There are actually people who make the argument, "birds arose on land," with images of "dry, arid, terrestrial, conditions -- "coming out of nowhere," replete with tumbleweeds and blistering sun beating down on the dry desert sand" dancing through their heads and *beep beep* Roadrunner, chased by Wile E. Coyote... and then, they envision these tetrapods, returned to the water... as if water were an unfamiliar, strange, new habitat.
These are those persons who can not accept, water, powerfully shaped the bird's anatomy and from its aquatic origins, derives the innate, instinctive ability to fly (a question of the principals of Hydrodynamics vs. Aerodynamics).
After all, didn't some scientist say "Tetrapods left the water," so an amateur with book sense but lacks vision of the planet's earlier history, has images of dry, arid desert...
Correct? What is now, always was, and always will be.
Dino bones are dug up in dry deserts and rocks, so therefore, that "dry, arid, desert" was the habitat the creature must have lived in, millions of years ago. Correct? Wrong. Somebody failed to realize the terrain was once like a plush tropical jungle, filled with sources of water, vegetation and diversity of predators and prey, and sometimes even, cannibalistic.
Visceral arches:
"...Columns of mesenchyme found in the neck of the developing vertebrate embryo derived from cranial neural crest. In lower vertebrates, blood vessels formed here become part of the gills; in higher vertebrates derivatives include portions of the jaw and middle ear. Also known as branchial arches, gill arches, or visceral arches."
(Source) "Mesenchymal structures in the region of the embryonic pharynx and visible on the ventrolateral aspect of the head; give rise to skeletal elements, larynx and other structures of the head."
(Source)
“Gill slits” by any other name…
"...the “pharyngeal apparatus” consists of a series of paired pharyngeal arches and fissures which develop on the exterior with a corresponding set of pharyngeal pouches on the inside of the throat, separated from the external fissures by a thin membrane (more on the details in a moment). And in fact the possession of these structures at some point in development, along with a hollow dorsal nerve cord, a notochord and a post anal tail, are the defining characteristics of the phylum chordata to which we and all other vertebrates belong."
Origins of Birds
"...He examines in detail the expression of evolutionary stages in the development of embryos, tracing from the process of cell division to the development of specific anatomical features. He finds a striking resemblance between the embryonic development of reptiles and birds, including details of the skeletal anatomy (with special attention to the hands and feet) and various organs. He notes that bird and reptile embryos develop visceral arches, hinting at their aquatic ancestry. Of more interest to his goal, Heilmann writes in a similar vein that the embryos of certain birds clearly show a three-clawed finger structure, at least one of which (the hoatzin) retains actual claws after hatching. He mentions other anatomical features of bird embryos that hint at their reptilian ancestry as well, such as the embryonic splitting of the pygostyle into distinct separate vertebrae."
Yes, bbbbut.... according to "Dinosaurs of the Air: The Evolution and Loss of Flight in Dinosaurs and Birds By Gregory S. Paul"... this is problematic because there may have been no trees at that time in earth's history.
---> adjective: arboreal
(chiefly of animals) living in trees.
"arboreal rodents"
of or relating to trees. <---
---> "...It was observed that a number of animals with moderate flying or gliding ability, such as bats, flying lizards and flying squirrels have arboreal lifestyles. This led to the idea that the ancestors of birds must have gradually acquired the ability to fly from leaping among branches in the tops of trees. <---
Yes, bbbbut Mr. Huxley... "...Superficially bird-like dinosaurs occurred some 25 million to 80 million years after the earliest known bird, which is 150 million years old".... hadn't Mr. Huxley ever heard of a thing called, "Convergent Evolution" or "Shared Ancestry" which neatly explains the problematic issue with the fossil timeline. Birds came BEFORE Cretaceous Theropod Dinosaurs, and all the obfuscating, lies, denials of the fossil record won't help their case. Repeating a lie enough times doesn't make it a fact.
--> "...with Thomas Huxley championing the idea that Archaeopteryx as well as modern birds had more in common with theropod dinosaurs than any other group of animals." <--
--> Franz Nopcsa proposed an alternate hypothesis in 1907, arguing that the ancestors of birds were fast-running, bipedal animals related to theropod dinosaurs. <--
bbbbut... "related to" through a common archosaur ancestor is not the same thing as "descended from" the late Cretaceous T.Rex... and if running and gaining lift were the underlying "original cause" of flight, there would be a lot more animals taking flight, and besides, the genetic evidence weighs in on the side that Birds have a closer genetic relationship to mammals & crocodiles, than T. Rex and ilk.
