Re: Embryo development of sparrow
- From: "Dana Tweedy" <reddfrogg@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 21:57:40 GMT
<mccoy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1141940869.852134.23180@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
snipping
you can see how the supposed slits develop.
One of which forms an opening tothe mouth, being that of the opening
between the lower jaw and the bottom of the beak. The second slit
correspond to the bottom part of the lower jaw. And third slit looks
like an adams apple, that apparently disappears into the neck.
Makes it rather hard to claim they don't exist, now does it?
I have a question. How many mammals have mouths, jaws, chin and adam's
apple?
Nearly all mammals have mouths, mandibles, a chin (ie lower margin of the
mandible) and a larnyx. Also, sparrows aren't mammals.
Interesting. Sounds like you've admitted my views to be correct.
When would I have ever done something like that?
And
also, sparrows have a mouth.
They still aren't mammals.
The supposed "pouches" which is actually
a misnomer, break open to form the jaw and neck lines.
Actually they don't "break open", and if they didn't exist, they'd couldn't
form the jaw and neck lines. In any case, sparrows are veribrates, so
their jaws do derive from the pharyangeal arches, which are homologus to the
gill arches in primitive jawless fish.
Need I state anymore of the obvious?
It might help if you were to explain what you are talking about.
And I have yet to find
these appendages on fish,
You haven't seen fish with mouths? Fish have different jaw structures
than mammals, and don't usually have a larnyx, as most fish don't have
lungs, requiring a trachea. Nor is a mouth an "appendage".
Good night. You like to quibble about insubstantive questions.
I'm sure you would. How about addressing the substantive questions,
instead?
Whether
or not you call the structures appendages or whatever you like, it
hasn't changed the fact that you don't see them (supposed gill slits)
You do, if you actually look at the specimens.
in the manner you see them on mammals.
you do, on the embyros of mammals.
The obvious answer to this
question is that mammals have a different facial orientation than
fishes.
Yet the embryos of fish and mammals are nearly identical.
Therefore you can in no way call them homologous with fish.
They don't even resemble.
They do resemble them, at the proper stage of the embryo. You keep
ignoring that, just as you ignore the statments below.
JM
which is where you would expect them to be
found.
Why would you expect a fish to have a larnyx? Most fish don't have
lungs,
and they don't have voices.
If there is a fish out there that has them I'd like to see it.
Why would you expect to see a fish with a larnyx? I take it you have
seen
fish that have a mouth.
But the fish I have seen do not and for obvious reasons. They don't
have a jaw and neck that are oriented on a head that hooks to a neck.
You really are deficient in anatomy, aren't you. Every fish has a head,
and a neck. Most fish have jaws, as well. There was even a book and
a
movie about a particular fish. You might have seen it. The title of
the
book and movie was "Jaws".
Fish heads are oriented straight perched on a horizontally arrange
backbone. Hence, they cannot get double chins (if they were fat
[grin].
http://trinitybeachss.eq.edu.au/4a/IMAGES/seahorse1.jpg
You were saying?
DJT
DJT
.
- References:
- Embryo development of sparrow
- From: mccoy
- Re: Embryo development of sparrow
- From: Dana Tweedy
- Re: Embryo development of sparrow
- From: mccoy
- Embryo development of sparrow
- Prev by Date: Re: most human-chimp differences due to gene regulation
- Next by Date: Re: Mike's Back!
- Previous by thread: Re: Embryo development of sparrow
- Next by thread: Re: Embryo development of sparrow
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
