "This lizard lays eggs and gives live birth in the same litter" https://theconversation.com/this-lizard-lays-eggs-and-gives-live-birth-we-think-its-undergoing-a-major-evolutionary-transition-133630 a miracle after a miracle after a miracle ... most miracles happen in evolutionary biology... martin_r
Martin_r has a very interesting website dedicated to repeated “evolution” cases. Just click on his name when he posts a comment here. jawa
as to:
"At the same time, we’ve found thousands of skeletal remains of ceratopsian dinosaurs, but almost none of their eggs. So why weren’t their eggs preserved? My guess — and what we ended up proving through this study — is that they were soft-shelled.”
Well actually, the option of live birth is now on the table
"Live birth has evolved many times independently in vertebrates, such as mammals and diverse groups of lizards and snakes. However, live birth is unknown in the major clade Archosauromorpha, a group that first evolved some 260 million years ago and is represented today by birds and crocodilians. Here we report the discovery of a pregnant long-necked marine reptile (Dinocephalosaurus) from the Middle Triassic (?245 million years ago) of southwest China showing live birth in archosauromorphs. Our discovery pushes back evidence of reproductive biology in the clade by roughly 50 million years, and shows that there is no fundamental reason that archosauromorphs could not achieve live birth. Our phylogenetic models indicate that Dinocephalosaurus determined the sex of their offspring by sex chromosomes rather than by environmental temperature like crocodilians. Our results provide crucial evidence for genotypic sex determination facilitating land-water transitions in amniotes." On The Conversation, Stephan Lautenschlager (U of Birmingham) says that live birth (viviparity) has evolved over 100 times independently in all different types of groups (the paper says 115 times). But since later Ruling-Lizard-Shapes laid eggs, this creates questions for evolution that he can only answer by confabulation: "The results of this study also raise several questions. Viviparity has evolved independently and numerous times in all major types of vertebrate, with mammals probably the most prominent and successful example. Although giving birth is physically and energetically taxing for the parent, it has clear advantages for the offspring, which receives extra nutrients and protection, and develops without being affected by environmental conditions. Yet archosauromorphs evolved away from this reproductive strategy to become the egg-laying dinosaurs, and eventually crocodiles and birds that we know. Why was this? We will now have to hope that future fossil finds might reveal another piece to the evolutionary puzzle." https://crev.info/2017/02/fossils-too-detailed-to-be-old/
as to;
,,, "hard-shelled eggs evolved at least three times independently in the dinosaur family tree."
The claim for 'convergent evolution', the idea that Darwinian processes can produce the same exact solution to a problem in widely divergent species, is far more of a problem for overall Darwinian claims than Darwinists apparently realize.
Claims about convergent evolution are absurd _ Feb. 2017 1. C4 photosynthesis. According to 'science' it has evolved 60 times independently. Scientists have not succeeded in building an autonomous photosynthesis system. But evolution has done this for 60 times! Seems to be easy! 2. Eye 35 times. Think about the complex mechanism and signaling pathways that are connected with brain. And according to 'science' humans and squids evolved same eyes using same genes. What a coincidence! 3. Giving birth, 150 times. Piece of cake for evolution. Very convincing. 4. Carnivorous plants. Nitrogen-deficient plants have in at least 7 distinct times become carnivorous. 5. Hearing. 30 times. Bats and dolphins separately evolved same sonar gene. What a surprise! (Do they really think that one gene is sufficient for developing a sonar ability?) 6. Bioluminescence is quite a mystery for science. According to darwinists it has independently evolved even 27 times! 7. Magnetite for orientation, magnetically charged particles of magnetite for directional sensing have been found in unrelated species of salmon, rainbow trout, some butterflies and birds. 8. Electric organ in some fishes. 