Genetic similarity between human and chicken: 60-75%
Genetic similarity between chicken and crocodilians 61.7%
Genetic similarity between chicken and t. rex: 58%
Sources: Mammal/Chicken DNA %
Crocodile Genome & Chicken %
The underlying flaw requires one logical question (which requires the ability to "think"):
"Which came first, the feather or flight?"
There are also "flying snakes" which have neither feather, nor wings... flying squirrels (don't they also have "visceral arches"? and in their distant past, traces of their aquatic origins lay dormant.)
From conception to birth... they all come from an egg, enveloped in water... just like the puddle, from where their primitive aquatic ancestor arose in the primordial puddle. (Primordial puddle does denote "water" lest they deny all living creatures and life, began in the water.)
The earliest fliers, were insects, and science concludes, they inherited this ability from swimming..
Fruit flies 'swim' through air, using the same physics as fish, study shows Fruit flies and other flyers also use drag to "swim" through the air, the scientists say. Their discovery lends support to the evolutionary theory that flight in insects emerged from swimming.
Even humans, seeming so far removed from their mammalian ancestry... are born with a rudimentary reflex to swim... inherited from a distant ancestor somewhere in the murky past . . .
Why would a human need "Visceral Arches" --GILLS?? for God's sake! And if humans can retain their swimming reflex, -- then why wouldn't birds?
The physics, Hydrodynamics and Aerodynamics are practically the same.
"...When Heilmann began his research in the early 1900s, the early bird Archaeopteryx was only known from three fossils found in the limestone quarries of Solnhofen near Eichstätt, Germany. The three fossils consisted of two nearly complete skeletons found in 1861 and 1877 and a single feather from 1860. They had been discovered just a few decades after the discovery of the dinosaurs, and as some dinosaurs appeared somewhat birdlike, Archaeopteryx was regarded as a possible "missing link" between reptiles and birds by many paleontologists at the time.[5]
The similarities between Archaeopteryx, known dinosaurs and extant birds were examined and emphasized, with Thomas Huxley championing the idea that Archaeopteryx as well as modern birds had more in common with theropod dinosaurs than any other group of animals. This was at the time in opposition to the view of anatomist Sir Richard Owen of the British Museum, who viewed Archaeopteryx as no different taxonomically from modern birds. Huxley's work was controversial, and this climate of uncertainty and contention about bird origins persisted well into the beginning of the 20th century.[7]
While the dinosaur-bird connection (or lack thereof) was being pursued in paleontology, the problem of the evolution of flight was under scrutiny as well. It was observed that a number of animals with moderate flying or gliding ability, such as bats, flying lizards and flying squirrels have arboreal lifestyles. This led to the idea that the ancestors of birds must have gradually acquired the ability to fly from leaping among branches in the tops of trees. The Hungarian paleontologist Franz Nopcsa proposed an alternate hypothesis in 1907, arguing that the ancestors of birds were fast-running, bipedal animals related to theropod dinosaurs. When Heilmann came onto the paleontology scene, these two sets of conflicting theories provided the framework for his research and eventual conclusions.[5]"
(Source)
The $100 Question
"...Even humans, seeming so far removed from their ancient mammalian ancestry... are born with a rudimentary reflex to swim... inherited from a distant water-borne ancestor somewhere in the murky evolutionary past...
Why would a human need "Visceral Arches" --GILLS?? for God's sake!
And if humans can retain their swimming reflex, -- then why wouldn't birds?"
HYDRODYNAMICS VS. AERODYNAMICS... written into the anatomy of mammals, reptiles, birds ... all creatures... with all sorts of creatures flying... but only one group possessing feathers...
So did the flying snake lose its feathers, or what about those "High Flying Reptiles who independently via convergent evolution, evolved the ability to fly?
Hollow bones helped high-flying reptiles stay aloft
"...Similar design features exist in modern birds, which evolved them independently, say the scientists."
