Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

New Sea Monster Found, Rewrites Evolution?

malawania anachronus ichthyosaur sea reptile dolphin jurassic

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1    Still Waters

Still Waters

    Deeply Mysterious

  • 37,706 posts
  • Joined:01 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Female

  • Que Sera, Sera - Whatever will be, will be..

Posted 15 May 2013 - 06:54 PM

A new species of dinosaur-era sea reptile is rewriting the books on the evolution of so-called sea monsters, a new study claims.

The newfound—and potentially controversial—Malawania anachronus was a ten-foot (three-meter) long ichthyosaur, a group of dolphin-like creatures that could grow to 65 feet (20 meters) in length. These fast-swimming predators peaked in diversity during the Jurassic period.

http://news.national...ence-evolution/

Posted Image

#2    Myles

Myles

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,117 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 May 2013 - 07:15 PM

A 65 ft dolphin? Holy cow!!


#3    Princess Serenity

Princess Serenity

    Selfie with precious

  • Member
  • 8,294 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Moon Kingdom

  • "There's nothing to fear but fear itself." Franklin D Roosevelt.

Posted 15 May 2013 - 07:31 PM

COOL! Thanks for sharing.


#4    Simbi Laveau

Simbi Laveau

    Overlord A. Snuffleupagus

  • Member
  • 8,266 posts
  • Joined:26 Feb 2012
  • Location:Rim of hell

  • ~So what's all this then ?!

Posted 15 May 2013 - 07:32 PM

Prehistoric waters were like Texas is today ,THEY DO EVERYTHING BIGGER !
:lol:

Miss me?

#5    YukiEsmaElite0

YukiEsmaElite0

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 153 posts
  • Joined:26 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Here (Indiana, Amerika)

  • "If we were blind and had no choice, would we hate each other by the tone of our voice?" - Anthrax, Schism

Posted 16 May 2013 - 12:32 PM

Will this prove to the world that evolution is the only correct theory? Probally not...


#6    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,186 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 16 May 2013 - 01:04 PM

I couldn't find the slightest trace of who said anything about this re-writing evolution (except for National Geographic).  The closest the study came to was that this may require a revision of the ichysomethingsomething timeline.


#7    paperdyer

paperdyer

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 645 posts
  • Joined:04 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina

  • "The place where optimism flourishes the most is the insane asylum."

Posted 16 May 2013 - 01:39 PM

View Postaquatus1, on 16 May 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

I couldn't find the slightest trace of who said anything about this re-writing evolution (except for National Geographic).  The closest the study came to was that this may require a revision of the ichysomethingsomething timeline.

But would have been as eager to read the article if it hadn't had "rewrite" in the title?

Edited by paperdyer, 16 May 2013 - 01:39 PM.


#8    mfrmboy

mfrmboy

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • Joined:18 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Past the stars and beyond the moon !

  • Beam Moo Up!

Posted 16 May 2013 - 01:44 PM

Dang !! Now the poor mules have nothing to step on........ :cry:

One man's TOOL is another man's TOY ! :tu:

#9    ShadowOfMothman

ShadowOfMothman

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 54 posts
  • Joined:29 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:All of time and space. Everything that ever happened or ever will.

  • “There's something that doesn't make sense. Let's go and poke it with a stick."
    ~ The Doctor

Posted 16 May 2013 - 03:43 PM

View Postaquatus1, on 16 May 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

I couldn't find the slightest trace of who said anything about this re-writing evolution (except for National Geographic).  The closest the study came to was that this may require a revision of the ichysomethingsomething timeline.
Actually, it could re-write the evolutionary history of Ichthyosauria. Think of all the possible forms they could have evolved in during those 66 million years! :lol:


#10    Auldaney

Auldaney

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined:16 May 2013

Posted 16 May 2013 - 05:03 PM

Evolutionists claimed Ichthosaurs became extinct in the Jurassic, now they found one in the Cretaceous, 66 million years later according to evolutionists.  

The newfound Ichthosaur—and controversial—Malawania anachronus was a ten-foot (three-meter) long Ichthyosaur, a group of dolphin-like creatures that could grow to 65 feet (20 meters) in length.  Of course they gave it a different name so it would not be recognized as identical to the Jurassic Ichthyosaur, proving it did not evolve for 66 million years!

