Fish with pelvis built for walking discovered in Thailand

[Shawn0001]

Very strange news item. A 26 year old discovery about a walking type fish. Why is this interesting today? There are many known air breathing land travelling fishes. This one is only different by its fin structure. It does not have a pelvis, rather a thickening of bone structure in a similar position to animals with pelvi. It does not advance the evolution theory one jot. The are millions of fish species many of them unique in one way or another. A diversity that has been rapidly shrinking long before modern times. Diversity only seems to go one way.

It does not advance the evolution theory one jot.

Just another of God's curiosities, forever providing doubt so we can find faith, I liked it when God buried the dinosaur bones, that was a clever trick.

[ddavidovsky]

This is the cave angel fish featured in David Attenborough's Planet Earth series a few years ago. I looked it up at the time. As mentioned, it lives only on underground waterfalls and seems to exist in only a few remote caves NW of Pai. Getting to see one is a dangerous undertaking as they are found about one kilometer deep where the air quality is quite poor and breathing equipment is necessary. Probably just as well. No doubt these are highly sensitive creatures and best left alone.

[Bluespunk]

BLUESPUNK.

Read the post!i didn't say it was about Judaism,i said he was teaching what the town elders believed to be witchcraft,because he was teaching EVOLUTION not CREATION. Where did i mention Judaism.The members of the town elders wanted the kids to be taught that the bible was correct,as was the standard belief of most of the back water towns in America,whose people professed to being god fearing citizens, and not science.Watch the movie.Maybe you'll get an insight as to what it was about.Better than that.

Google 'The Monkey trial'

My point was more in curiosity about your references to Judaism {at the start of your post and invitation to discuss scripture with those of that faith at the end}, and the BS they believe while not mentioning christian fundamentalism, who more or less believe the same thing.

I actually have read up on and studied the Scopes trial and I know what it was all about. I just found it odd you don't mention christian fundamentalism when referring to it, yet are happy to mention Judaism when criticing their beliefs.

You do realize that is no difference between the Jewish account of creation and the Christian one. You criticize one you criticize both.

That was my point...I just find it odd one faith is mentioned when criticising their beliefs but when a case is mentioned to highlight the nonsense some faiths attempt to hide the truth, the faith concerned is not mentioned. Even though both essentially believe in the same thing.

Edited March 30, 2016 by Bluespunk

[robblok]

That was my point...I just find it odd one faith is mentioned when criticising their beliefs but when a case is mentioned to highlight the nonsense some faiths attempt to hide the truth, the faith concerned is not mentioned. Even though both essentially believe in the same thing.

I find it funny how people like canuckamuck can ridicule the superstition of Thais but believe in an other faith at the same time. In fact all religion is equally funny and strange. No foundation for any of it just that more nutters believe in it does not make it any more valid without proof.

For me its all equally strange but I try to steer clear of the topic in general because it is dangerous. People can get real aggressive about religion. Just remember how brutal Christians were with heretics, burning and torturing them. Now you got the Muslims that are more violent but in essence all religion is dangerous.

In the Dutch news yesterday a guy killed an old minister of health because god told him to, the minister had introduced abortion and Euthanasia laws. This was a christian, who wants to take away the free choice people have. Its all nice for those religious nutters to abide by their own laws but once they start killing others because they don't like the real laws.....

Its a thing the would could do without.. religion. Not saying all conflict would be gone as we are a violent species.. but I think a lot of it would be better.

[canuckamuck]

That was my point...I just find it odd one faith is mentioned when criticising their beliefs but when a case is mentioned to highlight the nonsense some faiths attempt to hide the truth, the faith concerned is not mentioned. Even though both essentially believe in the same thing.

I find it funny how people like canuckamuck can ridicule the superstition of Thais but believe in an other faith at the same time. In fact all religion is equally funny and strange. No foundation for any of it just that more nutters believe in it does not make it any more valid without proof.

For me its all equally strange but I try to steer clear of the topic in general because it is dangerous. People can get real aggressive about religion. Just remember how brutal Christians were with heretics, burning and torturing them. Now you got the Muslims that are more violent but in essence all religion is dangerous.

In the Dutch news yesterday a guy killed an old minister of health because god told him to, the minister had introduced abortion and Euthanasia laws. This was a christian, who wants to take away the free choice people have. Its all nice for those religious nutters to abide by their own laws but once they start killing others because they don't like the real laws.....

