You know, I never thought about that question until now. But when you picture a Narwhal, the idea of a unicorn existing doesn’t seem too far-fetched.
Narwhals, a species of whale that lives in the Arctic oceans, are seen in nature with horns/tusks growing out of their head. The exact use of the tusk is up for debate, but it’s possible that it’s used for either echolocation, poking through the arctic ice, or for dominance over other male Narwhals.
For many years, Narwhals have been hunted for their tusks. It is a source of life for the Inuit living in the Arctic (the tusks are sold for money and the blubber is a source of vitamin C).
When a Narwhal is shot and killed, it is beheaded.
More photos of UNICORNS IN THE WATER inside.
I just know that somewhere…there is a unicorn community galloping and prancing around and enjoying their excellent hiding skills. But one day…ONE DAY…they will be found!
Photos by Paul Nicklen
“I just know that somewhere…there is a unicorn community galloping and prancing around and enjoying their excellent hiding skills. But one day…ONE DAY…they will be found!”
hahahaha :)
FUCKIN NARWHALS SWIMMIN AROUND KILLIN THE SHIT OUTTA FUCKIN UNICORNS AND ALL THOSE MOTHERFUCKERS
it must be hard to swim together in a pack without impaling a fellow narwhal???
RE: la perra
that’s where the hole on top of their head comes from…
Hahahahaha. Lovely observation, I dare say.
Youre an idiot kill youreself now /B/>.>
You’re stoopid, kill your self now you FAT.
Are you retarded? That’s not how the animal kingdom works. Just because one animal with a single horn exists doesn’t mean another completely different animal does.
That’s like saying “WELL IF AN ELEPHANT HAS A TRUNK WHY CAN’T A GIRAFFE?”
Because giraffes don’t need trunks.
Just like horses don’t have any evolutionary reason to have horns.
Narwhals have horns for mating purposes and also to break surface ice in Artic waters. That’s why they’re entitled to horns and horses aren’t.
oh i didnt know that. i always wondered why humans didnt have horns. but now i know that’s not how it works. good to know.
he was making a joke u dumbass
not a very good one
Dear doody brain you may not know the theory or Darwinism which has been proven but you certainly need to read up on it. The reason there is not such thing as a unicorn since the earliest horse the Eohippus to the modern one the Equus Callabus there has never been a time where they have needed a horn like rusrs said. Another reason is it is obvious that natural selection has not made horses genes mutate as there is no reason to except if they suddenly lived under water and needed to break the ice but thats never going to happen. Also there is another reason as if you decided to genetically engineered them there would be no DNA strands to make them have horns but if you still believe unicorns i guess anything could happen in evolution since whales evolved from a early type of wolf. Unbeliavable isn’t it!!!!
DARWIN JERKED OFF TO FUCKIN NARWHALS THEY’RE THE FUCKIN SHIT WOOHOOOO
Man, I can’t believe rusrs and sophie. Are you two really that overly smart, that you have ZERO sense of when someone is being sarcastic in a humorous way? Clearly Sir Dubious Brainicus is making a joke about the “If one, why not another?”. You two should hook up and then make some more of the smartest idiots around! (Please don’t rass me on how someone can’t be a smart-idiot, because then I’ll have to go into details to explain to whomever tries to point that out, how you CAN be both.)
Nice article Doob! Fear not, at least I share your sense of humor ;)
stfu mofo
hi there one baffled clint its Sophie again. The smart one as you so call me and i am only 14 so probably not yet but anyway i know he was only joking; i was only making a comment as i thought it would be interesting ( but apparantly not for people like you one baffled clint.) It seems like your trying to be smart- oh and how can you be a smart- idiot by the way- actually i am quite interested. On a nicer note don’t you find narwals so interesting because i certainly do there are so many great animals out there!!
Just because you’re 14, doesn’t mean you can’t be smart. That’s what a child prodigy is, essentially. Technically I suppose a prodigy would be a genius in a certain category, such as Mozart and the piano. Where as a genius, take Albert Einstein for example, was gifted in many different fields. So age is irrelevant. And if you knew he was joking, then there was really no reason to assume he knows nothing of Darwinism, and for him to read up on it, then go on a mini-lecture about why a horse has no need for a horn or why prehistoric horse ancestors had no need. Comes across to me that you are implying that he’s an idiot for thinking (see: joking) that if there are Narwhals, there is no reason for there not to be Unicorns. As far as a ’smart-idiot’, well if you take a genius who has no common sense, then you have a ’smart-idiot’. Or even a stupid-genius if you rather. Such a person would make a post like yours or rusr’s, not seeing the original satire in the article, and assuming the person is sincere in what they said.
To quickly go back to your original post. With DNA splicing, I actually find that it should (dare I say, could) be easily possible to make a Unicorn with Narwhal genes. Afterall, they made a UV sensitive rabbit by splicing in Glowing Jelly Fish protein markers. Mind you, I’m sure the reason for doing that was to see how possible it was to splice the genes. The actual use for the protein is to be able to watch how some invisible things work (such as nerve cell growth of the spread of cancer) via UV light and the inclusion of said protein. I believe they also have done this with pigs as well, since they are a very close human analog. So close in fact, that they can use a pig to work as a filter for blood in a human, much like a dialysis machine. With that said, there shouldn’t be much of a problem for making a unicorn, aside from the ethical ones. I personally have no problem with someone trying it, but I’m sure PETA would be quite pissed off.
