Human speech is linked to ... fish?

Question

And people say creationists are crazy!

Okay, where are the evolutionists who agree with this?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080718/sc_livescience/humanspeechtracedtotalkingfish

Answer 1

They have a lower jaw bone just like us.  What makes you or anyone else think we are not linked.  All living things on Earth are linked in the evolutionary tree.

What creationists fail to realize is that nothing about evolution discredits anything in the Bible UNLESS you try to take what is in the bible in the literal sense.  As soon as you do that the bible begins to fall apart.  Science is the study of the physical or measurable part of the Universe.  What can not be emperically measured falls outside the realm of science until a way to measure it is found.  

Simply put there is too much hard evidence that the Earth is 4.3 to 4.5 billion years old and that during that time it life evolved from single celled orgainisms to the complex orgainisms seen today.   If your faith isn't strong enough and flexible enough to accept that then it is not strong enough to survive the simple truth.   This is a case where you have to bend, break, or what most creationists do simply live in denial.

Michael, you do not know what you are talking about.  There is everything from predictive models of how the earth was formed which are supported by views of soloarsystems that are still being formed, to radioa isotope dating (not radio carbon dating which is only for organic organisms of less than 200,000 years) to fossil evidence to plate tectonics, to sea floor sedimentation, the list actually goes on for a lot longer.  But since you are not a geologist you wouldn't know about those.  Since you are not a biologist you would not know about mutations, genetic drift or evolutionary time frames.  as a result you spout nonesense that is actually just a repetition of what idiots like Kenneth Hovind say.  You have bought all their nonsense about how they are biology teachers etc.  Well I have news for you, Kenneth Hovind never was a biologist.  What he did was go to seminary school and he did teach biology.  He taught biology in a christioan school that did not want a real biologist to teach it since they would teach evolution.

There is 150 plus years of scientific evidence which supports evolution and NONE that rejects it.  Now just to dispel any nonsense on your part about how scientists look for evidence to support evolution....ANY SCIENTIST THAT CAN HONESTLY SHOW SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO REJECT EVOLUTION IN FAVOR OF CREATIONISM OR ANYTHING ELSE WILL BE FAMOUS AS WELL AS THEN CONSIDERED THE FOREMOST EXPERT IN A COMPLETELY NEW FIELD OF SCIENCE!  

Have you ever even condsidered what would happen to religion if suddenly someone could prove God's existence?  Suddenly faith would have no meaning and religion would become a science!  I don't know about you but that is not a life I envision as worth living.  Use science to answer the questions it was designed to answer (those about how things work) and leave religion in its place of helping us determine morale values.

BTW What I said was that fish have a lower jaw like us and if they had not evolved a lower jaw then our speech would be very different than it is.  I never said fish could talk.  They can and do communitcate like any animals and part of their communication was discovered to be through sound.  Many fish make noises, including drum, snapper, and grouper (just to name a few off hte top of my head)

And yes a number of transitional forms have been found including creatures half way between fish and amphibians, having lungs and legs with true toes and claws but maintaining fish like gills, scales and a finned tail.

Answer 2

We know so little, anything is possible. Who are you to say that fish don't have some auditory way of communicating. Besides, popularized science stories should never be taken too seriously. The media has a habit of interpreting good research in ways that leave it looking only a little bit like the original product.

Answer 3

photoshopped

Answer 4

Yes, I agree with this statement. People who say things like, "i disagree monkeys maybe but fish i mean come on?" (no names), are just ignorant. Fish are one of the first ancestors of all of the animals on the planet, and even though animals have evolved significantly since then, we still have a few features from when we were fish, so yes, I can believe this statement.

Answer 5

I Don't see what is so crazy about it! Humans are ignorant b******s who think that they are the smartest beings on the planet because they did this and they did that! They think that they are the only animals that can talk, the only animals that can whatever! Well it drives me mad! And they think i'm crazy because i say that Humans are the dumbest species on teh planet!

Answer 6

i disagree monkeys maybe but fish i mean come on?

Answer 7

you really do need to read a book.. specifically the origin of species..

fish make noises.. i've heard them.. in addition the few that jeff stated.. croaking gouramis (a common pet fish) rapheal catfish (another pet fish) squirrel and soldierfish (yet more fish people could have knowlege of) to name a very few that i have personally heard..

to think this could in no way over a billion years (which it has been verified, NOT GUESSED, the earth at 4.5 billion years old) change into verbal communication.. (not languange.. language is advanced.. the ability to make sounds isn't..) is just plain ignorant.. of the facts and of logic..

Answer 8

i had seen that topic in Discovery Channel already

Answer 9

Um, I'm not quite sure what your problem is here. Fish can make a noise. So what? It's not like that's new news. Sound travels 7 times faster in water than in air and it makes sense that sound is a more effective way of communicating through water, which is often murky and hard to see through.

Did you think land animals invented sound? Are you going to deny that dogs bark next?

Go back to church.

Answer 10

i think it was def. photoshopped!

Answer 11

I think you'll find that the article merely says that the area of the brain, in fish, responsible for controlling noises such as mating calls is similar in other vertabrates.  Considering the way that we all make vocal noises is fairly similar, is this not expected?

What exactly is your beef with it?  It states nowhere in the article that fish can talk.  I'll admit that the article title is slightly misleading as it is all vertabrate vocal ability, not just human speech, that is 'linked to fish'.