Two Arguments On The Theory Of Evolution

The ancestors of the whales transitioned from being land bearing animals to becoming animals that live in the ocean. While the original ancestor of whales lived on land as it evolved it was able to start to enter the water until it struggled more to get on land than to get in water until the whale’s ancestors began to live exclusively underwater.

The evolutionary path of a whale is a fascinating process of a terrestrial mammal that evolves into a marine mammal. This evolutionary path started with one of the earliest ancestors called “Pakicetus”. A Pakicetus was discovered to be a land animal with four legs that had teeth as carnivores. It skull structure was long, but this organism didn’t look like any marine animal. The scientist then discovered that on the skull’s ear region it was surrounded by a bony wall. This feature on an organism only was distinct from one type of species, scientist discovered that this animal “Pakicetus” was an ancestor of a whale. By comparing the early whales Pakicetus to the next generation of ancestors Ambulocetus, the Ambulocetus whale looks more like

Charles Darwin proposed the theory of evolution to explain the origin, diversity and complexity of life. I will will disprove evolution by showing that natural selection only explains small evolutionary changes, collectively known as microevolution. Natural selection cannot drive large evolutionary changes, macroevolution. I will also show that the primordial soup, in which life supposedly evolved, did not exist.

Recent evidence suggests that whales may not have always inhabited the oceans. Bones of an ancient ancestor of modern day whales, the Basilosaurus, were discovered in Pakistan that suggest whales evolved from a wolf-like creature. This genus of an early whale lived 34-40 million years ago in the late Eocene. These fossils show many different features in common with both modern day whales and modern day land mammals. Since the discovery of these bones, many other evidences show that whales are a likely descendant of the Basilosaurus through many different ways, such as embryologic comparison and DNA testing. Whales aren’t the only suspected descendants

Almost all of the black whales, present the same kind of genes of Tilikum (they can get aggressive)

The fossil allows us to reconstruct relationships between prehistoric creatures and those found today. It was discovered that the fish had resided in a shallow stream but obtained arm and leg bones similar to an animal as well. This allowed the fish to push-ups. By explaining experiments by various genetic researchers, there was a gene discovered called Sonic hedgehog. This gene is responsible for the shaping of hands, fins, or paws. Sonic hedgehog’s normal function can be disrupted by the recombination of its digits. This is the gene that explains that there is no emergence of a new DNA, but, rather, the gene was recombined in a new way. Most of the text elaborates on the close relations between invertebrates and unicellular creatures as well far more complex living

The first thing to notice on this evogram is that hippos are the closest living relatives of whales, but they are not the ancestors of whales. In fact, none of the individual animals on the evogram is the direct ancestor of any other, as far as we know. That's why each of them gets its own branch on the family tree.

In his book, Why Evolution is True, Coyne proposes five predictions of evolution and introduces the idea of retrodictions. Both his prediction of common ancestry in the fossil record and his retrodiction of vestigial structures can be observed through the lineage of the modern whale. Creationists can reject this prediction and retrodiction, yet there is enough information disprove their opinion. The history of whales provides a comprehensive fossil record that presents sufficient information to explain the prediction and retrodiction introduced by Coyne. It has been discovered that modern day whales can be traced back many generations, and each one can be considered a transitional form.

From the common ancestor to organisms as complex as the Bonobo, certain species have changed to the point where they cannot be seen as related to their ancestors at all. The Bonobo (Pan paniscus), the Emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae), the domestic Dog (Canis lupus familiaris), the Rhinoceros (Rhinocerotidae), Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus), Lion(Panthera leo), and American Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) are all prime examples of organisms that are all related to one common ancestor.

Dolphins are found to be directly related to wales and porpoises. Fossil evidence has been found from the second epoch of the Tertiary period that indicates early dolphins were already aquatic 45-50 million years ago. Scientists believe that animals that spent a great deal of time hunting for food around water areas may have through an amphibious stage before becoming solely committed to the water. Through changes in their teeth, scientists were also able to deduce that true cetaceans developed several millions of years after they took to the seas.

The first ancestor, the Indohyus, was discovered 48 million years ago. Indohyus’ were 4 legged and lived on land, the complete opposite of the modern day whale. Down the timeline to the Ambulocetus, more evolved whales showed higher levels of saltwater oxygen isotopes. This is important because it shows that they spend way more time in the water than their ancestors. Also, it means they lived in a nearshore marine habitat and were able to drink saltwater like today’s whales are able

The whales couldn’t find any food on land so they adapted their behavior and eventually the way they look to survive in water. Each couple million years the fossils change. Whales started off looking sort of like a wolf. Then, after a while their back bone started to change. At one point whales almost looked like a seal. () Whales over time lost most of their fur, changed from paws to webbed feet to fins, and their nostrils changed into a blow hole. Whales probably adapted early on because some of them were dying off of they needed food so they went in the water to hunt some fish. They were most likely successful at this so they continued to do this, and evolved to make it easier. Whale evolution supports the theory of evolution because you can see the fossils, and how they changed. Also, you see the fossil record and timeline of the organisms. Because of this you see what they looked like, where they lived, and how the adapted. Scientists can make a fossil record of whales because of the rock layers and fossil record. The law of superposition says that any undisturbed sequence of rocks deposited in layers, which means scientists can look at those layers to create a fossil record. You can use absolute and relative dating to find the age of any fossil. Scientists used half life of some type of chemical to find the absolute age of a whale fossil. Also, they looked at fossils and whale relatives to find relative age, like some

The main differences between whales and dolphins are evident in their amino acid sequences. Such are seen in the recent changes in dolphin myoglobin. In the phyla class, the sperm whale and the

Despite the fact that evolution has unsurmountable evidence and years of research behind it, there is still a startling amount of people who are “non-believers” in evolution. So much so that there are entire communities of skeptics who devote their time to disproving evolution. One such group is the Institute for Creation Research, which among other things, owns a “creationist museum” and encourages individuals to start “creation clubs”. One of the foremost scientist of the group Dr.Henry Morris makes his case in his article titled “The Scientific Case Against Evolution”

Both species of chimpanzees and bonobos proved to be the closest to human with numbers as low as 1% difference between human and primate genes such as myosin. Using the macroevolution based results from the BLAST tool, I was able to make theoretical inferences regarding the theory itself. Due to the similarity in the respective proteins of both humans and primates, there are various views of the dynamics of macroevolution that could argue for the theory of humans and primates sharing a common ancestor. This type of macroevolution, either through gradualism or punctuated equilibrium, could have resulted in the distinct genomes of both humans and primates, but also show the similarity of both sequences. As I analyzed the BLAST lab and its results, I was able to understand more behind the theory of macroevolution and test for myself some of the evidence that is used to back it up. I am still interested in comparing more genomes and have future questions on the similarity or difference between distinct species such as fish and