Why do new world tarantulas have irritating hairs but old worlds don't?

[jbm150]

That's it? Just 2 replies so far? Come on guys, I know there are a lot more Darwins out there by reading this thread. I wanna here your answers as well. I find it interesting that science is all about exploring your options and finding answers to problems and is open to EVERY possible scenario as to why things work and behave the way they do, but is completely close minded about creationism. The question was bated with a banana. I just wanted to see how many evolved primates I could catch. What made me smile was seeing Darwin himself (avatar) on the very first reply! I know I'm not going to change anyone's beliefs, and I'm not trying to. When it comes to arachnids this is the only place where I can share my excitement and receive the same response.
But when it comes to the deeper issues of life (like where we came from) I KNOW I was created and where I'm going when I leave this earth. And I make no apologies about it. I don't expect anyone that believes in evolution and holds that world view to understand. There are forces greater than we think that prevent evolutionists from seeing the truth. If you've never experienced it, than you simply don't know. All I ask is that you be open to ALL explanations to the world around us, and not just what you choose.

Cute. So you really want to turn this into an evolution vs. creationism thread? That is way off topic. Creationism explanation might be that it was created exactly as it is for its environment. Not really much to explain or talk about beyond that. Its kind of an end of conversation. If you're looking to pick a fight, that probably isn't going to go over well with mods

 

[Kirk]

Ok, I'll bite at your rhetorical query. But please do us a favor - learn how to use spell check, so we can feign belief that your education is sufficient to warrant your claims.

That's it? Just 2 replies so far? Come on guys, I know there are a lot more Darwins out there by reading this thread. I wanna here your answers as well. I find it interesting that science is all about exploring your options and finding answers to problems and is open to EVERY possible scenario as to why things work and behave the way they do, but is completely close minded about creationism.

You just mischaracterized science. Science is not 'open to EVERY possible scenario' except the one particular non-scientific choice you've made. Science is a melange of procedures with one goal in mind: to challenge understanding on an ongoing basis by the consequences of empirical investigations.

The question was bated with a banana. I just wanted to see how many evolved primates I could catch. What made me smile was seeing Darwin himself (avatar) on the very first reply! I know I'm not going to change anyone's beliefs, and I'm not trying to. When it comes to arachnids this is the only place where I can share my excitement and receive the same response.

Correct, you're likely not going to change anyone's beliefs. First and foremost you have to at least go to the trouble of understanding how science operates. Your desire to rely upon the supernatural is your choice. But please don't do it at the expense of wasting our time with not having a firm grasp of science and why no field of science accepts reliance on God as an explanatory vehicle.

But when it comes to the deeper issues of life (like where we came from) I KNOW I was created and where I'm going when I leave this earth. And I make no apologies about it. I don't expect anyone that believes in evolution and holds that world view to understand. There are forces greater than we think that prevent evolutionists from seeing the truth. If you've never experienced it, than you simply don't know. All I ask is that you be open to ALL explanations to the world around us, and not just what you choose.

Yes, you were 'created' when an egg and sperm joined in one of your mother's fallopian tubes. But even that is a hypothesis, but at least one founded in critically evaluated knowledge, not your blind acceptance of 'KNOW' based on what a bunch of ancient texts say.

You ask us to be open to 'ALL explanations.' And where does that leave us when it comes down to attempting to acquire understanding? How does one decide between competing hypotheses? The ever-increasing understanding we have witnessed over time is not because of blind acceptance of any and every explanation. That understanding has been accomplished by whittling away notions that are beyond reproach, beyond critical evaluation.

Don't expect the principles that guide all fields of science to be reduced to your supernatural-based dogma of blind acceptance. The very avoidance of just such a reduction is what has made the sciences so successful.

 

[Ether Imp]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB_htqDCP-s

My answer to creationism vs science.

 

[Skullptor]

I skimmed most of the entries, so this may have come up already. Could it be topography? Landscape? Most NW species live in open plain type areas where range roaming animals like bison and deer and predators like fox and coyotes would look down on top of the T- right on the urticating hairs, :?

OK. so lets forget places like South America when considering NW species.

while most OW T's live in dense forest where predators like monkeys would reach in towards the front of the T to find a strong venom and speed.
:?

Like in South America? Oh yea, I forgot South America is an open plain type area with no monkeys.

May I suggest reading instead of "skimming"

 

[Dave]

Gee, I wonder if all the hostility is a product of evolution, or the result of a spiritual condition? lol

Btw, did anyone even read the rest of my original post, besides the last question?

I skimmed most of the entries, so this may have come up already. Could it be topography? Landscape? Most NW species live in open plain type areas where range roaming animals like bison and deer and predators like fox and coyotes would look down on top of the T- right on the urticating hairs, while most OW T's live in dense forest where predators like monkeys would reach in towards the front of the T to find a strong venom and speed. This kind of explains Ephebopus having urticating setae towards the front as well. (similar environment to OW)

Amazing how one question can cause so much reaction in people.

Sorry for the hijack, Sparkn

 

[Dave]

OK. so lets forget places like South America when considering NW species.


Like in South America? Oh yea, I forgot South America is an open plain type area with no monkeys.

May I suggest reading instead of "skimming"

Ah, so I see you jumped on the hostile bandwagon.

 

[Skullptor]

Ah, so I see you jumped on the hostile bandwagon.

So if we don't agree with your opinions, we are on a hostile bandwagon?
Well, it's better than sitting next to you on the "short bus."

