Jump to content


Photo

Why Do Whales And Dolphins Have Lungs And Not Gills?


  • Please log in to reply
93 replies to this topic

#81 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 15 February 2010 - 11:46 AM

Plus this thread proves absolutely nothing. We know what we know, the OP is asking questions that neither side knows the answer to, and he knows it.

We will be left with the same speculative assumptions as before. This whole thread is just a battle of whos speculation beats whos.

So why do Whales and Dolphins have lungs and not Gills? Well, now why ask a question that cannot possibly be answered.

So what did you ask for upon asking an unanswerable question? You asked for opinons, and speculation. From both sides, because neither knows exactly why.

Both sides cling to their faith on why, but neither knows absolutely why.

If you or anyone in this thread claims to know why... then they need to explain, and show how it happened, when it happened, why the path was taken, and how many years ago this person witnessed such a happening.

Otherwise such statements will be faith based, both sides included.

#82 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 February 2010 - 12:26 PM

The whale could not survive with gills, and be warm blooded at the same time.  Jason is not speculating on this.  It's just a fact that Warm Blooded, and Cold Blooded creatures have very different systems.  Even though they seem very similar by design, yes I say design because it's an absolute fact that their designs are similar based on empiracle, witnessed studies.  Not wishy washy speculating.

View Post


What are you talking about??? Please follow the conversation. I never said a whale could survive with gills. I was responding to Jason saying lungs are better at absorbing oxygen that gills and correlating warm blooded to having lungs. Stop trying to be so confrontational. Most whales couldn't survive with gills, not because they're warm blooded but because their volume would mean gills would take up a prohibitively large amount of surface area.

It's common knowledge that warm-blooded animals all have 4 chambered hearts.

If you had paid attention to the entire thread, it isn't just about gills anyway. There's the whole issue of the 2nd set of paired appendages, the holes behind the eye sockets, the horizontal tale, etc, etc, etc. So many traits that are almost exclusively seen in animals that can at least live on land, but they're aquatic and marine mammals don't at all resemble other aquatic life. Why is this??? Evolutionary theory presents a perfectly good explanation. That's why it gets taught in schools and creation doesn't.

#83 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 15 February 2010 - 02:30 PM

What are you talking about???  Please follow the conversation.  I never said a whale could survive with gills.  I was responding to Jason saying lungs are better at absorbing oxygen that gills and correlating warm blooded to having lungs.  Stop trying to be so confrontational.  Most whales couldn't survive with gills, not because they're warm blooded but because their volume would mean gills would take up a prohibitively large amount of surface area.

It's common knowledge that warm-blooded animals all have 4 chambered hearts.

If you had paid attention to the entire thread, it isn't just about gills anyway.  There's the whole issue of the 2nd set of paired appendages, the holes behind the eye sockets, the horizontal tale, etc, etc, etc.  So many traits that are almost exclusively seen in animals that can at least live on land, but they're aquatic and marine mammals don't at all resemble other aquatic life.  Why is this???  Evolutionary theory presents a perfectly good explanation.  That's why it gets taught in schools and creation doesn't.

View Post


I was following the conversation, and that's why I responded. I already know that Whales barely resemble land mammals, but their skeletal make-up slightly resembles that of other mammals, and none-mammals alike.

Sharks and dolphins share a very similar design, only on the outside appearence. To claim that dolphins and whales don't resemble other sea life is not entirely true. Yes they don't have the same circulatory systems, yes they don't have scales, and don't breath through gills. But the structure that makes up the design flows well with other sea life, that no other land mammal has.

They have traits that are also designed very much like other none-mammals in the sea, such as sharks, only configured in a slightly different way towards the design of oceanic travel.

Of course Evolution tries to explain the why, and Creation also tries to explain the why. But the fact remains on biased opinon, because no one knows the why. All of it is speculation.

Christian Schools teach Creation, and None-Christian Schools teach Evolution. It all depends on which school you attend, the opinion of the people who attend, and the majority of the people who attend those schools. Evolution is not the only explanation, because Creation can explain it just as well.

You might say... Nature did it! There's a how, and why to nature did it.

I say God did it! There's a how, and why to God did it.

It is by our biased opinions, upon which we choose the path to follow. I choose Creation, because I believe the explanations that it holds are true. You may believe otherwise.

#84 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 February 2010 - 05:59 PM

I was following the conversation, and that's why I responded.  I already know that Whales barely resemble land mammals, but their skeletal make-up slightly resembles that of other mammals, and none-mammals alike.

View Post


Whales' outward resemblance to terrestrial mammals isn't major I agree, but what about the characters common to all terrestrial mammals that I mentioned??

Sharks and dolphins share a very similar design, only on the outside appearence.  To claim that dolphins and whales don't resemble other sea life is not entirely true.  Yes they don't have the same circulatory systems, yes they don't have scales, and don't breath through gills.  But the structure that makes up the design flows well with other sea life, that no other land mammal has.

View Post


Whales also lack a second set of fins, their tails are horizontal, and their skeletons are totally different.

I would just like to know why God designed them in such a way that common ancestry with land mammals is such an easy conclusion to reach. Why would you design them that way Scott??