Evolutionists are shocked because marine reptiles evolve rapidly!

This is the same thing that happened to the Archaeopteryx protoavis found in the Triassic, 70 million years before Archaeopteryx lithographica appeared in the Jurassic without any sign of evolution.

This is because evolutionists are mistaking depositional formations for periods of time, instead of depositional environments and water sorting during one long event.


#11    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,186 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:05 AM

View PostShadowOfMothman, on 16 May 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

Actually, it could re-write the evolutionary history of Ichthyosauria. Think of all the possible forms they could have evolved in during those 66 million years! :lol:

Which is a rather creative use by the article of a study which is actually about how little the fishie evolved in those 66 million years!

View PostAuldaney, on 16 May 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

The newfound Ichthosaur—and controversial—Malawania anachronus was a ten-foot (three-meter) long Ichthyosaur, a group of dolphin-like creatures that could grow to 65 feet (20 meters) in length.  Of course they gave it a different name so it would not be recognized as identical to the Jurassic Ichthyosaur, proving it did not evolve for 66 million years!

Well...not quite.  Species names are more often to indicate a different location, or a particular evolutionary development, or, (back in a more egocentric era) the name of the researcher.  Itchyfishie was not, after all, identical to the Jurassic version of itself.  It was close to identical, which happens regularly enough in evolution to have a specific name assigned to it: Lazarus taxon.  The real rarity in this find was a creature the size of the specimen.  The previous largest species, the coelacanth, was much smaller (although to its credit, it is still alive and swimming).

What is fun about this particular name is that it emphasizes that specific Lazarus phenomena, not just the standard location/evolution/name of scientist we usually see.

Quote

Evolutionists are shocked because marine reptiles evolve rapidly!

Hmm...where did you hear this?

Quote

This is the same thing that happened to the Archaeopteryx protoavis found in the Triassic, 70 million years before Archaeopteryx lithographica appeared in the Jurassic without any sign of evolution.

No, no.

Not only has protoavis not been classified as an Archeopteryx, there is significant debate that it isn't a bird at all, or even an actual single species.

Quote

This is because evolutionists are mistaking depositional formations for periods of time, instead of depositional environments and water sorting during one long event.

Oh...you're one of those.

Well, I'm out.  I would be happy to discuss science, but I'm not going to get into any sort of creationist nonsense.

View Postpaperdyer, on 16 May 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

But would have been as eager to read the article if it hadn't had "rewrite" in the title?

Ultimately...yeah, this is the most likely reason for that particular word choice...


#12    justcalmebubba

justcalmebubba

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 229 posts
  • Joined:16 Feb 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:frankston texas

  • there are many things that bump along in the nite but there are sum of us that bump back

Posted 17 May 2013 - 04:28 AM

looks like a swordfish  but then i dont know dinos  from any time period wait i know my x mother in law  does she count as a dino?


#13    ShadowOfMothman

ShadowOfMothman

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 54 posts
  • Joined:29 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:All of time and space. Everything that ever happened or ever will.

  • “There's something that doesn't make sense. Let's go and poke it with a stick."
    ~ The Doctor

Posted 17 May 2013 - 04:25 PM

View PostAuldaney, on 16 May 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

The newfound Ichthosaur—and controversial—Malawania anachronus was a ten-foot (three-meter) long Ichthyosaur, a group of dolphin-like creatures that could grow to 65 feet (20 meters) in length.
The anatomy of ichthyosaurs was ideal to hunt fast moving prey and escape other, larger species of marine reptiles, such as pliosaurs(a group of reptiles that used their four flippers to move around, and not their tail like the ichtyosaurs, a characteristic that offered great maneuverability but not as much speed as the fish-like tail o the icthyosaurs). So, as you can see, these creatures were so successful and so there was no need for them to change. And who says it did not evolve? The skull has yet to be found.

View PostAuldaney, on 16 May 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

Of course they gave it a different name so it would not be recognized as identical to the Jurassic Ichthyosaur, proving it did not evolve for 66 million years!
So, you think this is a conspiracy? :huh: Well, I sincerely feel sorry for you.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users