Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdeus
I agree with Mendel on this one. He started a scientific thread and Stangs jumped in and turned it into a debate on the second post. He didn't add anything to the thread and Mendel wasn't asking for opposing opinions. I'm not saying it's bad to state your opinion in any thread, but he certainly didn't add anything positive to the main topic.
FWIW, I found the links very interesting. The fossil record of snakes is pretty sparse, and I understand one theory is that snakes may have undergone several stages of evolution with regards to limbs in which they lost them and then gained them again perhaps more than once or twice during their evolutionary process.
Ok how did I turn it into a debate? I never said my info was right. It is what my opinion is. Like it or not.
Also, I didnt say anything about his link.So what. Your all right it was a good read , but Just becasue i dotn post anything doesnt mean i dont like it. Sheesh.
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankykeno
Hmmm I went a-googlin on that one Daniel LOL. From what little I could find there is a theory that the lack of external ear canals and the fused permanent scale over their eyes is an evolutionary reaction to either subterranean or aquatic conditions. In either environment it would make sense to keep dirt or water out as much as possible so not having ear holes and unprotected eyes (or blinking eyelids...think dirt under an eyelid...OWWW) would be quite a handy thing.
I have read this too, but with the part about the keeping water out makes you wonder about the whole nictitating membrane that crocs and frogs/toads have. Im not disagreeing it is just curious that they preferred to have a permenant scalation over the eye.
~Mike
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
Ain't Mother Nature a cool old broad LOL
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankykeno
Ain't Mother Nature a cool old broad LOL
That she is! :P
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
I don't know about the whole....'because they want to keep dirt out of the eye' reason....because if that was the case....most monitor lizards (since they burrow in soil alot) wouldn't have eyelids and would just shed eyecaps...maybe two different evolutionary paths?...only heaven knows...all we can do is guess ;)
And after all.....Snakes are just lizards without legs and eyelids :D
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendel's Balls
I took the comment as sarcasm trying to stir debate......
My intention was not to turn this into a evolution vs. creaton debate....
Ok which one is it? You got what you asked for. And sometimes when you ask for something its not always what you thought it was going to be. I believe, and read the Bible. But agree its good to atlest have some knowledge what scientist are saying so when you hear it your not thrown off, also thats why none believers should read the Bible so they're atleast well educated in the other side's argument like whenever these things occur.
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire7
Ok which one is it? You got what you asked for. And sometimes when you ask for something its not always what you thought it was going to be. I believe, and read the Bible. But agree its good to atlest have some knowledge what scientist are saying so when you hear it your not thrown off, also thats why none believers should read the Bible so they're atleast well educated in the other side's argument like whenever these things occur.
First, how do you know how much I am educated in the bible?
I certainly am no expert....but I have read portions of it.
Second, does that mean I can criticize your "argument"? That's typically what happens in a debate......Is that what those who like to hijack this thread really want?
This is a scientific thread......by bringing the bible into it you either do as I ask.....and drop it or open the pages of the bible up for the scrutiny of science. There are numerous scientific inaccuracies in the bible...where would you like to start?
Or is it the goal of those who jump in to get the thread locked down and hence censored in the first place?
Look there are things for those of you who don't believe in evolution to get from this thread.....the pic of the garter snake embryo is cool regardless of your stance on evolution.
If you can view this as just developmental biology rather than evo-devo...perhaps you will learn something.
The words, prefixes Evo, Evolution, or Evolutionary shouldnt attract such a melee of anti-evolution reponses....how would you feel if the word bible in another thread prompt me to see that's wrong according science?
PS>Perhaps the bible isn't so anti-evolutionary after all?....God lets "the earth bring forth" the plants, rather than creating them directly (Genesis 1:11)
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
Why is it that just about every other thread in the forums can be "hijacked" with tongue-in-cheek jokes...ribaldry...and all around general silliness.....but this one can't? The original response to the original post was just that....a tongue-in-cheek joke. It wasn't until someone took serious offense to that, that the whole thread turned into what the original poster did not want.
However...the person posting a thread doesn't "own" it. Once you post something here, you leave it open to whatever discussion is going to come of it, whether that be serious discussion or not. If you prefer something more serious, feel free to continue to post and try to direct the conversation the way you'd like it to go.
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLC
Why is it that just about every other thread in the forums can be "hijacked" with tongue-in-cheek jokes...ribaldry...and all around general silliness.....but this one can't? The original response to the original post was just that....a tongue-in-cheek joke. It wasn't until someone took serious offense to that, that the whole thread turned into what the original poster did not want.
However...the person posting a thread doesn't "own" it. Once you post something here, you leave it open to whatever discussion is going to come of it, whether that be serious discussion or not. If you prefer something more serious, feel free to continue to post and try to direct the conversation the way you'd like it to go.
Fair enough......Here's what I believe is a more approriate reponse to discuss alternatives.....http://www.ball-pythons.net/forums/s...7&page=2&pp=10
Melicious did not let the thread get away from topic too much...she wasnt sarcastic in her first response and she ended up creating another thread.....which was locked eventually.
PS>From what I seen ob this site the normal life cycle of a thread is not usually filled with goofiness at the beginning of it. This usually happens towards the end of the thread.
Re: Why snakes dont have legs......(Technical but interesting)
What I've learned in life....that for sure comes in handy here....never take anything seriously....especially yourself....laugh and learn as much as often.....if you dont want a thread to be "high jacked" and you dont want anyone to comment on anything other then what you believe in the lock the stinking thing down....
Stangs:
I dont like anyone...so dont feel special....okay maybe I like Adam a little....but doesnt everyone?
But again Stangs....I wasnt being serious.....okay maybe a little....darn it I cant make up my mind today.
