Always wondered this...Biology question

reefer545

Member
This thread is going nowhere. No offense to any posters. It seems that everybody is aruging semantics in a rather pedantic fashion. The main question is a great question with what may have a GREAT amount of worth, but that question seems to have become misconstrued. I personally would consider many crustaceans the insects of the sea, but whether or not any are related to spiders or mosquitoes, I don t know. I wouldnt be surprised. Could we classify many crabs as Arachnids? Tough questions. Tough beliefs. But while I believe in Creation, I also believe that evolution is a CREATION. My two cents. If I can do anything by posting this, lets look at the at the proven science of the matter, and go from there. Sorry if I offended anyone.
 

jerthunter

Active Member
Originally Posted by REEFER545
This thread is going nowhere. No offense to any posters. It seems that everybody is aruging semantics in a rather pedantic fashion. The main question is a great question with what may have a GREAT amount of worth, but that question seems to have become misconstrued. I personally would consider many crustaceans the insects of the sea, but whether or not any are related to spiders or mosquitoes, I don t know. I wouldnt be surprised. Could we classify many crabs as Arachnids? Tough questions. Tough beliefs. But while I believe in Creation, I also believe that evolution is a CREATION. My two cents. If I can do anything by posting this, lets look at the at the proven science of the matter, and go from there. Sorry if I offended anyone.
Generally the groups are separted by certain adaptive strategies. Something that serparates arachnids from others is their mouth parts. Appendage formation can be used to separate crustaceans from insects.
Of course the traits traditionally used for naming don't always turn out to be the best. As more moleculor evidence comes out this is more clear showing closer relatedness between certain groups then orignially thought.
 

reefer545

Member
Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Generally the groups are separted by certain adaptive strategies. Something that serparates arachnids from others is their mouth parts. Appendage formation can be used to separate crustaceans from insects.
Of course the traits traditionally used for naming don't always turn out to be the best. As more moleculor evidence comes out this is more clear showing closer relatedness between certain groups then orignially thought.
Right on Jert. I am aware of much of what you said, but I also gained a good bit from it too. That question was more rhetorical than not, but the answered is well recieved. As well, it is definitely enlightening.
Hey MIE. Lighten up. This isnt about YOU. OR anybody else. It's about EVERYBODY. Best wishes bringing change to people lives though.
 

mie

Active Member
Originally Posted by REEFER545
Right on Jert. I am aware of much of what you said, but I also gained a good bit from it too. That question was more rhetorical than not, but the answered is well recieved. As well, it is definitely enlightening.
Hey MIE. Lighten up. This isnt about YOU. OR anybody else. It's about EVERYBODY. Best wishes bringing change to people lives though.
What are you talking about? Never said it was about me. Just having a discussion. I am not going to lose any sleep over this or anybody else's veiw. IT IS A DISSCUSION, and an answer to someones question (a very two sided long answer)
 

jonthefishguy

Active Member
I have been following this thread for a while and while certain person(s) dont believe in evolution, there are more scientific facts being dicovered every other week to prove that this in fact is what happend versus "they just magically appeared that way". Everything in life evolves from the largest animal to the smallest virus, If you dont believe it, try finding a cure for the common cold. Why cant they, because the strains evolve. Just like the aids virus it mutates (evolves) to find a way to live in its surrounding. To qoute a movie line, "nature finds a way". Just like clownfish and other species change sexes to keep the species going...other things have EVOLVED to do the same thing. Lets take a look at corals that live in the bottom of the ocean floor thousands of feet down with no light that depend on sulfuric acid and all elements that this planet released in hot gases from cracks in the earth. The animals have adapted aka EVOLVED to endure such extreme temperatures and pressure.
 