Since its imperative to distinguish birds evolved those features *independently* from reptiles, then let's be careful to give equally imperative emphasis on how the bird was
1) a fully developed bird with feathers and all, way back to 150 million years ago.... which is long, long before
2) the BLATANT LIES about cretaceous dinosaurs evolving what do they call it, "protofuzz" pawned off as "feathers"???
supposedly "birthed"
3) creatures which lived 70 million years apart and before them in the fossil record!!!!!
If we are going to utilize reason, the scientific method, and Darwin's theory of Evolution, that would uh, like ha, make Archaeopteryx the grandfather of T. Rex, wouldn't it?
Ohhhh... wait!! I get it... Archie didn't birth T. Rex instead... it's called CONVERGENT EVOLUTION. When similar features arise naturally, due to environmental influences on their anatomy... yeah, that's how real science works, not all that pseudo-babble mythology about "T. rex (80 million years ago) crawling in a time machine, going back 70 million years in the past, to give birth to Archaeopteryx" nonsense.
150 million years ago, Birds already had feathers, and then, much, much later some dinosaurs arose with similar characteristics who started evolving "proto" integumentary-fuzz which is mistaken for feathers due to its similarities, and obviously scientists aren't quite sure what it was, but if it was similar to birds' feathers, it was a result of
1) convergent evolution, and nothing more...
2) The only other alternative is that these creatures inherited a gene from a common Archosaur ancestor, and caused "feather" and "protofuzzies" to evolve independently at later, but separate stages in the fossil record.
Birds (150 million years ago) did not "evolve from" cretaceous dinosaurs who lived nearly 100 million years, later.
--> "Superficially bird-like dinosaurs occurred some 25 million to 80 million years after the earliest known bird, which is 150 million years old.” <--
To claim otherwise, is a blatant Un-Darwinian denial of the fossil record! Only Creationists and pseudo-scientific Science-Deniers deny the fossil record and want to overturn standard scientific methodology, replacing facts with mythology.
Science has devolved into a source for whimsical fantasy "entertainment".
"...The mammalian diving reflex is a reflex in mammals which optimizes respiration to allow staying underwater for extended periods of time. It is exhibited strongly in aquatic mammals (seals,[1] otters, dolphins, etc.), but exists in weaker versions in other mammals, including humans, in particular babies up to 6 months old (see Infant swimming). Diving birds, such as penguins, have a similar diving reflex. Every animal's diving reflex is triggered specifically by cold water contacting the face."
(Source, Mammalian diving reflex, Wikipedia)
Take a look at that salamander!
Born To Swim?
"...Try this to trigger one of the cutest reflexes around. Just blow into a baby’s face and watch him or her gulp air, close eyes, and stop whatever they’re doing. Parents have used this as a way to get their little ones to stop crying – but it’s also the path to swimming.
The response is what’s known as the bradycardic reflex, which is part of the mammalian diving reflex. When the face of an infant is exposed to cold water, the heart slows down and blood is shifted away from the peripheral muscles to conserve oxygen for the brain and heart, and they typically hold their breath. The reflex is the same one that protects babies from getting milk in their lungs, says Goren Wennergren, a pediatrician and professor at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
“It’s interesting that the reflex kind of reroutes the entire circulatory system to save blood for the heart and brain, and not pump it through the rest of the body,” says Wennergren.
Wennergren had heard that after 6 months of age, this reflex fades away – so he decided to look into the function of the diving response in babies of different ages. Along with a graduate student, he studied 36 infants in swimming classes at warm pool – one of the few actual studies into diving babies. They monitored the babies’ heart rates, breathing and watched their behavior during their underwater dives, which lasted a few seconds.
Not only did the babies hold their breath, but they seemed to enjoy the experiment. The researchers found that the diving reflex still exists in older babies (they tested babies up to 1 year old) but that it decreased in older infants. The babies all held their breath, and it took about 10 seconds after the dive was over for their breathing to return to normal. Wennergren noted that the babies seemed eager to dive, and the ones with diving experience prepped by closing their eyes before being submerged. His study was published in 2002 in the journal Acta Paediatrica.
“In diving animals, the reflex persists for their whole life,” Wennergren told KinderLab, noting that adult humans also have the same reflex – if you dunk your face in cold water, you’ll gasp and hold your breath."
/EXCERPT
The Dino-Myth crowd likes denying the obvious.