Bat family 36 million years older than thought

its the geology that is determining the biology evolution here. This YEC thinks bats are only post flood. So mechanism did turn a rat into a flying thing. No bats before the flood. Yet it was instant with no intermediates. I just saw a youtube thing on the creation of the old batman series. Hmmm. Robert Byers

There it is again.... "....sheds light on evolution" I love that phrase. It carries with it the illusion that they are actually unearthing solid evidence for evolution instead of just imagining things. lifepsy

phylogenies are notoriously unreliable: Logged Out - Scientists Can't Find Darwin's "Tree of Life" Anywhere in Nature by Casey Luskin - Winter 2013 Excerpt: the record shows that major groups of animals appeared abruptly, without direct evolutionary precursors. Because biogeography and fossils have failed to bolster common descent, many evolutionary scientists have turned to molecules—the nucleotide and amino acid sequences of genes and proteins—to establish a phylogenetic tree of life showing the evolutionary relationships between all living organisms.,,, Many papers have noted the prevalence of contradictory molecule-based phylogenetic trees. For instance: • A 1998 paper in Genome Research observed that "different proteins generate different phylogenetic tree[s]."6 • A 2009 paper in Trends in Ecology and Evolution acknowledged that "evolutionary trees from different genes often have conflicting branching patterns."7 • A 2013 paper in Trends in Genetics reported that "the more we learn about genomes the less tree-like we find their evolutionary history to be."8 Perhaps the most candid discussion of the problem came in a 2009 review article in New Scientist titled "Why Darwin Was Wrong about the Tree of Life."9 The author quoted researcher Eric Bapteste explaining that "the holy grail was to build a tree of life," but "today that project lies in tatters, torn to pieces by an onslaught of negative evidence." According to the article, "many biologists now argue that the tree concept is obsolete and needs to be discarded.",,, Syvanen succinctly summarized the problem: "We've just annihilated the tree of life. It's not a tree any more, it's a different topology entirely. What would Darwin have made of that?" ,,, "battles between molecules and morphology are being fought across the entire tree of life," leaving readers with a stark assessment: "Evolutionary trees constructed by studying biological molecules often don't resemble those drawn up from morphology."10,,, A 2012 paper noted that "phylogenetic conflict is common, and [is] frequently the norm rather than the exception," since "incongruence between phylogenies derived from morphological versus molecular analyses, and between trees based on different subsets of molecular sequences has become pervasive as datasets have expanded rapidly in both characters and species."12,,, http://www.salvomag.com/new/articles/salvo27/logged-out.php bornagain77

Umm.... the bat family is not older than thought. Molecular phylogenies already placed this split in the Eocene, this is just the first Eocence fossil from the family. wd400

OOPS, misread, the 54.6 million year old specimen, with echolocation, is still oldest. bornagain77

Old World sucker-footed bat (Myzopoda aurita) Excerpt: The Old World sucker-footed bat possesses a complex echolocation system and produces remarkably long calls, used to hunt insects, in particular small moths. http://www.arkive.org/old-world-sucker-footed-bat/myzopoda-aurita/ Previous oldest bat: Australonycteris clarkae is the oldest bat ever found in the fossil record at 54.6 million years old. The ear bones of Australonycteris show that it could navigate using echolocation just like modern bats. https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/biology/the-bionic-antinomy-of-darwinism/#comment-340412 Bat Evolution? - No Transitional Fossils! - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6003501/ bornagain77