Then how the hell are we able to halt a chickens development in the Egg at an earlier stage in its evolution?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112431-Scientists-Monkey-With-Evolution-Produce-Snouted-Chicken


Quote:

Abzhanov started by trying to pinpoint the gene changes that led to the myriad beak shapes of Galapagos finches. In 2004, he showed that all the finches share a handful of genes crucial to beak development, but instructions for the signalling molecules they control vary from bird to bird. Abzhanov realised that a similar process might underlie the much bigger evolutionary shift from snouts to beaks.    The tip of an alligator snout is made of a separate set of paired bones called the premaxillary, but in birds, these have fused with the main of the upper jaw to form a single, sharp bone.    Abzhanov scanned signalling molecules in alligator and chick embryos and found that two of them -- known as sonic hedgehog and fibroblast growth factor 8 -- show up before the snout and beak form. In gators, however, the molecules were only present along the sides of the face. Chicks express them both at the sides and centre of the developing face. What would happen, he wondered, if he turned that central expression off?    He developed a gel bead full of proteins that stick to the signalling molecules and deactivate them. As the molecules arrived at the centre of the embryonic chick face -- around day 5 -- Abzhanov added his bead to the mix. Sure enough, the chicks developed paired bones. "It looks exactly like a snout looks in an alligator [at this stage]," says Abzhanov.

You think chickens came from alligators?

Is this an observation or an interpretation?

Because god gave us free will and a magic text book.  ;D

Evolution is a change over time.

Playing with genetic make up is not evolution, its scientific interference.

To call the halting of growth evolution shows you dont actually understand it at all.

freediver wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2011 at 7:16am:

You think chickens came from alligators? Is this an observation or an interpretation?

No, chickens, along with all birds came from the smaller Dromaeosauridae class of theropod dinosaurs, where as alligators are members of the Crocodilia class of reptiles...

Verge wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2011 at 8:52am:

Evolution is a change over time. Playing with genetic make up is not evolution, its scientific interference. To call the halting of growth evolution shows you dont actually understand it at all.

A few scientists have been experimenting with reactivating 'unused' dna in chicken embryos. It was done to see if birds really are linked to dinosaurs and seems to work.......One researcher even manage to turn on the genes for long tails (like T-rex and Raptors) and for the carnivore style teeth (or tooth buds) in chicken embryos..

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2011 at 1:17pm:

Verge wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 8:52am: Evolution is a change over time. Playing with genetic make up is not evolution, its scientific interference. To call the halting of growth evolution shows you dont actually understand it at all. A few scientists have been experimenting with reactivating 'unused' dna in chicken embryos. It was done to see if birds really are linked to dinosaurs and seems to work.......One researcher even manage to turn on the genes for long tails (like T-rex and Raptors) and for the carnivore style teeth (or tooth buds) in chicken embryos..

You know that one of the links they used to link that are gone now right ?
I will try and find the article. Was about 3 weeks ago on one of the news sites.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/world/charles-darwin-may-have-just-lost-evolution-exhibit-a-otherwise-known-as-archaeopteryx/story-e6frea8l-1226103215779

feathered dinosaur

Deborahmac09 wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2011 at 4:50pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 1:17pm: Verge wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 8:52am: Evolution is a change over time. Playing with genetic make up is not evolution, its scientific interference. To call the halting of growth evolution shows you dont actually understand it at all. A few scientists have been experimenting with reactivating 'unused' dna in chicken embryos. It was done to see if birds really are linked to dinosaurs and seems to work.......One researcher even manage to turn on the genes for long tails (like T-rex and Raptors) and for the carnivore style teeth (or tooth buds) in chicken embryos.. You know that one of the links they used to link that are gone now right ? I will try and find the article. Was about 3 weeks ago on one of the news sites. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/world/charles-darwin-may-have-just-lost-evolution-exhibit-a-otherwise-known-as-archaeopteryx/story-e6frea8l-1226103215779 feathered dinosaur

Yeah, I already knew that...
Archaeopteryx was always classed as the precursor to birds, and no one ever suggested it could fly....