J

jrthomas40

Guest
Originally Posted by mie
All creatures are to perfect to have evolved it does'nt make sense.
And i believe we are all entitled to our own opinions and beliefs.
Lets just keep it civil and understand that everyone is entitled to there opinons and beliefs
No harm no foul.

if you think all animals are to perfect to have evolved then what do you think evolution is??? of course they are perfect for there environment because selective pressures have caused them to adapted to the situation...aka EVOLUTION....a lot of people get the misconception that evolution is survival of the strongest when in fact it is survival of the MOST FIT AT A SPECIFIC TIME AND PLACE given certain selective pressures that cause the adaptation...but the answer to the question has been answered when someone said that crustaceacns are the insects of the sea...everything fits into a given niche that it has adapted to and once an environment has reached "saturation" then nothing else can fit and insects came about after the crustaceans and were not able to get into the "ocean niche"
wanted to add that evolutions first occurs on a genetic level...such as a virus becoming immune to certain medicines...i love these types of discussions
 

mie

Active Member
Then how do you explain sea turtles returning to the same beach year after year in a three week window every year to lay there eggs. Then the baby turtles return to the sea then back to the beach again. just like the salmon.
Anyways nothing but love for all of you and no hard feelings. I have to go to bed gotta get up at 11 oclock for work
.
P.S i am not conceading
 
Wow didn't think this would cause so much controversy. I'm going to go change the first post so no one else takes it the wrong way. Also, this is just something I have always wondered, just as the title says.
 

reefer545

Member
Originally Posted by mie
What are you talking about? Never said it was about me. Just having a discussion. I am not going to lose any sleep over this or anybody else's veiw. IT IS A DISSCUSION, and an answer to someones question (a very two sided long answer)

You seem to answer EVERY question/argument "I". That makes it seemingly about you. Sleep well.
Side note: we are gettin off topic again.
 
J

jrthomas40

Guest
Originally Posted by mie
Then how do you explain sea turtles returning to the same beach year after year in a three week window every year to lay there eggs. Then the baby turtles return to the sea then back to the beach again. just like the salmon.
Anyways nothing but love for all of you and no hard feelings. I have to go to bed gotta get up at 11 oclock for work
.
P.S i am not conceading

turtles and salmon express homing behaviors same way pigeons do there is a word i can not find right now or think of but it is some type of homeopathy or something pathy...but essentially they can sense directions and certain chemical ques in the water help find the way back because as i am sure you know the water make up and deposits are different everywhere once the eggs are hatched it is kinda "stamped" into their core...i am going to have to get out some old biology books to find that word now...thanks...lol
 

jerthunter

Active Member
I'm not sure what word you are thinking of but salmon seem to find their birth-stream via imprinting of chemical (or odor) ques imprinted at birth. I do not see how animal behavior call into question the idea that change happens.
 

jonthefishguy

Active Member
I would just lke to point out that although this is off topic and is not ENGLISH 101, Mie...I have noticed that many of the same words you spell over and over are completely misspelled. If it were one word you happend to misspell I could understand that your finger slipped and that it is a typo. However, you tend to spell the same exact word(s) not just in this thread but other threads and it makes me wonder how old you are and what was the extent of your education. I not only ask this because of your continous misspelling but of your way of not thinking outside the box. Just curious!!!
 

ophiura

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefkprZ
ok at this point if I was mod I would lockdown this thread. for a couple reasons
.

In short, it is exactly what i feared, and on some level KNEW would happen (hence my original post and my second post).
I will give it a bit more time to try and get back to the original point....MEANING...please do not go down the road of whether evolution exists or not, because clearly, not everyone IS entitled to their own opinions when it comes right down to it (so it seems...)
.
Evolution "makes no sense" or "is just a theory" etc etc are not ways to encourage open discussion and share opinions.

SOooooo I am hopeful those who want to consider the original question will stick with it...and those who do not want to consider the original question will back off a bit. I mean this in the most polite way. People ARE entitled to the opinion that evolution exists; they ARE entitled to the opinion that it does not exist...but not when it hijacks the original question and redirects all the discussion (or any attempts at discussion)...at least IMO.
Ironically, had the post said "they aren't there becuase God did not want them there (and who are we to question it...) would have been more on point to the discussion than how this thread has "evolved." That I could consider a reasonable on topic opinion actually!

However, anyone who wishes to continue the evolution/creationism debate can look up some of the recent threads on that SPECIFIC topic
and continue there. Many of the same points (or same old points) are covered there.
 
