Smarch of the Fossil Penguins

| 159 Comments

My research doesn’t have an easy outreach component. There is only so much you can do to get K-12 students interested in the bioinformatics of indels. My colleague Dan Ksepka has a much better time getting the public interested in his research. Of course, he works on the giant fossil penguins of Peru (http://fossilpenguins.wordpress.com/). He recently gave a talk on penguin evolution to open NC State’s seminar series for research professionals. Luckily it has been archived online. So grab the munchkins, sit them in front of the monitor, and let them marvel the awesomeness of penguins the size of Danny Devito.

Fossil Penguins: A 60 Million Year Journey From Wings to Flippers

159 Comments

This was great, Reed. Thanks for sharing!

But do they carry umbrellas?

YEC here. The title implies it took 60 million years to go from wing to flipper. Laying aside dates. the fossil penguins had arrived long before the 60 million by their datings. A minor point. Creationism agrees and welcomes that these were flying birds first. its welcome they were more healthy, that is diversity including hugh sizes, in the past with only remnants alive today. lHowever the idea of in betweens between winging it and flipping it needs evidence. I say its impossible. In fact it was instant change within actual lives of the first birds or their kids that led to a swimming life and not a flying one. in fact atrophied wings is a common thing in the fossil record in the islands of the pacific. Its simply the extreme area of the Antarctic that allows some of the bigger ones and in large numbers to survive. A common thing as with mush oxen or Llamas. Otherwise extinction rules the earth. I see penguins as a post flood adaptation of some bird. It changed instantly and ever since has been the same except for losing diversity. Their cute.

Robert Byers said:

YEC here. The title implies it took 60 million years to go from wing to flipper. Laying aside dates. the fossil penguins had arrived long before the 60 million by their datings. A minor point. Creationism agrees and welcomes that these were flying birds first. its welcome they were more healthy, that is diversity including hugh sizes, in the past with only remnants alive today. lHowever the idea of in betweens between winging it and flipping it needs evidence. I say its impossible. In fact it was instant change within actual lives of the first birds or their kids that led to a swimming life and not a flying one. in fact atrophied wings is a common thing in the fossil record in the islands of the pacific. Its simply the extreme area of the Antarctic that allows some of the bigger ones and in large numbers to survive. A common thing as with mush oxen or Llamas. Otherwise extinction rules the earth. I see penguins as a post flood adaptation of some bird. It changed instantly and ever since has been the same except for losing diversity. Their cute.

Once more, Byers makes a statement that makes him look idiotic. There is absolutely nothing there that is supported by any evidence, let alone makes even a bit of sense.

Robert Byers isn’t just idiotic, he’s also illiterate. Could someone possibly remind him that Peru isn’t a Pacific island. It’s actually a region (actually currently a country) on the South American mainland. ‘Their cute’ what? …

Robert Byers said: However the idea of in betweens between winging it and flipping it needs evidence. I say its impossible.

I wonder if this fellow watched the presentation, or is simply riffing on the title. The speaker talks in detail about the transition from aerial to underwater flight, with lots of examples of living and extinct birds that are capable of both.

More on topic, I noticed that the speaker uses the word “penguin” to refer not only to the body plan and lifestyle of the birds we all know and love, but also to the evolutionary lineage that includes volant birds. Now I am curious about what features might clue us in to recognizing a flighted penguin in the fossil record!

Thanks for posting this, Reed. Yeah for NCSU researchers!

(NCSU grad, here.)

Yea, penguins are obviously the result of the fall. They fell off a rock and into the ocean and they instantly started to swim, but they couldn’t possibly have evolved in millions of years. I think they’re downfall was all of the dancing. You know what that leads to. We got pictures of em doin it on TV, so who could argue? And there ain’t no mediates neither.

Just another sample of creationist doin researches that disprovens evilution don’t ya knows.

We love you Robert. Keep up the good work.

Robert Byers said:

I say its impossible.

You say that like it matters.

Robert,

You should look at the presentation again. Apparently there were almost fifty different species of intermediates. Now how could you have missed that?

Thanks to Reed for the great link.

DS said: Now how could you have missed that?

I think that’s a 24:7:365 habit of his.

Thanks for sharing this Reed. Dan has done some admirable work in public outreach regarding his paleobiological research. He spoke to the New York Paleontological Society back in 2005 and 2006 while he was in the midst of completing his Ph. D. research at Columbia (though based at the American Museum of Natural History, where he gave other talks there, aside from the two he gave to the New York Paleontological Society, which meets at the museum.).

Robert Byers said: However the idea of in betweens between winging it and flipping it needs evidence. I say its impossible.

Impossible like the Phalacrocoracidae?

Science Avenger said:

Robert Byers said:

I say its impossible.

You say that like it matters.

He’s probably trying to accommodate the transitional form that carries an umbrella and resembles Burgess Meredith.

A common thing as with mush oxen

Is that a cross between a cow and a husky?

Karen S. said: Is that a cross between a cow and a husky?

No, that’s a malamoo.

mrg said:

Karen S. said: Is that a cross between a cow and a husky?

No, that’s a malamoo.

Are you sure you’re not thinking of a Spitzenstein?

Robert Byers said:

moronic babbling snipped

I see penguins as a post flood adaptation of some bird. It changed instantly and ever since has been the same except for losing diversity. Their cute.

In other words, you’re saying that, because you don’t want to learn about science, God magically poofed penguins into existence, using magic, after the Flood, leaving no evidence whatsoever.

So, why do we need to believe that your half-assed bellybutton contemplation is more scientific than actual science, and why are we supposed to assume that your babblings are supposed to supercede actual fossil evidence?