6 times. Independently from each other. Sure. 9. Parthenogenesis. Some lizards, insects, fishes and rodents are able to reproduce asexually, without males. Etc.. etc.. etc.. http://sciencerefutesevolution.blogspot.fi/2017/02/claims-about-convergent-evolution-are.html “The reason evolutionary biologists believe in "40 known independent eye evolutions" isn't because they've reconstructed those evolutionary pathways, but because eyes don't assume a treelike pattern on the famous Darwinian "tree of life." Darwinists are accordingly forced, again and again, to invoke convergent "independent" evolution of eyes to explain why eyes are distributed in such a non-tree-like fashion. This is hardly evidence against ID. In fact the appearance of eyes within widely disparate groups speaks eloquently of common design. Eyes are a problem, all right -- for Darwinism.” http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/03/its_a_shame_rea083441.html The Real Problem With Convergence - Cornelius Hunter - May 25, 2017 Excerpt: 21st century evolutionists are still befuddled by convergence, which is rampant in biology, and how it could occur. This certainly is a problem for the theory.,,, a fundamental evidence and prediction of evolution is falsified. The species do not fall into the expected evolutionary pattern. The failure of fundamental predictions — and this is a hard failure — is fatal for scientific theories. It leaves evolution not as a scientific theory but as an ad hoc exercise in storytelling. https://www.evolutionnews.org/2017/05/the-real-problem-with-convergence/ Extinct Four-Eyed Monitor Lizard Busts Myth of a Congruent Nested Hierarchy - Günter Bechly - April 23, 2018 Excerpt: One of the most essential doctrines of Darwinian evolution, apart from universal common descent with modification, is the notion that complex similarities indicate homology are ordered in a congruent nested pattern that facilitates the hierarchical classification of life. When this pattern is disrupted by incongruent evidence, such conflicting evidence is readily explained away as homoplasies with ad hoc explanations like underlying apomorphies (parallelisms), secondary reductions, evolutionary convergences, long branch attraction, and incomplete lineage sorting. When I studied in the 1980s at the University of Tübingen, where the founder of phylogenetic systematics, Professor Willi Hennig, was teaching a first generation of cladists, we still all thought that such homoplasies are the exceptions to the rule, usually restricted to simple or poorly known characters. Since then the situation has profoundly changed. Homoplasy is now recognized as a ubiquitous phenomenon (e.g., eyes evolved 45 times independently, and bioluminiscence 27 times; hundreds of more examples can be found at Cambridge University’s “Map of Life” website). https://evolutionnews.org/2018/04/extinct-four-eyed-monitor-lizard-busts-myth-of-a-congruent-nested-hierarchy/ Simon Conway Morris: “Fossil evidence demands a radical rewriting of evolution.” – March 2012 Excerpt: “The idea is this: that convergence – the tendency of very different organisms to evolve similar solutions to biological problems – is not just part of evolution, but a driving force. To say this is an unconventional view would be something of an understatement.” https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/evolution/simon-conway-morris-fossil-evidence-demands-a-radical-rewriting-of-evolution/ Problem 7: Convergent Evolution Challenges Darwinism and Destroys the Logic Behind Common Ancestry - Casey Luskin February 9, 2015 Excerpt: Whenever evolutionary biologists are forced to appeal to convergent evolution, it reflects a breakdown in the main assumption, and an inability to fit the data to a treelike pattern. Examples of this abound in the literature,,,, Biochemist and Darwin-skeptic Fazale Rana reviewed the technical literature and documented over 100 reported cases of convergent genetic evolution.126 Each case shows an example where biological similarity -- even at the genetic level -- is not the result of inheritance from a common ancestor. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/02/problem_7_conve091161.html Darwinism Versus the Octopus: An Evolutionary Dilemma - Eric Metaxas - September 08, 2015 Excerpt: The researchers who sequenced the octopus genome call this “a striking example of convergent evolution,” or the supposed tendency of unrelated creatures to develop the same traits in response to environmental pressures. Isn’t that just a fancy way of saying a miracle happened twice? But the octopus isn’t the only such miracle. “Convergent evolution” is all over nature, from powered flight evolving three times to each continent having its own version of the anteater. Think about that. As one delightfully un-self-conscious “Science Today” cover put it, convergent evolution is “nature discover[ing] the same design over and over.” Well, good for nature! But as Luskin argues, there’s a better explanation for a tentacled mollusk having a mammal’s brain and human eyes. And that explanation is common design by an intelligent Engineer. And like all good engineers, this this one reused some of His best designs. Now that explanation isn’t going to satisfy Darwinian naturalists. And they’ll probably keep on invoking “convergent evolution” when faced with impossible coincidences in nature. But hopefully knowing a more straightforward explanation leaves you forearmed—or should I said “eight-armed”? http://www.christianheadlines.com/columnists/breakpoint/darwinism-versus-the-octopus-an-evolutionary-dilemma.html
"Library of possibilities" is a GREAT phrase. Especially resonant with programming. I'm going to steal it immediately and add it to my library of possibilities in thinking! :) polistra

Leave a Reply