Its a thing the would could do without.. religion. Not saying all conflict would be gone as we are a violent species.. but I think a lot of it would be better.

Are you referring to my astonishment over the Luhk Thep dolls (with the souls of dead children)? Are you saying this is an established part of Thai culture and Buddhist belief. Because I don't think it is. I think it is crazy stuff that hasn't had the consideration of thousands of years of debate and investigation. You desperately want to put it all on the same level so you can dismiss it all with a smug remark. Just like you pick on the anomaly of a murderer saying he killed for God but discount the overwhelming amount of ethical and charitable behaviour exhibited by ordinary Christians daily. You know as much as anyone else that the man is mentally ill.

You are usually among the first on every thread to declare all religion is crazy. This is what I call atheistic proselytizing. I know you think your world view will save us all, but understand it is only one of the many.

[tigermoth]

Must be closely related to you know who head of department.

[Thechook]

Anyone get down to the site and get the lottery numbers?

[willyumiii]

Wow!

What will they find next?

Walking animals that know how to swim?

[robblok]

That was my point...I just find it odd one faith is mentioned when criticising their beliefs but when a case is mentioned to highlight the nonsense some faiths attempt to hide the truth, the faith concerned is not mentioned. Even though both essentially believe in the same thing.

I find it funny how people like canuckamuck can ridicule the superstition of Thais but believe in an other faith at the same time. In fact all religion is equally funny and strange. No foundation for any of it just that more nutters believe in it does not make it any more valid without proof.

For me its all equally strange but I try to steer clear of the topic in general because it is dangerous. People can get real aggressive about religion. Just remember how brutal Christians were with heretics, burning and torturing them. Now you got the Muslims that are more violent but in essence all religion is dangerous.

In the Dutch news yesterday a guy killed an old minister of health because god told him to, the minister had introduced abortion and Euthanasia laws. This was a christian, who wants to take away the free choice people have. Its all nice for those religious nutters to abide by their own laws but once they start killing others because they don't like the real laws.....

Its a thing the would could do without.. religion. Not saying all conflict would be gone as we are a violent species.. but I think a lot of it would be better.

Are you referring to my astonishment over the Luhk Thep dolls (with the souls of dead children)? Are you saying this is an established part of Thai culture and Buddhist belief. Because I don't think it is. I think it is crazy stuff that hasn't had the consideration of thousands of years of debate and investigation. You desperately want to put it all on the same level so you can dismiss it all with a smug remark. Just like you pick on the anomaly of a murderer saying he killed for God but discount the overwhelming amount of ethical and charitable behaviour exhibited by ordinary Christians daily. You know as much as anyone else that the man is mentally ill.

You are usually among the first on every thread to declare all religion is crazy. This is what I call atheistic proselytizing. I know you think your world view will save us all, but understand it is only one of the many.

That there are 1000's of years of debate about it but no proof makes it as crazy as the Luhk Thep dolls who have also no proof. Just talking about something without proof for 1000's of years does not give it anymore validity. Give me one bit of evidence that there is a god ? if you can't then the look Theb dolls with no evidence are just as believable. That is what critical thinking says. Why accept one invisible entity without proof and not an other ?

And yes I feel all religion is the same all is crazy, unless of course someone comes up with some proof then I will eat my words. Until then all unproven religions are equally funny.

1 guy murdering for god.. you should read up on history the cruelty done to people by Christians. Now the Muslims do the same, I have yet to see an atheist say he killed for his beliefs. So yes I classify religion as dangerous. Just that many people infected with religion don't kill does not make it untrue that they often kill in the name of it all through history.

I am just happy that more and more people are opening their eyes and are forgetting about religion. Before saying one was an atheist could have bad consequences. I am younger than you probably but I can still remember how the Catholics and the protestant people in different villages refused to buy in shops of the other religion and fought in bars.

[Slain]

This is just a trick by evil scientist to try to disprove the theory of evolution!!

[gandalf12]

this is the missing link!!!! DAD!!!!!!

Deep in the ocean is a colony of humans that have gills!!! And on the moon there are flying cats!!!!

Listen, in 145,690 years there will be aliens landing in NYC

In 1,434,667 years we will be fighting crocodiles who learned how to shoot AK's

and snakes that fly!!!!