There's some evidence floating around that some species of raptors had a sort of proto-feather as well.....not for flight, but for temperature control.

I didn't get the chickenosaur thing off the internet, it was from a doco about dinosaurs...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2011 at 1:13pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 7:16am: You think chickens came from alligators? Is this an observation or an interpretation? No, chickens, along with all birds came from the smaller Dromaeosauridae class of theropod dinosaurs, where as alligators are members of the Crocodilia class of reptiles...

Speaking of dinosaurs, Mr. Science, care to explain in 100 words or less how the Jurassic was so efffing hot, if CO2 doesn't cause warming? ::)

Seriously, you are as bad if not worse than an evolution sceptic, the form of thinking you subscribe from is cut from the exact same cloth.

astro_surf wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2011 at 11:12pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 1:13pm: freediver wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 7:16am: You think chickens came from alligators? Is this an observation or an interpretation? No, chickens, along with all birds came from the smaller Dromaeosauridae class of theropod dinosaurs, where as alligators are members of the Crocodilia class of reptiles... Speaking of dinosaurs, Mr. Science, care to explain in 100 words or less how the Jurassic was so efffing hot, if CO2 doesn't cause warming? ::) Seriously, you are as bad if not worse than an evolution sceptic, the form of thinking you subscribe from is cut from the exact same cloth.

I think one of the main reasons was different land masses and different ocean flows.

astro_surf wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2011 at 11:12pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 1:13pm: freediver wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 7:16am: You think chickens came from alligators? Is this an observation or an interpretation? No, chickens, along with all birds came from the smaller Dromaeosauridae class of theropod dinosaurs, where as alligators are members of the Crocodilia class of reptiles... Speaking of dinosaurs, Mr. Science, care to explain in 100 words or less how the Jurassic was so efffing hot, if CO2 doesn't cause warming? ::) Seriously, you are as bad if not worse than an evolution sceptic, the form of thinking you subscribe from is cut from the exact same cloth.

How do you explain the Carboniferous Period having the same temperature as the Jurassic, when the Co2 was between 4500ppm and 7000ppm, when the Co2 levels in the Jurassic had dropped to 1100ppm????

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 9:52am:

astro_surf wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 11:12pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 1:13pm: freediver wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 7:16am: You think chickens came from alligators? Is this an observation or an interpretation? No, chickens, along with all birds came from the smaller Dromaeosauridae class of theropod dinosaurs, where as alligators are members of the Crocodilia class of reptiles... Speaking of dinosaurs, Mr. Science, care to explain in 100 words or less how the Jurassic was so efffing hot, if CO2 doesn't cause warming? ::) Seriously, you are as bad if not worse than an evolution sceptic, the form of thinking you subscribe from is cut from the exact same cloth. How do you explain the Carboniferous Period having the same temperature as the Jurassic, when the Co2 was between 4500ppm and 7000ppm, when the Co2 levels in the Jurassic had dropped to 1100ppm????

CO2 isn't the only thing that warms or cools the earth. Changes in Earths orbit, changes in the Sun and changes in continental drift all affect global temperature.

But having said that, all things being equal, if we increase the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere then we will increase the global temperature.

The_Barnacle wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 11:45am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 23rd, 2011 at 9:52am: astro_surf wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 11:12pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 1:13pm: freediver wrote on Aug 22nd, 2011 at 7:16am: You think chickens came from alligators? Is this an observation or an interpretation? No, chickens, along with all birds came from the smaller Dromaeosauridae class of theropod dinosaurs, where as alligators are members of the Crocodilia class of reptiles... Speaking of dinosaurs, Mr. Science, care to explain in 100 words or less how the Jurassic was so efffing hot, if CO2 doesn't cause warming? ::) Seriously, you are as bad if not worse than an evolution sceptic, the form of thinking you subscribe from is cut from the exact same cloth. How do you explain the Carboniferous Period having the same temperature as the Jurassic, when the Co2 was between 4500ppm and 7000ppm, when the Co2 levels in the Jurassic had dropped to 1100ppm???? CO2 isn't the only thing that warms or cools the earth. Changes in Earths orbit, changes in the Sun and changes in continental drift all affect global temperature. But having said that, all things being equal, if we increase the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere then we will increase the global temperature.

