This is part 7 of a series of commentaries on material presented by Andy McIntosh. This material was presented at a church that I attend. It has been presented other places as well.
For reference, related arguments were presented by McIntosh in the following video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPUU9Wb8yzQ
It should also be noted that this does not mean that the theory of evolution states that mammals evolved 225 Ma. It means it happened sometime before that. New fossils are constantly being found and refining the timeline. The timeline is always subject to refinement based on evidence.
For reference, related arguments were presented by McIntosh in the following video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPUU9Wb8yzQ
Evil-utionists
Persuasive speeches often employ subtle techniques to influence the audience. When listening to the video, one thing that immediately stood out to me was the way McIntosh pronounced "evolutionists". It sounds like he is saying "evil utionists". I only bring this up in case anyone else has that reaction. The way McIntosh pronounces this is the proper pronunciation for the UK.Old Mouse
At 5:56 McIntosh states:
"[...] you can find a huge number of mammals displaced from the region where the evolutionists would say that they should be. We do actually find mammals even down [...] in the Jurassic [period]"McIntosh does not elaborate why he stated that evolutionary biologists would not expect mammals in the Jurassic period. The earliest date for a mammal I could easily find was for the specimen Tikitherium, which is dated to 225 Ma (million years ago). This puts it in the Triassic period, prior to the Jurassic.
It should also be noted that this does not mean that the theory of evolution states that mammals evolved 225 Ma. It means it happened sometime before that. New fossils are constantly being found and refining the timeline. The timeline is always subject to refinement based on evidence.
No Change in The Giraffe
Around 7:08 McIntosh starts discussing the Giraffe. He states:
Giraffes are exactly the same in the fossil record as today. The only possible difference is the size of the skull.
Self-Presented Contrary Evidence
If the size of the skull is different, they aren't the same. Environmental changes resulting in different body sizes doesn't help here. He is claiming that the necks are just as long, but the skulls are different sizes. A genetic change would be required. The evidence presented is contrary to the claim.New Contrary Evidence
The giraffe's closest living relative is an okapi. They are both pictured, the giraffe on the left, the okapi on the right.
Evolution is a theory. Theories are always open to new evidence. Before something is a theory, it already has a very large body of evidence. So the odds of a theory being completely wrong are low, more likely it will get revised. This is one of the strengths of science.
On November 25, 2015, a new study was released:
On November 25, 2015, a new study was released:
This study is an analysis of a new find that broadens our evidence base for giraffe ancestry. You've got to be careful though. There are a lot of scientific journals, and just because you find something on the internet, doesn't make it valid.
The very next step should be pubmed. If you go to pubmed and search for articles about this fossil, you find multiple articles, in multiple journals. Not as many as I'd like, but this is a very new find.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Samotherium
The very next step should be pubmed. If you go to pubmed and search for articles about this fossil, you find multiple articles, in multiple journals. Not as many as I'd like, but this is a very new find.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Samotherium
From the conclusion of the study:
In analysing morphological features and cervical measurements, we find the neck of S. major to be intermediate between O. johnstoni and G. camelopardalis. In the extinct taxon, the cranial (C2–C3) vertebrae demonstrate a mosaic of characters and dimensions that closely resemble either the okapi or the giraffe. The caudal region of the neck (C5–C7) appears more transitional between the two extant taxa. The C6 of S. major is exceptionally unique in that it has a partially excavated ventral lamina, and a ventral ridge that is developed cranially and yet absent caudally. Both quantitatively and qualitatively, we find the S. major neck to be truly intermediate between the okapi and the giraffe.Reading that last sentence, we see that this is a fossil that is transitional between the giraffe and the okapi. It is a giraffe ancestor with a shorter neck. The study provided the following diagram. (a) is a giraffe, (c) an okapi, and (b) this find. Ignore the head.
Comments