Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Would a living Dinosaur disprove Evolution?









Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,169
Goldstone
No.
 


Goldstone1976

We Got Calde in!!
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Apr 30, 2013
13,783
Herts
Well, there are some species that are believed not to have changed that much for millions of years, judging by comparing living examples with those in the fossil record. Ceolacanths and crocodiles to give just two examples. I'm not sure that folk believe that their existence disproves evolution - other than religious fundamentalists, of course.
 


Papa Lazarou

Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
Jul 7, 2003
18,858
Worthing
If you've got some free time, watch the video with a cup of tea (or coffee). They seem very confident in their assertions.
 




Silk

New member
May 4, 2012
2,488
Uckfield
If you've got some free time, watch the video with a cup of tea (or coffee). They seem very confident in their assertions.
Really. The argument that it would disprove evolution seems to depend on the idea that in order for evolution to be true, ALL species MUST evolve. But evolutionary theory makes no such assertion. I doubt I'd waste my time listening to these bozos, however "confident" they are.
 


Well, there are some species that are believed not to have changed that much for millions of years, judging by comparing living examples with those in the fossil record. Ceolacanths and crocodiles to give just two examples. I'm not sure that folk believe that their existence disproves evolution - other than religious fundamentalists, of course.

Presumably the environment in which they live is relatively stable so there would have been no need for them to evolve?
 


Goldstone1976

We Got Calde in!!
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Apr 30, 2013
13,783
Herts
Presumably the environment in which they live is relatively stable so there would have been no need for them to evolve?

I'm not an expert in the field, but that would make sense. From a layman's perspective, that explanation would certainly work for ceolacanths, being deep ocean fish. It works perhaps less well for crocodiles?
 




Papa Lazarou

Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
Jul 7, 2003
18,858
Worthing
Really. The argument that it would disprove evolution seems to depend on the idea that in order for evolution to be true, ALL species MUST evolve. But evolutionary theory makes no such assertion. I doubt I'd waste my time listening to these bozos, however "confident" they are.

What astounds me is that in the US, and to an extent the UK too, people are lobbying and at times winning the right to teach this stuff in schools.
 


Papa Lazarou

Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
Jul 7, 2003
18,858
Worthing
I'm not an expert in the field, but that would make sense. From a layman's perspective, that explanation would certainly work for ceolacanths, being deep ocean fish. It works perhaps less well for crocodiles?

And if, however unlikely, there were some dinosaurs still living in the jungles of The Congo, I assume the same would apply there also.
 


Goldstone1976

We Got Calde in!!
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Apr 30, 2013
13,783
Herts
And if, however unlikely, there were some dinosaurs still living in the jungles of The Congo, I assume the same would apply there also.

You are trying really hard to get me to watch the video, aren't you? :wink:

Hypothetically, I would say that it's even harder to explain that scenario than the crocodile one in terms of a non-changing environment. Deep sea fish? Yep, perhaps the environment hasn't changed that much. Nile crocodile? Hmmmm, surely it has. Tropical rainforest? Got to have changed dramatically - not least the geographic locations of them, meaning that if creatures have lived for millions of years unchanged, they'd have had to go on some pretty meaty migrations.

Anyway, I would assert that there are no dinosaurs (in the commonly accepted meaning of the word) living today in the Congo. Obviously, some might visit the Congo - Tony Pulis on holiday, for example.
 








CheeseRolls

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 27, 2009
5,951
Shoreham Beach
I'm not an expert in the field, but that would make sense. From a layman's perspective, that explanation would certainly work for ceolacanths, being deep ocean fish. It works perhaps less well for crocodiles?

Crocodiles live relatively long lives, with very high rates of infant mortality. It is perfectly possible that evolution is happening but not on a scale compatible with the human timeframe.
 




Goldstone1976

We Got Calde in!!
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Apr 30, 2013
13,783
Herts
Crocodiles live relatively long lives, with very high rates of infant mortality. It is perfectly possible that evolution is happening but not on a scale compatible with the human timeframe.

Yes, that's true, and might be a partial explanation. However, the same can be said for lots of other species too. For examples, sea-based turtles. As far as I know, no-one is saying that they are fundamentally unchanged for millions of years, as they do for crocodiles.

To be clear, I don't want anyone thinking I don't believe in evolution! I do.
 




Albumen

Don't wait for me!
Jan 19, 2010
11,495
Brighton - In your face
Blackbird_2.jpg


Here's a dinosaur. It evolved.
 








KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,802
Wolsingham, County Durham
Crocodiles live relatively long lives, with very high rates of infant mortality. It is perfectly possible that evolution is happening but not on a scale compatible with the human timeframe.

My mediocre knowledge of evolution is that things evolve to adapt to their environment. Crocs are highly evolved already and are perfectly adapted to their environment, so do not need to evolve much. If their environment changes, they will start to evolve faster.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here