Some snakes can kind of fly already although it is really a form of gliding

[canuckamuck]

Are you referring to my astonishment over the Luhk Thep dolls (with the souls of dead children)? Are you saying this is an established part of Thai culture and Buddhist belief. Because I don't think it is. I think it is crazy stuff that hasn't had the consideration of thousands of years of debate and investigation. You desperately want to put it all on the same level so you can dismiss it all with a smug remark. Just like you pick on the anomaly of a murderer saying he killed for God but discount the overwhelming amount of ethical and charitable behaviour exhibited by ordinary Christians daily. You know as much as anyone else that the man is mentally ill.

You are usually among the first on every thread to declare all religion is crazy. This is what I call atheistic proselytizing. I know you think your world view will save us all, but understand it is only one of the many.

That there are 1000's of years of debate about it but no proof makes it as crazy as the Luhk Thep dolls who have also no proof. Just talking about something without proof for 1000's of years does not give it anymore validity. Give me one bit of evidence that there is a god ? if you can't then the look Theb dolls with no evidence are just as believable. That is what critical thinking says. Why accept one invisible entity without proof and not an other ?

And yes I feel all religion is the same all is crazy, unless of course someone comes up with some proof then I will eat my words. Until then all unproven religions are equally funny.

1 guy murdering for god.. you should read up on history the cruelty done to people by Christians. Now the Muslims do the same, I have yet to see an atheist say he killed for his beliefs. So yes I classify religion as dangerous. Just that many people infected with religion don't kill does not make it untrue that they often kill in the name of it all through history.

I am just happy that more and more people are opening their eyes and are forgetting about religion. Before saying one was an atheist could have bad consequences. I am younger than you probably but I can still remember how the Catholics and the protestant people in different villages refused to buy in shops of the other religion and fought in bars.

It is not that there is no proof, it is a question of what you, in your personal judgement, accept as proof. And critical thinking (since you brought it up) would have it that, if I believe a particular thing to be true, I must consider the contradictions to be untrue. Otherwise I am a hypocrite.

So no I don't have to believe in everything, I only have to believe what is consistent with the truth.

As for the other point. You are the one who brought up the man who murdered in the name of God. Obviously there have been many others, All of them rejected by anyone maintaining a solid Biblical doctrine .But I am very surprised you have never heard of an atheist who has murdered for their belief. Perhaps you should Google Mr Stalin or Mr Mao. They made quite an impact a few years ago.

And I am from Western Canada so we didn't have Protestant Vs Catholic issues at least it was never a big thing. Everyone just got along and watched hockey.

[Fookhaht]

A pelvis?

Can it dance to Elvis?

[stickylies]

So there is a new breed of fish (...).

which tastes excellent with chillies and garlic according to majority of the public

[robblok]

Are you referring to my astonishment over the Luhk Thep dolls (with the souls of dead children)? Are you saying this is an established part of Thai culture and Buddhist belief. Because I don't think it is. I think it is crazy stuff that hasn't had the consideration of thousands of years of debate and investigation. You desperately want to put it all on the same level so you can dismiss it all with a smug remark. Just like you pick on the anomaly of a murderer saying he killed for God but discount the overwhelming amount of ethical and charitable behaviour exhibited by ordinary Christians daily. You know as much as anyone else that the man is mentally ill.

You are usually among the first on every thread to declare all religion is crazy. This is what I call atheistic proselytizing. I know you think your world view will save us all, but understand it is only one of the many.

That there are 1000's of years of debate about it but no proof makes it as crazy as the Luhk Thep dolls who have also no proof. Just talking about something without proof for 1000's of years does not give it anymore validity. Give me one bit of evidence that there is a god ? if you can't then the look Theb dolls with no evidence are just as believable. That is what critical thinking says. Why accept one invisible entity without proof and not an other ?

And yes I feel all religion is the same all is crazy, unless of course someone comes up with some proof then I will eat my words. Until then all unproven religions are equally funny.

1 guy murdering for god.. you should read up on history the cruelty done to people by Christians. Now the Muslims do the same, I have yet to see an atheist say he killed for his beliefs. So yes I classify religion as dangerous. Just that many people infected with religion don't kill does not make it untrue that they often kill in the name of it all through history.

I am just happy that more and more people are opening their eyes and are forgetting about religion. Before saying one was an atheist could have bad consequences. I am younger than you probably but I can still remember how the Catholics and the protestant people in different villages refused to buy in shops of the other religion and fought in bars.

It is not that there is no proof, it is a question of what you, in your personal judgement, accept as proof. And critical thinking (since you brought it up) would have it that, if I believe a particular thing to be true, I must consider the contradictions to be untrue. Otherwise I am a hypocrite.

