Comments on: Oldest 4-Legged Creature Found

By: samspotter

samspotter — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 05:30:23 +0000

Got it. Thanks, erykmynn, for clearing that up for me.

By: CamperGuy

CamperGuy — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 22:35:17 +0000

“Land masses have collided and split apart over the years….”

I agree.

Tiktaalik was a species on at least two seperated landmasses of the three at the time. I don’t know of Australia and North America land masses rejoining.
I think it odd a species seperated from its fellows followed a similar path to become tetrapods.
In my opinion this “transitional species” poses more questions for evolutionary theory than answers.

By: erykmynn

erykmynn — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:29:09 +0000

CamperGuy:

Land masses have collided and split apart over the years…. The world did not always look as it is today.

By: erykmynn

erykmynn — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:27:07 +0000

Usually if they use the term “transitional species” what they mean is that it lies somewhere between two modern groups that are linked in the past but far separated today.

samspotter is right in that all species are transitioning all the time. The use here implies that this creature may be a bridge between fishes and legged animals. He exhibits characteristics of both in some way that would be a ‘grey area’ yet little grey area exists anymore as land animals and fishes are, for the most part, quite distinct.

Kind of a more accurate and less silly way of saying “missing link”

By: CamperGuy

CamperGuy — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 03:18:34 +0000

I disagree with “transitional species” since I am a non-evolutionist but the concept is pretty simple.

Ventastega curonica is interesting regardless the point of view.

I now know what a tetrapod is.

Learned a bit about the Devonian Period.

I don’t understand how Tiktaalik “evolved” into tetrapods on at least two seperate land masses. Wouldn’t that be a bit like humans “evolving” in Africa and North America seperately? Is that likley in evolutionary theory?

By: Andrew Minnesota

Andrew Minnesota — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:05:57 +0000

There is more information out there if you take the time to look, more has been found than just a skull

“The new remains — including most of the creature’s skull, the braincase, half of the bones in its forelimb and a quarter of its pelvic girdle”

The article that I took that quote from also says that there have been some skeletal fragments found in the past.

I tried to post this comment with a link but it doesn’t seem to be working so if you want to check it out and get a little more information the website is sciencenews.org and the article titled “Fossil Helps Document Shift From Sea To Land” Date: June 25th, 2008

To find it in the first place all I did was type in “Ventastega” into google.

By: bigfootsdad

bigfootsdad — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:56:36 +0000

M17hrandir - You beat me to the same response. Man, you talk about “tall tales.”

By: Andrew Minnesota

Andrew Minnesota — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:56:31 +0000

There is more information out there if you take the time to look, more has been found than just a skull

“The new remains — including most of the creature’s skull, the braincase, half of the bones in its forelimb and a quarter of its pelvic girdle”

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/33623/title/Fossil_helps_document_shift_from_sea_to_land

The article that I took that quote from (link above) also says that there have been some skeletal fragments found in the past.

By: M17hrandir

M17hrandir — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:32:58 +0000

I find it hard to believe that this piece of a skull tells us this much about an unknown animal. There is no way to tell if it had a fin, or how long it actually was, or its behaviors at all. So where do scientists come up with the ideas that this is the missing link, if you only have part of a skull?

By: samspotter

samspotter — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:22:26 +0000

Another transitional species? Pardon me if I’m completely wrong, but aren’t we all transitional species? If evolution is ongoing and constant, how can you define a specific point of transition? Or is “transitional species” a term used to refer to all species that existed between the beginning of time and the present day?

Interesting article, by the way.