Theories
- Thread starter kendor
- Start date
Sponsored Links
I have a theory as to why people put unbelievably stupid posts on here. They have been sprinkled by fairy dust and pass out. During their deep sleep they post c**p posts on here and then they wake up not knowing what they have done 
............ and no it does not affect me. I have an anti fairy dust spray!!
............ and no it does not affect me. I have an anti fairy dust spray!!
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2004
- Messages
- 698
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
I have a thought, not quite a theory, there are still not many women "posting" on this forum!
That will get a few comments, but I mean real women, you know, those other ones with.....well, not blokes who make silly comments....
I doubt there's many would like to let us know, in case they lose their source of jokes. (I suppose that's a theory)
That will get a few comments, but I mean real women, you know, those other ones with.....well, not blokes who make silly comments....
I doubt there's many would like to let us know, in case they lose their source of jokes. (I suppose that's a theory)
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Messages
- 1,021
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
Cos we talk boy things?
Anyhow, at least this way when my wife beats me about the head for staying up all night on the computer - I can hand on heart say I was here, and not up to no good talking to laydees!!!
P.S. What moisturiser do you lot use?
Anyhow, at least this way when my wife beats me about the head for staying up all night on the computer - I can hand on heart say I was here, and not up to no good talking to laydees!!!
P.S. What moisturiser do you lot use?
OK. Here's one of my pet theories. There's a generally accepted theory that birds evolved from four legged land based animals. The way I see it, for the forelimbs to go from being useful (either as feets or prehensile appendages), to wings, there would have to be an intermediate stage, where they are not useable as anything.
So my theory is that all birds evolved from fish. That way, the fins could be useful for swimming, and then gradually evolve into gliding appendages (that are still useable as fins), and finally into propper flappy wings. In the meantime, another set of fins could gradually evolve into clingy type appendages (still useable as fins), and finally into feet. simultaneously, the scales could gradually evolve into frilly type things, to become feathers in due course.
So my theory is that all birds evolved from fish. That way, the fins could be useful for swimming, and then gradually evolve into gliding appendages (that are still useable as fins), and finally into propper flappy wings. In the meantime, another set of fins could gradually evolve into clingy type appendages (still useable as fins), and finally into feet. simultaneously, the scales could gradually evolve into frilly type things, to become feathers in due course.
Hmmm, bit of a big evolutionary step from a fish to a bird...
Granted, there are several totally separate branches where flying has evolved: insects evolved flight from land-based insects, birds evolved flight from land-based reptiles (except in Tex's theory of fishy birds ), bats evolved flight from land-based mammals. Then there are all sorts of gliding animals from cat-sized squirrels to funny lizards.
However, there are several evolutionary steps that don't make much sense in the fish-bird model.
For instance, feathers are a very important contributor to a bird's flight. Now, there are birds that swim and dive, however feathers are a hindrance in the water thus it is unlikely any creature would evolve feathers THEN leave the water.
Then there is the respiratory aspect. A fish that flies and then eventually evolves lungs would be a bit daft. Look at the "flying fish", it leaves the water for seconds at a time. It is no big deal for a fish to eventually evolve a means to breathe air, many amphibians can breathe underwater or on dry land. And as the very name "amphibian" would suggest, the course from fish to land animal would have a similar step along the way. There would have been animals that popped their heads out of the water for extended periods or lived in less-than-wet environments (think mudskipper), so they would have found those that could breathe above the water advantageous. But, it would be pointless for this animal to learn to breathe air during the same stage as learning to fly.
There is the warm/cold blood aspect. Sharks are the nearest thing in the modern world to a warmblooded fish, in that they can preheat certain sets of muscles to allow a quick reaction. Now, we know that mammals are warmblooded, and we know that they evolved from land animals. There is a lot of evidence for this. However, I am not aware of any evidence for a warmblooded animal evolving directly from fish.
Then there are eggs. Bird's eggs are very similar, in fact pretty much identical, to reptile eggs. They are nothing like fish eggs or even frogspawn.
Also, nesting tendencies: reptiles build nests in a similar way to birds.
Then you have:
Bone structure (look at the bones in a fish, then the bones in a chicken)
Eyes
Skin
Legs, feet, claws (lizard feet very similar to bird feet)
Brain structure
True, could be another one of these evolutionary parallels, but as you can see there are a lot of similarities and obvious relations between birds and reptiles, and none that I can think of between birds and fish.
There is recent evidence that birds went through a four-winged stage, but I think that is assumed to point towards evolving from quadrupeds rather than different fins.