 

[Ether Imp]

So if we don't agree with your opinions, we are on a hostile bandwagon?
Well, it's better than sitting next to you on the "short bus."

That's a little hostile..

 

[Exo]

Ah, so I see you jumped on the hostile bandwagon.

Perhaps your god is really an alien scientist and we're just one of his experiments.Not knowing who or what he was, we interperted as best we could what we saw and created religeons based on these interpretations. There, that should satisfy both sides.

 

[Kirk]

Perhaps your god is really an alien scientist and we're just one of his experiments.Not knowing who or what he was, we interperted as best we could what we saw and created religeons based on these interpretations. There, that should satisfy both sides.

While amusing, 'brain in the vat' scenarios are never scientifically satisfactory.

 

[Exo]

While amusing, 'brain in the vat' scenarios are never scientifically satisfactory.

Never said god was a brain in a vat.....that would be funny though.

 

[Kirk]

Never said god was a brain in a vat.....that would be funny though.

That's not what I meant. Ever watch The Matrix? Brain in a vat is a classic philosophical thought experiment.

 

[Exo]

That's not what I meant. Ever watch The Matrix? Brain in a vat is a classic philosophical thought experiment.

Now I know what you mean.

My idea is that maybe humans were created by an alien race, perhaps by combining their DNA with that of Neanderthalls. That might explain why Neanderthall DNA is different than ours (it was tested in germany and found to be very different than ours, so they are not our direct predecessors).

Hey, you never know.

 

[Dave]

Now I know what you mean.

My idea is that maybe humans were created by an alien race, perhaps by combining their DNA with that of Neanderthalls. That might explain why Neanderthall DNA is different than ours (it was tested in germany and found to be very different than ours, so they are not our direct predecessors).

Hey, you never know.

Different DNA, interesting... perhaps Neanderthal never existed?
Aliens, huh? Anything but God. lol

 

[jbm150]

So where are we again on this urticating hairs discussion again? I was thinking about my previous connection between pokies and psalmos. I know nothing about the natural history of tarantulas, how far back its thought different lines go. How closely related are Psalmopoeus, Tapinauchenius, Stromatopelma, Heteroscodra, Poecilotheria, and Lampropelma? Are their similaries simply due to similar environmental conditions (arboreal lifestyle) or are they truly closely related? Lack of UHs might mean something (or not, a single morphological similarity often means little).

Its interesting that there are NW Ts without urticating hairs but NO OW (that we know) with them. I guess that gives support to the idea that they arose after the continents split and are relatively new adaptations. Psalmos and Taps might represent an arboreal line of Ts that originated from the baboons/asian theraphosids rather than a NW line. Maybe all Ts with UHs all arose from a single species or genus of tarantulas (soon?) after the continents split. That particular genus developed a mutation of easily-shedable setae on their abdomen (by chance, perhaps) that actually was advantageous. The particular individual or sac-mates with loose setae survived, not necessarily better, but survived to produce more with the same genetic change. After periods of time where biodiversity flourished and competition/predation became more intense (after ice ages, catastrophes, etc), those with UHs became more and more successful at evading predation but also branching into new genuses and into new habitats. Fewer and fewer non-UH-possessing Ts in the NW could be found, replaced by those with 'em. Seems the Ts without 'em are exceptionally fast and aggessive to compensate. Both defensive strategies undoubtedly work but seems that UH might be somewhat more advantageous to survival in comparison (if what I've postulated has any truth at all).

Maybe this is all obvious and well known and I sound like an idiot, I dunno. I have no clue on any phylogenetic basis to any of this. I'm sure Chone and others can pick it apart and provide us a much clearer picture. I'm just rambling :}

 

[Exo]

Different DNA, interesting... perhaps Neanderthal never existed?
Aliens, huh? Anything but God. lol

Maybe they are god. Scary thought, isn't it.

 

[Dave]

Maybe they are god. Scary thought, isn't it.

I guess someday we'll all know.

I'm feeling bad at this point that we're so off topic and it started with my question. So I'm done with my debate in this thread. If someone wants to continue in a specified thread somewhere, I'm all ears.

 

[jbm150]

Hi Dave,

I appreciate you providing your thoughts on the matter, please don't let anyone dissuade you from doing so. But also please understand that a good many people here believe in evolution and to say it is the way it is because it was created like that just isn't going to be satisfactory. If you believe strongly in creationism, thats fine. You're an adult and that is your decision. People do get hostile over differences in belief, I'm surprised its been as tame as it has been.

I'd love to actually have a discussion on it. If you start a thread, I'd chime in and listen to what you have to say. I'm not sure that'd be allowed on these boards, however. I am a science/evolution guy but I am curious as to others beliefs as well and why they believe as such. There's no way we'd convince each other otherwise but its fun to debate/converse

 

[Ether Imp]

Different DNA, interesting... perhaps Neanderthal never existed?
Aliens, huh? Anything but God. lol

I've seen UFO's.

I've never seen angels.

Also, scientific discoveries and theories thus far support the possibility of alien species inhabiting the universe. Therefor, as 'nutty' as it may sound, belief in aliens and ufo's is much more logical than the belief in a creator.

 

[Kirk]

I'd love to actually have a discussion on it. If you start a thread, I'd chime in and listen to what you have to say. I'm not sure that'd be allowed on these boards, however. I am a science/evolution guy but I am curious as to others beliefs as well and why they believe as such. There's no way we'd convince each other otherwise but its fun to debate/converse

The topic has been discussed/argued ad nauseum in The Watering Hole. It's a fun mine field in which to step, but be prepared to be squeezed from all sides.