#85 larrywj2

larrywj2

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Sparks, Nv

Posted 15 February 2010 - 10:34 PM

This is an interesting one. Fish use gills to breathe. This means they can't drown, and don't need to surface to breathe....
Does The Theory of Creation have a parallel explanation, with evidence?

View Post

I had to re-write this earlier post. The addition could not be left out.

God is creative. Evidence; look around.

There will not be a "parallel" explanation. Parallel implies similarity to evolution but in a creation manner. Regarding creation, the origin ancestors were created as is. There is no lineage which ends in the original whale. It was the first whale. All the ocean organisms which swam with it on its first day, were the original ancestors of the organisms we see today.

It is amazing to me how many arguing against YEC actually DO NOT understand what YEC is.

#86 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 15 February 2010 - 11:46 PM

What's the point of "designing" multiple ways to do the same thing??? As an engineer myself, I find it is most productive to solve one problem then move onto the next.

What are you talking about??? Please follow the conversation. I never said a whale could survive with gills. 


It sure sounds like you insinuated just that to setup a design strawman. You claim that different designs makes no sense from a design prespective until your confronted with evidence of why it would'nt be possible.

Besides,God creating different kinds was'nt an attempt to be efficent,productive,etc. He did it for his good pleasure and glory. What is unlikely is a terrestrial mammal needing to adapt to an aquatic environment. I'm sure it was comfortable to start with like all the other terrestrial species that suddenly show up and remain unchanged through out their history in the fossil record.

Whales' outward resemblance to terrestrial mammals isn't major I agree, but what about the characters common to all terrestrial mammals that I mentioned??


If it was'nt for those basic similairities,then whales would'nt be mammals. Taxonomy is another science one must reject to be an evolutionists.




Enjoy.

#87 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 February 2010 - 07:01 AM

If it was'nt for those basic similairities,then whales would'nt be mammals. Taxonomy is another science one must reject to be an evolutionists.
Enjoy.

View Post


No, taxonomy and phylogeny fit perfectly with evolution.

#88 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 16 February 2010 - 10:16 AM

Lol, excellent ownage flatland.

View Post


And the evidence of that is where? He showed that a polar bear ate a whale, I provided evidence of a killer whale eating a polar bear. :)

No owange, just more his skirting of the issue (once again).

#89 Flatland

Flatland

    Junior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Age: 24
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • NYC

Posted 20 February 2010 - 12:42 AM

And the evidence of that is where? He showed that a polar bear ate a whale, I provided evidence of a killer whale eating a polar bear.  :rolleyes:

No owange, just more his skirting of the issue (once again).

View Post

So killer whales can eat polar bears...what exactly is that suppose to prove? In fact, you didn't even show any evidence, just a website with a bunch of speculations. Your original claim was that whales and dolphins are more successful than sharks and you have yet to show a single evidence - although I don't expect you to

#90 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 20 February 2010 - 06:30 AM

So killer whales can eat polar bears...what exactly is that suppose to prove? 

View Post

That your little attempt to prove polar bear were superior to whale was a farce… Nothing more.

In fact, you didn't even show any evidence, just a website with a bunch of speculations.

View Post

Its proven flatland, you just don’t like it. It’s a fact that dolphins fending off shark attacks are far more successful then sharks ability to prey on dolphins. The evidence is overwhelming.

Your original claim was that whales and dolphins are more successful than sharks and you have yet to show a single evidence - although I don't expect you to

View Post


My claim is that Dolphins and whales, on the whole, are at the top of their food chain as oceanic dwelling creatures. That they are a success and your hypothesis is a failure. They, on the whole, have no predators that are successful against them. That Man, the superior creature, is the only one who can decimate whale, dolphin, or shark for that matter.

And that must gall you because your feeble attempt to denigrate the whale and dolphin to prove your point is such a massive disappointment as an argument. So you attempt to come back and pretend you still have an argument over and over.

By the way, is information about killer whales preying on great white shark:

http://www.ptreyesli...oct23/orca.html

http://www.telegraph...eat-sharks.html

http://abcnews.go.co...tory?id=9191986

#91 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 21 February 2010 - 10:02 PM

If you knew how to count,then you would know that atheist make up only 10% of the worlds population.

Seems like the forum policy is to ban people when they lose an arguement.


The policy is to get rid of people who only argue and waste time. Ironically,that is just what you did.

It is also all you did when you were asked to present some kind of evidence in this post.

http://www.evolution...indpost&p=50647

#92 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 25 February 2010 - 12:06 PM

If you knew how to count,then you would know that atheist make up only 10% of the worlds population.
The policy is to get rid of people who only argue and waste time. Ironically,that is just what you did.

It is also all you did when you were asked to present some kind of evidence in this post.

http://www.evolution...indpost&p=50647

View Post


He just wanted to argue "a priori" Jason.

#93 Guest_Tezza_*

Guest_Tezza_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 February 2010 - 06:19 AM

Seems that this should be included here - http://www.evolution...?showtopic=3122

#94 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 26 February 2010 - 09:29 AM

Seems that this should be included here - http://www.evolution...?showtopic=3122

View Post


Actually this one would probably be a better fit: http://www.evolution...c=1924&hl=truth




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users