Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,877 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,002,849
Pageviews Today: 1,347,187Threads Today: 315Posts Today: 5,680
01:50 PM

Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
Message Subject Oh Mr Darwin..... why didn't all animals go extinct during the millions years it took evolution to NON-intelligently design umbilical cords?
Poster Handle Anonymous Coward
Post Content
The remnant yolk sacs of eggs evolved into the umbilical cord. It was much safer to have your fetus growing inside you than to have to lay eggs which proved as an evolutionary advantage for mammals and marsupials.

So basically, the eggs starting growing inside animals, which was advantageous. What was the yolk and other parts that are present in eggs, are still present in human embryos as well. Our early development is strikingly similar to reptiles' early development.
 Quoting: AllGunsBlazing

Disregarding the fact that your explanation is purely 'just-so' speculation... Do you realize how many perfectly coordinated changes would have to occur in order to switch from an Ovoviviparous egg development and Viviparous placental gestation, while constantly conferring enough of a fitness advantage to become fixated in the population???

This supposed evolved fetus might be safer in the mother's womb, but how on earth do you reconcile a fitness advantage to the mother herself, now having to bare the burden of prolonged pregnancy??? Embryo safety is meaningless without survival advantage to the mother.

Where does her fitness advantage arise from bearing the extra weight and having to supply extra nutrition?

If these intermediate stages were so beneficial, how come there is not a trace of evidence for this body plan? Why no organisms using an intermediate gestation stage today?

Oh yea, let's not forget that we don't observe a single novel protein evolving today, much less the myriad of coordinated protein transportation systems evolved in embryonic development systems.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23223519

It's certainly not speculation, but ok, this should help beat down those straw men you're setting up.

[link to www.askabiologist.org.uk]

[link to voices.yahoo.com]
 Quoting: AllGunsBlazing

How are my questions at all strawmen?

The only "answers" in your links are simply information about different types of embryonic stages. The best "intermediate" provided is the same system I already mentioned: Ovoviviparous, where the eggs hatch inside the mother.

Can you fathom how many more changes are needed to transition to Viviparous gestation? Placenta, umbilical cord, and just go down the list of novel structures listed in OP's video. And all have to confer fitness advantage to mom.

Since each stage between Ovoviviparous and Viviparous would have had to be beneficial, (not to mention this "miracle of evolution" is a homologous, occurring across multiple phyla!) there should be evidence of this gradation in the fossil record, but there is not. We see sudden leaps between a small handful of embryonic arrangements!

Did every "convergent evolution" of embryonic stages just happen to settle on the same systems in multiple phyla, even though each intermediate stage would have had to be beneficial?

I want to hear a logical, practical answer. Not some lame cop-out like "oh well some eggs hatch inside the mom so it makes sense!"

Really, the logic of evolution is one train-wreck after another.
Please verify you're human:

Reason for reporting: