thank fish for your ears.

Scania · 4 Apr 2008 at 17:14

Gilly said:
We need to hear, we don't need to breathe under water.

But we'd drown! :confused:

Mercutio · 4 Apr 2008 at 17:34

Gilly said:
...and the movie Alien says there are Xenomorphs that will kill us with acid blood, and our lungs came from gills...

Then it doesn't back up your theory :/

Once on the back of hearing that "fact" (after watching Abyss) I looked up the science involved and humans can "breathe" liquid. Water wont do and its very hard to get a liquid that will trap carbon dioxide for us to "breathe" it out. I seem to remember there was some sort of fluorocarbon liquid (freon?) that "worked".

In fact: Linky

Alternatively the mighty wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing (I see this has been linked already - meh)

Nitefly · 4 Apr 2008 at 17:53

Ben M said:
We devolved our gills...

Agh! *bangs head on desk*.

Everytime you say that word, a puppy gets thrown of a cliff because a soldier can't be bothered to shoot it. It should be a forum sticky that there is no such thing as devolution.

~>Dg<~ said:
yes but if we moved to water/sea then we would need them whether it be a backwards step or not.our bodies would change to suit enviroment.

Why then do dolphins and whales, whilst having ancestors previously land-dwelling, not have gills?

Tefal · 4 Apr 2008 at 17:58

Nitefly said:
It should be a forum sticky that there is no such thing as devolution.

How do you explain the French then? :confused:

Nitefly · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:00

Tefal said:
How do you explain the French then?

No one can explain the French.

badbob · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:06

Why then do dolphins and whales, whilst having ancestors previously land-dwelling, not have gills?

Give it another few million years and they may do?

Psyk · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:08

badbob said:
Give it another few million years and they may do?

Why would they? How often do you hear about a dolphin or whale drowning? It's more likely they would evolve to fire frickin' laser beams from their heads to fight off Japanese whaling boats.

Nitefly · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:09

badbob said:
Give it another few million years and they may do?

No. For the exact same reason that humans arn't going to grow extra legs when 2 will do fine.

Voltar · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:10

haha Devolution

/runs very fast

badbob · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:10

Why would they?

What a silly reply. Why would fish want to go onto land?

Tefal · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:11

badbob said:
What a silly reply. Why would fish want to go onto land?

more food, less competition, drying up lake/river/sea?

aren't dolphins and whales millions of years old anyway?

Monkey Puzzle · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:18

Nitefly said:
Considering that the mammals which have gone back to living in water still havn't evolved gills and don't need to, its a fairly safe bet that no human decendant will ever, ever evolve gills.

Nonsense! Haven't you seen Waterworld?! That's how it's going to be in the future.

Nitefly · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:18

Voltar said:
haha Devolution

/runs very fast

Die.

badbob said:
Why would fish want to go onto land?

You do realise all extant mammals, reptiles and birds evolved from a fish ancestor, right?

Tefal said:
aren't dolphins and whales millions of years old anyway?

Yes.

Monkey Puzzle said:
Nonsense! Haven't you seen Waterworld?! That's how it's going to be in the future.

No wai!

Voltar · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:19

But I don't wanna die

I'm too young

Maybe this will all just devolve into a big argument in which Nitefly evolves many unhappy arguments

Nitefly · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:21

Voltar said:
Maybe this will all just devolve into a big argument in which Nitefly evolves many unhappy arguments

... something like that :confused:

badbob · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:21

You do realise all extant mammals, reptiles and birds evolved from a fish ancestor, right?

Yes I know that. You didn't get my point...which was if you're an observer AT THAT TIME looking at a catfish you have no idea of what is to come. Much like now..I don't think any scientist can predict what species will change and how, in millions and hundreds of millions of years. And some don't change, ie crocodiles.

Nitefly · 4 Apr 2008 at 18:25

badbob said:
Yes I know that. You didn't get my point...which was if you're an observer AT THAT TIME looking at a catfish you have no idea of what is to come. Much like now..I don't think any scientist can predict what species will change and how, in millions and hundreds of millions of years. And some don't change, ie crocodiles.

Thats not particuarly fair since their arn't any new environments to exploit.

Saying that, there is an element of truth in that we can never be sure what the future holds or how the planet may change.

Voltar · 4 Apr 2008 at 19:23

is it fair to say de-evolution?

Or can that simply not happen?

Psyk · 4 Apr 2008 at 20:23

Voltar said:
is it fair to say de-evolution?

Or can that simply not happen?

It's just called evolution. Evolution simply describes what happens over time. The only way to make it go backwards, is to go back in time.

Nitefly · 4 Apr 2008 at 21:48

Psyk said:
It's just called evolution. Evolution simply describes what happens over time. The only way to make it go backwards, is to go back in time.

<3