Here is a look at the anatomy of the dolphin, a cetacean marine mammal whose closest terrestrial relatives are artiodactyls such as giraffes, cows, pigs and camels.



If evolution is the result of the natural selection of random mutations in DNA, can someone please tell me how such an anatomy entirely suited to a marine environment and replete with blowholes, flukes, dorsal fins, flippers etc could have evolved through molecular tinkering in the DNA? I do realize that the dolphin genome is not yet available. But still.

Don't just say Evolutiondidit.

Here's the answer. *

Atheistoclast wrote: natural selection of random mutations.

Is your problem that you think a dolphin evolved from a fuckin giraffe? Cause that's stupid.
* i think...

You know, 5 seconds on Google would give a basic answer to your question, but judging by your post history, I get the impression that any answer wouldn't be good enough for you if it wasn't the answer you'd already decided is the right one.

matt8819 wrote:Here's the answer. *

Atheistoclast wrote: natural selection of random mutations.

Is your problem that you think a dolphin evolved from a fuckin giraffe? Cause that's stupid.
* i think...

It apparently evolved from a terrestrial ancestor of the giraffe that lived about 80-100 million years ago. I really don't care. I just want to know why it is so different, morphologically, from a giraffe. What is the genetic causal basis?

I am not arguing from a creationist viewpoint. I just want to know why the dolphin is so different anatomically from a giraffe or a cow when they share very similar DNA. Is that so hard to understand.

Can we please move this thread back to the Biology forum?

Atheistoclast wrote:I just want to know why the dolphin is so different anatomically from a giraffe or a cow when they share very similar DNA.

There are anatomically similar animals that have far less in common than whales and giraffes do. I think you're ascribing a little too much important to outward appearance. (And really, webbing over digits and shifting nostrils isn't as amazing as you seem to think it is. Such things can start as a part of simple normal variation and then be selected for by the environment.)

For what it's worth, the last common ancestor between the whale and the giraffe didn't look much like a giraffe either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_cetaceans

Atheistoclast wrote:I am not arguing from a creationist viewpoint. I just want to know why the dolphin is so different anatomically from a giraffe or a cow when they share very similar DNA. Is that so hard to understand.

Can we please move this thread back to the Biology forum?

I think you saying this

Don't just say evolutiondidit

Is part of it. You seem to be ignoring that fact that it was evolution. Or at least ignorant of the fact that we don't have a paper list of the specific mutations that took place to do it.

Atheistoclast, simple question, is this an aquatic or a terrestrial animal?

I.e. is it a terrestrial animal which spends a lot of time in the water, or an aquatic animal which spends time (by current necessity) out of the water?

Can you think why I might have chosen this particular animal?

Atheistoclast wrote:Here is a look at the anatomy of the dolphin, a cetacean marine mammal whose closest terrestrial relatives are artiodactyls such as giraffes, cows, pigs and camels.



If evolution is the result of the natural selection of random mutations in DNA, can someone please tell me how such an anatomy entirely suited to a marine environment and replete with blowholes, flukes, dorsal fins, flippers etc could have evolved through molecular tinkering in the DNA? I do realize that the dolphin genome is not yet available. But still.

Don't just say Evolutiondidit.

No doubt you are trying to make some kind of argument against evolution by natural selection by pointing out how different this animal is from the land mammals it is distantly related to. However, you are really just providing evidence for evolution by posting this picture.

Let's take a close look at it. There are quite a few differences from a giraffe, but there are also lots of similarities. It has a large, strong backbone, just like a giraffe. It's internal organs are a lot like a giraffes. Take a look at the flipper; notice how the bones in it look a lot like the bones in a hand or a foot. Also, notice how it has a pelvis, even though the animal's ancestors lost their legs long ago.

If evolution is true, then if some humans decide to take to the oceans as the ancestors of cetaceans did, then they will acquire marine adaptations through changes in their DNA. I propose we conduct an experiment and see if a race of mermen evolve.

But evolution is false, so we might not even bother.

And you wanted this kept in the Biology section... why? You didn't even last more than a page.

Atheistoclast wrote:If evolution is true, then if some humans decide to take to the oceans as the ancestors of cetaceans did, then they will acquire marine adaptations through changes in their DNA. I propose we conduct an experiment and see if a race of mermen evolve.

But evolution is false, so we might not even bother.

Great idea. lead the way AC, we're right behind you.

Atheistoclast wrote:If evolution is true, then if some humans decide to take to the oceans as the ancestors of cetaceans did, then they will acquire marine adaptations through changes in their DNA. I propose we conduct an experiment and see if a race of mermen evolve.

But evolution is false, so we might not even bother.

Although not evolution in the strictest sense, yes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12151830

Suck it.

It's just Atheistoclast.

AlohaChris wrote:-snip-

Already posted that, don't even bother. I called it on the third post.

K'den we done here.