So no I don't have to believe in everything, I only have to believe what is consistent with the truth.

As for the other point. You are the one who brought up the man who murdered in the name of God. Obviously there have been many others, All of them rejected by anyone maintaining a solid Biblical doctrine .But I am very surprised you have never heard of an atheist who has murdered for their belief. Perhaps you should Google Mr Stalin or Mr Mao. They made quite an impact a few years ago.

And I am from Western Canada so we didn't have Protestant Vs Catholic issues at least it was never a big thing. Everyone just got along and watched hockey.

Oh, did Stalin and Mao murder in name of atheism. Could you please give some references to historical studies ? Just because someone is an atheist does not mean he murders in name of. Different of course for the burning of heretics, (believe the church supported that). Crusades anyone.. more recent all those killings of abortion Dr's. Those were all things done in name of religion. That you say its false is just the same as the Muslims saying that terrorist killing in name of Islam are not really Muslims.

Oh your proof theory.. is of course not relevant. It is what scientist call proof that is proof. Not what you think is proof. What you think is bias of course. Proof should be verified by independent others. For now the Luk Theb and your religion have the same amount of proof and so does the flying spaghetti monster in the sky religion.

I am giving up because its pointless to argue with religious people, they just call something belief and if something challenges that belief they say its a test of god.

I think we both got better things to do.

[DrTuner]

Something relevant to the discussion I saw today: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/03/how-strongly-do-different-nationalities-feel-about-religion?utm_content=bufferc97b6&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Anything over 20% means nutters galore. I'm not surprised the birthplace of Flying Spaghetti Monster is right up there.

[canuckamuck]

That there are 1000's of years of debate about it but no proof makes it as crazy as the Luhk Thep dolls who have also no proof. Just talking about something without proof for 1000's of years does not give it anymore validity. Give me one bit of evidence that there is a god ? if you can't then the look Theb dolls with no evidence are just as believable. That is what critical thinking says. Why accept one invisible entity without proof and not an other ?

And yes I feel all religion is the same all is crazy, unless of course someone comes up with some proof then I will eat my words. Until then all unproven religions are equally funny.

1 guy murdering for god.. you should read up on history the cruelty done to people by Christians. Now the Muslims do the same, I have yet to see an atheist say he killed for his beliefs. So yes I classify religion as dangerous. Just that many people infected with religion don't kill does not make it untrue that they often kill in the name of it all through history.

I am just happy that more and more people are opening their eyes and are forgetting about religion. Before saying one was an atheist could have bad consequences. I am younger than you probably but I can still remember how the Catholics and the protestant people in different villages refused to buy in shops of the other religion and fought in bars.

It is not that there is no proof, it is a question of what you, in your personal judgement, accept as proof. And critical thinking (since you brought it up) would have it that, if I believe a particular thing to be true, I must consider the contradictions to be untrue. Otherwise I am a hypocrite.

So no I don't have to believe in everything, I only have to believe what is consistent with the truth.

As for the other point. You are the one who brought up the man who murdered in the name of God. Obviously there have been many others, All of them rejected by anyone maintaining a solid Biblical doctrine .But I am very surprised you have never heard of an atheist who has murdered for their belief. Perhaps you should Google Mr Stalin or Mr Mao. They made quite an impact a few years ago.

And I am from Western Canada so we didn't have Protestant Vs Catholic issues at least it was never a big thing. Everyone just got along and watched hockey.

Oh, did Stalin and Mao murder in name of atheism. Could you please give some references to historical studies ? Just because someone is an atheist does not mean he murders in name of. Different of course for the burning of heretics, (believe the church supported that). Crusades anyone.. more recent all those killings of abortion Dr's. Those were all things done in name of religion. That you say its false is just the same as the Muslims saying that terrorist killing in name of Islam are not really Muslims.

Oh your proof theory.. is of course not relevant. It is what scientist call proof that is proof. Not what you think is proof. What you think is bias of course. Proof should be verified by independent others. For now the Luk Theb and your religion have the same amount of proof and so does the flying spaghetti monster in the sky religion.

I am giving up because its pointless to argue with religious people, they just call something belief and if something challenges that belief they say its a test of god.

I think we both got better things to do.

I suppose you can split hairs over what Stalin and Mao killed over, but atheism was a core component of their mantra and both of them purged religion and religious people with extreme malice.

And I think it is presumptuous to infer God can't exist if science doesn't have a test for that.