Anyways, Happy Thanks Giving.
you have no common sense.
Oh i am no prodigy but thanks all the same. And well if he was really thinking that and i know he wasn’t before you give me a very long lecture- again- he would be an idiot. Even you have to agree with me God forbid. I can’t believe what scientists can do its amazing i really am a science feak not that thats a bad thing. All what i meant was because i am 14 my brain is still growing and i am sorry but unicorns can definately not have horns. This is because the place where the narwals chromasone is which means they have a horn well a horses chromasone is full so it would be impossible to do this unless science improved dramatically. And i mean dramatically. Sorry i’m going off on one of my waffles. Oh also i am not American but thanks all the same about thanksgiving. What is thanks giving by the way i have never quite understood it? Lotsa love Sophie and happy thanksgiving!!
I’m a narwal
… For anyone who goes with the whole darwinism thing; just because “natural selection” does exist, it doesn’t mean that the universe has to follow the whole idea 100%. For example, why do people have 2 arms? Wouldn’t it be “darwinistically” better to have four arms so that you can do more things at once? Wouldn’t it be darwinistically better for humans to be 200% smarter? Wouldn’t it be better if humans could perform photosynthesis? See, darwinism is but a theory. It does work in many aspects, but it’s not a “law”. Furthermore, it’s quite possible for a horse to one day grow a horn. If a rhino can have one, why not a horse? They’re actually pretty similiar in the mammalian animal systems, so it’s possible. And don’t forget that gazelles (related to deers) are bihorned creatures. It’s quite possible for a horse to one day have a single horn that is relocated to its snout. Frankly I don’t see what the awe and wonder with unicorns is. I mean, personally I’d be as afraid as heck of a unicorn. A horse is scary enough; given that it can trample me without me having a chance to fight back. A horse that can trample me and impale me is a lot worse. Now… if you want a mythological creature that would awe me if it were real… a pegasus. Now THAT would be a thing of dreams and myth. And frankly, I’d be amazed. Of course, I’m 99.99% sure that unless God intervenes with His current animal kingdom, it won’t exist.
me again. sorry but i keep checking my emails and seeing people keep arguing about Darwinism and the if narwals have horns why cant horses it is very simple. You are quite right to say masterfu that Darwinism is a theory but there is so much evidence it is now really a fact. As i keep saying masterfu it is impossible for horses to have a horn as their chromasone is full where the narwhals gene is and at the present moment even genetic engineering could not do this. Also your argument why humans should have four arms well would there be any point as it would not make us survive any more and anyway humans have become smarter by variation and adaptation so i dont see where you are coming from there. If you come up with anything better than darwinism be sure to let me know but i very well doubt it. Also the point of rhinos what you cunjured up is quite daft as they are related but they arent even the same type of ungulate and as i keep saying rhinos need them the same as narwhals do and HORSES DONT!!!!! Or do you belief in the creation story about god as if you do it has been proven wrong over and over again and that was the first theory so if you believe that and not Darwinism it is a backward way of thinking. So just take this into consideration and then you may relise HORSES CANT HAVE HORNS!!!!!
oh i forgot as well about your point of the universe doesnt have to follow darwinism well if they are spouting out things they dont need and loosing more energy because of it it is not going to be a very good lanet of living organisms is it? just think about it sensibly.
How can we believe you darwinists when you are uneducated about the point of a narwhals tusk, but you go about making stuff up anyway. The truth is evolution is just a theory. You CAN’T prove evolution because skeletons do not fossilize often enough to see transitional species. All a scientist can do is guess that there were transitional species, but there is no proof, and there won’t be any because as I said before, there is not enough fossil evidence to conclude this. Don’t push it on us like a fact.
As for the narwhal, you guys are saying they break the ice with it and that is why they need it. Wrong. Narwhals break the ice with the back of their heads. The reason for the tusk is unknown. It was pretty foolish to come to a conclusion like that without any knowledge. Why would these animals evolve a tusk for no reason? According to natural selection the animals who began growing tusks would have died out because if anything it would hinder it. Think about how a 6-9 foot long tusk could alter a whale’s life. And it is apparent the whales could survive without it since the females have no tusk.
And Sophie, for you to say that the theory of god has been proven wrong over and over again is foolish also. If anything the complexities of the small planet earth alone prove that thought was behind the process. I like when evolutionists call creationists unelightened fools because we believe in some “sparkly guy” in the universe when they believe in the far-fetched theory that a pinhead (that apparently came from nothing also) exploded and created everything. Where did this pinhead come from anyway?
oh yes we can prove it when people will listen to us
dear domenic the point i was making was unicorns cant exist and where have you heard narwals dont use there tusks to break the ice and thats not what its for and actually you are probably right as they probably do not only use it for that and since you say know one knows truthfully you are right but they have watched narwhals do this. And you are professing to know more about narwhals than anyone but you dont. As they have them for the reason or else they would be extinct as they would not be adapted enough. Before you say something like that read up on it properly and think. and think you are saying females dont have tusks it is a bit obvious as males have them to impress the females (has the penny dropped?). As there are two rules in the animal kingdom and that is have as many offspring or/ and live as long as possible.