Granted, there are several totally separate branches where flying has evolved: insects evolved flight from land-based insects, birds evolved flight from land-based reptiles (except in Tex's theory of fishy birds
), bats evolved flight from land-based mammals. Then there are all sorts of gliding animals from cat-sized squirrels to funny lizards.However, there are several evolutionary steps that don't make much sense in the fish-bird model.
For instance, feathers are a very important contributor to a bird's flight. Now, there are birds that swim and dive, however feathers are a hindrance in the water thus it is unlikely any creature would evolve feathers THEN leave the water.
Then there is the respiratory aspect. A fish that flies and then eventually evolves lungs would be a bit daft. Look at the "flying fish", it leaves the water for seconds at a time. It is no big deal for a fish to eventually evolve a means to breathe air, many amphibians can breathe underwater or on dry land. And as the very name "amphibian" would suggest, the course from fish to land animal would have a similar step along the way. There would have been animals that popped their heads out of the water for extended periods or lived in less-than-wet environments (think mudskipper), so they would have found those that could breathe above the water advantageous. But, it would be pointless for this animal to learn to breathe air during the same stage as learning to fly.
There is the warm/cold blood aspect. Sharks are the nearest thing in the modern world to a warmblooded fish, in that they can preheat certain sets of muscles to allow a quick reaction. Now, we know that mammals are warmblooded, and we know that they evolved from land animals. There is a lot of evidence for this. However, I am not aware of any evidence for a warmblooded animal evolving directly from fish.
Then there are eggs. Bird's eggs are very similar, in fact pretty much identical, to reptile eggs. They are nothing like fish eggs or even frogspawn.
Also, nesting tendencies: reptiles build nests in a similar way to birds.
Then you have:
Bone structure (look at the bones in a fish, then the bones in a chicken)
Eyes
Skin
Legs, feet, claws (lizard feet very similar to bird feet)
Brain structure
True, could be another one of these evolutionary parallels, but as you can see there are a lot of similarities and obvious relations between birds and reptiles, and none that I can think of between birds and fish.
There is recent evidence that birds went through a four-winged stage, but I think that is assumed to point towards evolving from quadrupeds rather than different fins.
B
breezer
AdamW said:
just dont tell KFC
AdamW said:Hmmm, bit of a big evolutionary step from a fish to a bird...
Granted, there are several totally separate branches where flying has evolved: insects evolved flight from land-based insects, birds evolved flight from land-based reptiles (except in Tex's theory of fishy birds
However, there are several evolutionary steps that don't make much sense in the fish-bird model.
For instance, feathers are a very important contributor to a bird's flight. Now, there are birds that swim and dive, however feathers are a hindrance in the water thus it is unlikely any creature would evolve feathers THEN leave the water.
Then there is the respiratory aspect. A fish that flies and then eventually evolves lungs would be a bit daft. Look at the "flying fish", it leaves the water for seconds at a time. It is no big deal for a fish to eventually evolve a means to breathe air, many amphibians can breathe underwater or on dry land. And as the very name "amphibian" would suggest, the course from fish to land animal would have a similar step along the way. There would have been animals that popped their heads out of the water for extended periods or lived in less-than-wet environments (think mudskipper), so they would have found those that could breathe above the water advantageous. But, it would be pointless for this animal to learn to breathe air during the same stage as learning to fly.
There is the warm/cold blood aspect. Sharks are the nearest thing in the modern world to a warmblooded fish, in that they can preheat certain sets of muscles to allow a quick reaction. Now, we know that mammals are warmblooded, and we know that they evolved from land animals. There is a lot of evidence for this. However, I am not aware of any evidence for a warmblooded animal evolving directly from fish.
Then there are eggs. Bird's eggs are very similar, in fact pretty much identical, to reptile eggs. They are nothing like fish eggs or even frogspawn.
Also, nesting tendencies: reptiles build nests in a similar way to birds.
Then you have:
Bone structure (look at the bones in a fish, then the bones in a chicken)
Eyes
Skin
Legs, feet, claws (lizard feet very similar to bird feet)
Brain structure
True, could be another one of these evolutionary parallels, but as you can see there are a lot of similarities and obvious relations between birds and reptiles, and none that I can think of between birds and fish.
There is recent evidence that birds went through a four-winged stage, but I think that is assumed to point towards evolving from quadrupeds rather than different fins.
Adam i have threatened that special doctor before..................it could be time
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2004
- Messages
- 1,069
- Reaction score
- 71
- Country
planenut said:
Looks to me as if the female quotient will stay pretty minimal thanks to Adams's posts.
2
2scoops0406
This one got me the other night. Black holes, anyone care to try to explain it to me ? It just doesn't seem to add up. Failing any good explanation, I suppose I could go to calcutta. I mean can you believe it, they've even outsourced black holes
Sponsored Links