Fossil shows how fish made the leap to land (Darwin, evolution)

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Mr Spinkles

But not everyone who opposes evolution/big bang theory believes in a Young Earth...

Darn it, that's a good point. But creationist isn't any better though and much more vague IMO. Maybe we just figure out a new term to use....put a vote on it?

[Flappycat]

Originally Posted by Victor

Those front fins may have been used for digging nests on beaches in order to protect their young from predators in the water. It doesn't look like a configuration that would have been particularly useful for hunting upon land prior to further adaptation, though the absence of any precedent may not have required much speed or defense of invertebrate shore-dwellers of the time. My rationale for them being nest-diggers is that the adaptation of more complex limbs and unexpressed digits would have been useful in pawing through the sand; if you will look closely, you can see the bone within the fin from which "forearms" would logically have developed. Possibly, invertabrate life was so abundant and unopposed in this world that there would have been an unusually powerful drive to adapt fully to life on land to facilitate taking advantage of game that rested further inland. In fact, as their game adapted to their presence, they would have had a choice between moving inland and away from the shores, where their game was getting faster and meaner, or improving their mobility on land, both of which would have led to them adapting more fully to surface life.

Mind you, this may not be our direct ancestor. It is perfectly possible that this was an evolutionary dead-end that descended from our actual ancestor or was only marginally related. However, this fellow does compellingly resemble many land-dwelling creatures that we are familiar with.

[painted wolf]

I dont' think that the digging nests thing is likely sorry....
fish eggs like amphibians need lots of water to survive. The earliest evidence of watertight eggs doesn't show up untill 220 mya. Although early reptiles are found as late as 350 mya.

now what the legs are good for is for getting from one puddle to another. But even this isn't likely the best reason for them. Crawling around on the bottom of the water to stalk prey is IMHO most likely. Early amphibians wern't very capable of moving around on land, as new studies of Icthyostega show. They were likely stalkers similer to crocodilians. Walking lets you control your speed and stop on a dime, very helpful for sneaking. Also the legs can provide a bit of a boost when it comes time to spring after your prey.

Interestingly this guy also has adaptations to his 'ear' that show them becomeing more like amphibian ears. The reason for this change likely had to do with a bottom dwelling lifestyle. The impoved 'ear' would help keep silt from clogging the gills.

wa:do

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by Mr Spinkles

by what name shall we call those who explicitly evolution/big bang theory and oppose its teaching in schools and/or support teaching their theology in publicly-funded science classes? What do we call that specific group of "creationists" on the opposing side of the issue?

Good question Spinks! I for one believe that the germ of life was God's hand and that he used evolution to create life for him. I will always consider myself a creationist AND and an evolutionist. Maybe we are crevolutionists???