J

jrthomas40

Guest
Originally Posted by Jerthunter
I'm not sure what word you are thinking of but salmon seem to find their birth-stream via imprinting of chemical (or odor) ques imprinted at birth. I do not see how animal behavior call into question the idea that change happens.
yeah it is the same thing and imprinting is what i was talking about when i said that it was "stamped" at hatching
 

jonthefishguy

Active Member
Amphibious fish are fish that are able to leave water for extended periods of time. About 11 distantly related types of fish are listed as amphibious. This suggests that many fish genera independently evolved amphibious traits. These fish use a range of terrestrial locomotory modes, such as lateral undulation, tripod-like walking (using paired fins and tail), and jumping. Many of these locomotory modes incorporate multiple combinations of pectoral, pelvic and tail fin movement.
Many ancient fish had lung-like organs, and a few, such as the lungfish, still do. Some of these ancient "lunged" fish were the ancestors of modern amphibians. However, in most recent fish species these organs evolved
into the swim bladders, which help control buoyancy. Having no lung-like organs, modern amphibious fish and also many fish in oxygen-poor water use other methods such as their gills or their skin to breathe air. Amphibious fish may also have eyes adapted to allow them to see clearly in air, despite the density differences between air and water.
Some of these fish include:
*Rockskippers: These are found in Panama. These fish come onto land to catch prey and escape aquatic predators. They often come out of water for up to 20 minutes.
*Wooly sculpin: Found in tide pools along the Pacific coast, these fish will leave water if the oxygen levels get low and can breathe air for 24 hours.
*Mudskippers (Oxudercinae): This subfamily of gobies is probably the most land adapted of fish. Mudskippers are found in mangrove swamps in Africa and the Indo-Pacific, they frequently come onto land and can survive in air for up to three and a half days. Mudskippers breathe through their skin and also through the lining of the mouth (the mucosa) and throat (the pharynx). This requires the mudskipper to be wet, limiting mudskippers to humid habitats. This mode of breathing, similar to that employed by amphibians, is known as cutaneous breathing. They propel themselves over land on their sturdy forefins.
*Anableps: Found in Central and South America, the unusual "four-eyed" and "four-sexed" fish can move on land for short periods of a time. Its pupils are divided into two. The upper half is adapted to see in air, and the lower half is for seeing in water.
*Eels: Some eels, such as the European eel and the American eel, can live for an extended time out of water and can crawl on land if the soil is moist.
*Snakehead fish (Channidae): This family of fish are obligate air breathers, breathing air using their suprabranchial organ, which is a primitive labyrinth organ. The Northern Snakehead has a limited capacity to wriggle over wet grass and mud.
*Airbreathing catfish (Clariidae). This family of fish has a labyrinth organ which allows them to breathe air. Some species from this group can "walk" on land. For example the Walking catfish (Clarias batrachus) of Southeast Asia, can "walk" on land by wriggling and using its pectoral fins, this allows it to move between the slow-moving, and often stagnant and temporary bodies of water in which it lives. Another amphibious species of this family is the Eel catfish (Channallabes apus), which lives in swamps in Africa, and known to hunt beetles on land .
*Labyrinth fish (Anabantoidei). This suborder of fish also use also use a labyrinth organ to breathe air. Some species from this group can move on land. An amphibious fish from this family is the Climbing gourami, an African and Southeast Asian fish that is capable of moving from pool to pool over land by using its pectoral fins, caudal peduncle and gill covers as a means of locomotion. It is said that climbing gourami move at night in groups.
WIKI
 
J

jrthomas40

Guest
man i was reading that and thought you was an ichthyologist until i got to the WIKI part...lol...here is a question for the person who started the thread...after all the statements made has your question been answer to your liking???...i know i answered the question in one of my first post and there was some else who also answered it
 

jonthefishguy

Active Member

Originally Posted by jrthomas40
man i was reading that and thought you was an ichthyologist until i got to the WIKI part...lol...
Actually, I knew quite a bit of the write up already just through self education but WIKI
put it in a simpler form than I probably would have. I would have got you lost. lol
 

jerthunter

Active Member
Another interesting group of fish is the coelocanths, related (if you choose to see similarities between groups) to the lung fish. The extant ones show some very interesting traits that might appear to some people to show a link between tetrapods and fish.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Another interesting group of fish is the coelocanths, related (if you choose to see similarities between groups) to the lung fish. The extant ones show some very interesting traits that might appear to some people to show a link between tetrapods and fish.
Of course the existence today of the "primitive" fish calls into question our current theory of evolution.
 
Top