What genius at NCSU had the idea to use Silverlight for multimedia content? :((

Reed,

That was a fascinating video. Thanks so much for posting it.

The cherry on top of that steaming pile of turds (to mix metaphors) was the use of ‘their’ for ‘they’re’.

KP said:

Robert Byers said: However the idea of in betweens between winging it and flipping it needs evidence. I say its impossible.

Impossible like the Phalacrocoracidae?

KP, I think you mean Fratercula. Puffins use their wings to swim; cormorants use their feet.

Walter said:

What genius at NCSU had the idea to use Silverlight for multimedia content? :((

Probably someone in IT who only understands Windows. I can’t watch the video because I only have Apple.

Stanton said:

Are you sure you’re not thinking of a Spitzenstein?

That sounds like the product of a lab in a Transylvanian castle. “IT’S ALIVE! IT’S ALIVE!”

Robert Byers said:

I say its impossible.

Well, I’m convinced.

KP said:

Robert Byers said: However the idea of in betweens between winging it and flipping it needs evidence. I say its impossible.

Impossible like the Phalacrocoracidae?

Wrong family. Those are foot-propelled divers. Substitute Alcidae or Hydrobatidae and you’ll have better luck.

BobbyEarle said:

Robert Byers said:

I say its impossible.

Well, I’m convinced.

Me too. I’m packin’ it in and going out for a bicycle ride.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/0[…]o046271.html

let’s get this posted and start shredding klinghoffer’s silly arguements…

jj23 said:

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/0[…]o046271.html

let’s get this posted and start shredding klinghoffer’s silly arguements…

What arguments? I didn’t see any in the article you linked to. Just assertio

jj23 said:

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/0[…]o046271.html

let’s get this posted and start shredding klinghoffer’s silly arguements…

What arguments? I didn’t see any in the article you linked to, not even bad ones. There were a few assertions. Is that what you meant?

mrg said:

Stanton said:

Are you sure you’re not thinking of a Spitzenstein?

That sounds like the product of a lab in a Transylvanian castle. “IT’S ALIVE! IT’S ALIVE!”

You’re thinking of the Moldovan Shishkakeeshond, better known as the “Transylvanian Bird Tepes.”

Similar, but the Spitzenstein has neckbolts, and the Bird Tepes has this really bad habit of literally pointing out birds.

steve p. said:

You have to be mad to think design in not imbedded in life. You have to be completely irrational to assert a dichotomy between (designing) Man and (non-designing) nature.

Design is fact. Design is success. Design is life.

There are no coincidences, except in a reductionist Darwinian world.

Assertion, assertion, assertion. You sound like CS Lewis after a bit too much coffee. To each assertion, we’ll keep asking the same questions: How do you know that? Where is your evidence? What is the mechanism for these design claims of yours. When and how does it happen? How can you distinguish between design and non-design?

No answers, no persuasion, simple as that. But being horrifically closed-minded whilst accusing others of same at least has some entertainment value. Try this at your next business meeting, let us know how it goes.

Good grief! Is this steve p really as delusional as he appears to be? He ASSERTS that we can SEE evidence of DESIGN under the microscope. If he was referring to the bacterial flagellum, that might make sense. But resistance to antibiotics, not so much. BTW, what about resistance to pesticides by insects? Rachel Carlson predicted this in her book Silent Spring, yet she, as far as I know, didn’t believe in Intelligent Design. Indeed, resistance to antibiotics by bacteria and resistance to presticides by insects are basic predictions of natural selection. NOT INTELLIGENT DESIGN! So steve p is promoting FRAUD, like every other stupid Creationist who barges in here!

Of course people use design when doing things.

That has nothing to do with whether life prior to us was deliberately engineered by somebody or something.

Sheesh.

All this commentary without a single mention of the classic Bloom County series on “Penguin Evolution vs. Scientific Penguinism”?

Penguin Evolution is a fib!

(That may be where Byers gets his material.)

There are certainly a variety of particulars like that to take into consideration. That is a great level to carry up. I provide the ideas above as basic inspiration but clearly there are questions just like the one you deliver up the place an important thing will likely be working in sincere good faith. I don?t know if best practices have emerged around things like that, but I am sure that your job is clearly identified as a fair game. Both boys and girls really feel the impression of only a second’s pleasure, for the rest of their lives.

Do you have a spam issue on this website; I also am a blogger, and I was curious about your situation; many of us have developed some nice practices and we are looking to swap techniques with other folks, be sure to shoot me an e-mail if interested.

Oh wonderful - spam trying to sell ways of dealing with spam! :p

Henry J said: Oh wonderful - spam trying to sell ways of dealing with spam! :p

Oh come on. Haven’t you run into “free virus checks” yet?

Cons: Feels like a first-generation version of a new product line rather than a sequel to the iPod nano. Video, gaming, camera, speaker, and microphone features are amongst a laundry list of capabilities dropped from the new model, precluding it from being used as a complete or even substantial replacement for its three most recent predecessors, primarily by users with video needs. New glossy body colors are weaker than ones introduced in last two years. Multi-Touch screen has only one multi-touch gesture, lacking for others that might have made the device more interesting, while the lack of physical Home and track control buttons complicates the device’s ease of use; plenty of swiping is necessary. Use of clip, as well as connection and disconnection of accessories, can be a modest challenge while the device is being used.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Reed A. Cartwright published on May 2, 2011 9:08 PM.

Barite was the previous entry in this blog.

Laboratory synthesis of an independently reproducing vertebrate species is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter