HogNose Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Human Speech Traced to Talking Fish http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080718/sc_livescience/humanspeechtracedtotalkingfish From Don Knotts' portrayle of "Mr. Limpet" to the children's favorite "Nemo" and the tuna-pitching character in the "Sorry, Charlie" commercials, we all have seen fish that can talk. But that's just fiction, right? Well ... Researchers say real fish can communicate with sound, too. And they say (the researchers, that is) that your speech skills and, in fact, all sound production in vertebrates can be traced back to this ability in fish. (You got your ears from fish, too.) The new study was led by Andrew Bass (we did not make this up) of Cornell University. The scientists mapped developing brain cells in newly hatched midshipman fish larvae and compared them to those of other species. They found that the chirp of a bird, the bark of a dog and all the other sounds that come out of animals' mouths are the products of the neural circuitry likely laid down hundreds of millions of years ago with the hums and grunts of fish. Click for full article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan133 Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 similarity is not causation. that conclusion is based upon the assumption that fish and other vertebrates have a common ancestor. I see common design were others see common ancestry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 I think it was Dr. Doolittle, that had a scene where the Dr. reveals that fish talk by blowing bubbles, and he can blow bubbles, too (he's sticking a drinking straw into an aquarium), but all the bubbles he makes ate too big, and all the fish will say to him is to tell him to quit shouting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 similarity is not causation. that conclusion is based upon the assumption that fish and other vertebrates have a common ancestor.I see common design were others see common ancestry. And the fact that at one point in your life, you had gills, is that all part of the plan, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tastes Like Chicken Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 The original mother-in-law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Shot Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 similarity is not causation. that conclusion is based upon the assumption that fish and other vertebrates have a common ancestor.I see common design were others see common ancestry. But ancestry can be traced..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Someone trying to get there 15 minutes of fame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titaw Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 So, we came from croakers now? Riiiiiight, keep trying maybe you'll make SOME sense SOME day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 I see common design were others see common ancestry. Ah, but there is an abundance of evidence for common ancestry. It's not based on a 'gut feel' or appearance. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ Many religions people believe in common descent. Common descent doesn't make any statement on where the first life-form came from, not if anything created the environment for evolution to take its course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 What is this guy talking about god made us seven thousand years ago, some people will never learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Why do these always de-volve into black and white God vs. Science sessions. This is a cool study. I'm not sure that it's particularly ground breaking. We have been studying sea mammal vocalizations for decades especially dolphin and whale. Still, it's pretty cool that we can break down and find these genetic links. And it's amazing when you think about it how communication developed from this basic series of grunts, shrieks and yelps designed for defense to what it is today. I sometimes wonder about the depth of marine communication. I believe I've read that some of it can be fairly complex or at least can express fairly complex patterns (ideas?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Why do these always de-volve into black and white God vs. Science sessions. Because someone on the Internet is wrong, and this must be rectified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Why do these always de-volve into black and white God vs. Science sessions. Because there are so many people who think (incorrectly, IMO) that "this universe isn't big enough for science and my religion"? (And therefore, arguing against science has become part of their religion?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy Burner Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Is this the talking fish that Jeff Foxworthy has on his living room wall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 I don't think this news is so shocking. We supposedly evolved from water so what's the big revelation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 Because there are so many people who think (incorrectly, IMO) that "this universe isn't big enough for science and my religion"? (And therefore, arguing against science has become part of their religion?) And arguing against religion has become part of others science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 And arguing against religion has become part of others science. You can make that point in the next religion thread when a scientist argues about religious matters. This is a thread about science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 And arguing against religion has become part of others science. I'm sure there's one somewhere. Don't think I've ever seen one, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan133 Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 Why do these always de-volve into black and white God vs. Science sessions.This is a cool study. I'm not sure that it's particularly ground breaking. We have been studying sea mammal vocalizations for decades especially dolphin and whale. Still, it's pretty cool that we can break down and find these genetic links. And it's amazing when you think about it how communication developed from this basic series of grunts, shrieks and yelps designed for defense to what it is today. I sometimes wonder about the depth of marine communication. I believe I've read that some of it can be fairly complex or at least can express fairly complex patterns (ideas?). Don't get me wrong, its a cool study. what irks me is that the study is based upon an assumption. scientists are supposed to be impartial and unbiased. instead of saying "Fish have as similar capabilities in communication as other mamals and creatures, including humans." they based their studdies conclusion on something that could not be proven through that study.I never made it a God vs Science debate, never intended to, its just iritatating to me that there are pleanty of scientist out there researching common design theory and those who oppose it pretend that it doesn't exsist or treat it as 'flase' science or garbage. Because there are so many people who think (incorrectly, IMO) that "this universe isn't big enough for science and my religion"? (And therefore, arguing against science has become part of their religion?) never argued against their findings per say. and I think there's pleanty of room for science and religion. its narrow-minded and anti-Godly people who proclaim the evil of science in general. science is very useful for studying, understanding, and marveling at the awesome wonder of all God's creation. can we not all agree that this universe is awesomje, inspiring, and breath-takingly beautiful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHOPSkins Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 .....Common descent doesn't make any statement on where the first life-form came from, not if anything created the environment for evolution to take its course.First life.......God who was and is alwaysAnd since you brought cosmology in an evolution thread, please answer how life began....can it be duplicated in a lab?....has it been?.....Accident my _______ matter just appears? energy just appears? Easier to believe in a God that always was.....then energy/matter just appeared Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 First life.......God who was and is alwaysAnd since you brought cosmology in an evolution thread, please answer how life began....can it be duplicated in a lab?....has it been?.....Accident my _______ matter just appears? energy just appears? Easier to believe in a God that always was.....then energy/matter just appeared WTF? I was making the point that the science of evolution isn't necessarily in conflict with faith, as a bunch of posters implied. This is a thread about a theory in biology, not cosmogony. If you have nothing to contribute to the thread, don't bother. Take your religion elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinFaninOKC Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 Singing Fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 http://sacoast.uwc.ac.za/education/resources/fishyfacts/coelacanth.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 While i believe we evolved 400 million years ago during the thaw of the snowball earth etc.. I think the actual speaking and such came much later that "the fish". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfitzo53 Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 While i believe we evolved 400 million years ago during the thaw of the snowball earth etc.. I think the actual speaking and such came much later that "the fish". 400 million years ago was before the dinosaurs even walked the Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.