Whoever said all things are 'equal'???
I view Co2 as an insulator...it regulates temperature, so if we increase the concentration....but the 'heat source' cools, then the global temperature will cool, but at a slower rate, and if the 'heat source' warms, then the global temperature will rise, again at a slower rate...

freediver wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 7:22am:

I think one of the main reasons was different land masses and different ocean flows.

Yeah, that's not right at all


Quote:

Climate The Berriasian epoch showed a cooling trend that had been seen in the last epoch of the Jurassic. There is evidence that snowfalls were common in the higher latitudes and the tropics became wetter than during the Triassic and Jurassic.[7] Glaciation was however restricted to alpine glaciers on some high-latitude mountains, though seasonal snow may have existed farther south. Rafting by ice of stones into marine environments occurred during much of the Cretaceous but evidence of deposition directly from glaciers is limited to the Early Cretaceous of the Eromanga Basin in southern Australia.[8][9] After the end of the Berriasian, however, temperatures increased again, and these conditions were almost constant until the end of the period.[7] This trend was due to intense volcanic activity which produced large quantities of carbon dioxide. The production of large quantities of magma, variously attributed to mantle plumes or to extensional tectonics,[10] further pushed sea levels up, so that large areas of the continental crust were covered with shallow seas. The Tethys Sea connecting the tropical oceans east to west also helped in warming the global climate. Warm-adapted plant fossils are known from localities as far north as Alaska and Greenland, while dinosaur fossils have been found within 15 degrees of the Cretaceous south pole.[11] A very gentle temperature gradient from the equator to the poles meant weaker global winds, contributing to less upwelling and more stagnant oceans than today. This is evidenced by widespread black shale deposition and frequent anoxic events.[12] Sediment cores show that tropical sea surface temperatures may have briefly been as warm as 42 °C (107 °F), 17 °C (31 °F) warmer than at present, and that they averaged around 37 °C (99 °F). Meanwhile deep ocean temperatures were as much as 15 to 20 °C (27 to 36 °F) higher than today's.[13][14]

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 9:52am:

How do you explain the Carboniferous Period having the same temperature as the Jurassic, when the Co2 was between 4500ppm and 7000ppm, when the Co2 levels in the Jurassic had dropped to 1100ppm????

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past.htm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 12:52pm:

Whoever said all things are 'equal'??? I view Co2 as an insulator...it regulates temperature, so if we increase the concentration....but the 'heat source' cools, then the global temperature will cool, but at a slower rate, and if the 'heat source' warms, then the global temperature will rise, again at a slower rate..

Yup. You sound exactly like a creationist. Pseudo scientific drivel.

That's all good and well but when the 'heat source' 'warms' or 'cools' throughout geological history the changes have been relatively slight, certainly not strong enough to cause the dramatic changes that they DO cause without the climate having the sensitivity to CO2 that mainstream climate science suggests. So your little thought eperiment really falls flat in the face of evidence.


Quote:

The initial changes in temperature during this period are explained by changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, which affects the amount of seasonal sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface. In the case of warming, the lag between temperature and CO2 is explained as follows: as ocean temperatures rise, oceans release CO2 into the atmosphere. In turn, this release amplifies the warming trend, leading to yet more CO2 being released. In other words, increasing CO2 levels become both the cause and effect of further warming. This positive feedback is necessary to trigger the shifts between glacials and interglacials as the effect of orbital changes is too weak to cause such variation. Additional positive feedbacks which play an important role in this process include other greenhouse gases, and changes in ice sheet cover and vegetation patterns. http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

astro_surf wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2011 at 9:37pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 23rd, 2011 at 9:52am: How do you explain the Carboniferous Period having the same temperature as the Jurassic, when the Co2 was between 4500ppm and 7000ppm, when the Co2 levels in the Jurassic had dropped to 1100ppm???? http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past.htm

Interesting, but I didn't mention the Ordovician glaciation...

So not really relevant...