Would discovery of species previously thought to be extinct impact the theory of evolution?

[John53]

If he doesn't mind hooking up with a tour by a neverwas no talent, I'm good with it.

They did reform not so long back! Dave never told me about this! He's on the right.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Instead of derailing my own thread, I think the @Subduction Zone was onto something worth discussing regarding the idea of the discovery of an extant form of a previously extinct group that has unexpected traits.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

They did reform not so long back! Dave never told me about this! He's on the right.

They look a lot different. Amazing what a little makeup and long hair do to your looks.

 

[John53]

They look a lot different. Amazing what a little makeup and long hair do to your looks.

It's the tight spandex pants.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's the tight spandex pants.

Yeah. That's it. Maybe the song should be too much beer and fried food.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have been thinking about this. Do you mean by previously unknown traits ones that have no antecedent in the record? I suppose that would make it a possibility, but not definite. Occasionally, rarely, even new phylla are discovered.

Yes, but I then thought of an even better possible refutation as shown in my next post. I suppose if a species with zero similarity to other life was found it would be evidence of an extra terrestrial visitor. So various chimeras would be a better example.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes, but I then thought of an even better possible refutation as shown in my next post. I suppose if a species with zero similarity to other life was found it would be evidence of an extra terrestrial visitor. So various chimeras would be a better example.

Would an extraterrestrial actually refute the theory or just offer evidence of life outside the Earth?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes, but I then thought of an even better possible refutation as shown in my next post. I suppose if a species with zero similarity to other life was found it would be evidence of an extra terrestrial visitor. So various chimeras would be a better example.

It could be evidence of a the culmination of an early origination event that was not squashed from competition with other forms of life, managed to survive and have descendants for us to find. Of course that would demand explanation for how it responded to the same sorts of selection to end up so different as it has.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Would an extraterrestrial actually refute the theory or just offer evidence of life outside the Earth?

That is why I went back on my idea and switched over to chimera. I saw my error as I talked it out a bit.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That is why I went back on my idea and switched over to chimera. I saw my error as I talked it out a bit.

I see. I wasn't clear on the chimera reference.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It has long been known that a crocoduck would result in a rejection of the theory of evolution. Though a crocnbull would not.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see. I wasn't clear on the chimera reference.

You know what a pegasus is I hope. A winged horse, with feathers. Feathers are complex structures that arose in dinosaurs long after the split between our common ancestor wth them. The similarities are much deeper than can be explained by convergent evolution.

Worse yet it would be a hexapod, not a tetrapod.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You know what a pegasus is I hope. A winged horse, with feathers. Feathers are complex structures that arose in dinosaurs long after the split between our common ancestor wth them. The similarities are much deeper than can be explained by convergent evolution.

Worse yet it would be a hexapod, not a tetrapod.

Finding a pegasus would be a conundrum to explain given our existing understanding. Or minotaurs or centaurs. At least they are mixes of mammals though widely divergent species of mammals.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You know what a pegasus is I hope. A winged horse, with feathers. Feathers are complex structures that arose in dinosaurs long after the split between our common ancestor wth them. The similarities are much deeper than can be explained by convergent evolution.

Worse yet it would be a hexapod, not a tetrapod.

Hard to claim that wings developed from forelimbs with that extra set. I think you have hit on something that would actually call our understanding of evolution into question if any were found.

I could buy a unicorn before a pegasus.

 

[John53]

Hard to claim that wings developed from forelimbs with that extra set. I think you have hit on something that would actually call our understanding of evolution into question if any were found.

I could buy a unicorn before a pegasus.

The platypus caused quiet the controversy at first.

 

[PruePhillip]

Recently comments about the discovery of living populations of coelacanths prompted my thinking on how such a discovery appears to be evidence for some to consider it as a basis to reject the theory of evolution. As if finding a species or even more than one species of dinosaur in some remote part of the world is evidence that evolution does not take place.

It is my position that such a finding or any of the findings of modern species of groups previously thought to be extinct is not evidence to reject the theory of evolution.

Finding extant dinosaurs would be surprising. Entirely unexpected. Especially if their morphology were stable enough for cursory examination to identify them given the time since that group went extinct. Would they be the same species as ancestral dinosaurs? Such a high level of similarity would indicate the stability of the environment, but not be evidence to refute the theory of evolution.

Why would anyone think that such a finding would lead to a rejection of the theory of evolution?

No, it happens all time. See the Coelanith or however you spell it.

 

[John53]

Yeah. That's it. Maybe the song should be too much beer and fried food.

I sent the suggested rewrite to Dave. I can't repeat the reply.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The platypus caused quiet the controversy at first.

That was a favorite story of mine as a child. My father liked telling us about how it was considered a fraud at first.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

No, it happens all time. See the Coelanith or however you spell it.

I don't doubt that it does, but I have seen such discoveries used as evidence against the theory of evolution. Out of apparent ignorance is near as I can determine for using that as evidence of such.

 

[SomeRandom]

That was a favorite story of mine as a child. My father liked telling us about how it was considered a fraud at first.

I’d like to think most of our Australian wildlife is considered fake elsewhere.
I mean where else in the natural world would you find a mammal that lays eggs?
(Echidna.)
And have you seen a Cassowary?
It looks like someone simply glued a rock on top of a giant bird.
Not to mention the thorny devil. Which is what you’d get if someone made a mini cactus that could move on its own.