EVOLUTION IS JUST A THEORY BUT THERE IS SO MUCH EVIDENCE IT IS NEARLY A FACT.
Oh and me foolish about the God thing (i knew i would have to be careful about putting that thought across) i dont think so. As you say the coplexities of the eaerth proves there is a god that is foolish and as i said before the theory of God has been proven wrong and that ‘pinhead’ was a very clever man. As for that experiment in europe they actually made a small version of the big bang using protons and neutrons. So i would rather believe in proof not the Noahs ark story
Why the hell can’t unicorns be real?!? My idea is that it’s nothing but a carnivorous/omnivorous horse that uses its horn for hunting! The same thing goes with dragons! Why can’t there be flying reptiles these days?!? There were like 50 billion years ago! WHY CAN’T DRAGONS BE REAL?!? SURE UNICORNS WON’T BE MAKING RAINBOWS AND FLYING AND SURE DRAGONS WON’T BE SPITTING FIRE, BUT THEY COULD EASILY BE SPITTING SOME SORT OF FLAMABLE FLUID! I understand why the Loch Ness Monster would be pretty much not that realistic because of the lack of food in the lake but still! It could be out there, somewhere! Who knows? Maybe we’ll find something like twice the size of the Blue Whale somewhere in the ocean?
Regarding weird animals, I just want to point out that there are plenty of creatures that seem almost magical that we’ve grown used to.
There’s the gigantic elephant. The extremely tall giraffe (which was believed to be a dragon by the ancient chinese). The basilisk that can run on water. Heck, flight is amazing; and we don’t think twice when we see a bird flying. There’s bio luminescence by fireflies and deepsea anglers. Heck, we’ve even proven that the legendary Krakens are actually real life creatures (though they’re not as huge as was once claimed; but nonetheless they’re still huge)… The blue whale is huge beyond imagination. There were “dragons” in the past, called Pteradons and Pteradactyls, only feature they were missing was fire breath (and while I do admit I can’t find the concept of firebreathing creatures as being very probable, it’s still very possible). Why? Well, would you believe me if I said there were animals that could electrocute you? Well, do consider the electric eel and the sturgeon (I’m pretty sure it’s called a sturgeon). They can both use electric shocks. Would you believe there are animals that can shoot you with biologically derived weapons? The bombardier beetle and the skunk are both able to shoot their victims with corrosive fluids. It’s slightly possible that flying lizards existed that could somehow create small bursts of fire…
Furthermore, regarding ‘magical’ creatures, let’s continue with other miracle creatures. Look up cordyceps on youtube. These are parasitic plants that will take over a victim and actually grow on their victim. Remember all those kids stories about eating watermelon seeds and having a watermelon vine grow out of you? Well, that’s what a cordycep does to you (granted it’s extremely rare to be affected as a human, but smaller insects get affected really easily).
Chameleons are also wonderous creatures that can alter color (not as perfectly as many people believe, but nonetheless it’s pretty amazing). Even more amazing are color changing octopi…
With that said, considering how many amazing animals we’ve PROVEN to exist, I can’t discount the possibility of a horse species that happened to have a horn grow out of its head. Besides, who’s to say that gazelles aren’t a form of horse? They seem extremely similar to me; and it’s pretty subjective for a scientist to choose whether deer are equine creatures. I mean, if we can classify a fish as a mammal due to its lack of gills (coughwhales/dolphins/orcascough), then why is it wrong to classify a deer as a horse just because of one horn?
So yes, that’s my view. Furthermore, for those of you who believe in God, there should be absolutely no reason for you to say “unicorns are impossible”. He has the ability to create any creature He wills. If He can create something as amazing as a human; then surely He can create a horse with a piece of bone sticking out of his head. Finally, carnivore or not, the horn shouldn’t matter. As far as I know, rhinos are horned herbivores. Oh, and it’s kinda random, but go check youtube for “cow eating chicken”. Not all herbivores are vegetarian.
the ungulate gazelles are as well and nowhere near the same anatomy. i rather think my brother looks like a fish, doesnt mean he is one. mind you i dont know???!!!
Oh yeah; I forgot to mention that there’s a high possibility that a gigantic sea serpent/ loch ness monster can exist. It was recently uncovered that there’s a small collection of “coecalynths” (or something like that) fish were found. These creatures were around during dinosaur times and were eaten by pleiosaurs I believe. Thus, if these fish still exist (in small numbers), then why can’t there be a few dozen pleiosaurs still lurking in the sea? I have no problem in believing in sea serpents. They can just be large amphibious anacondas. The sea has a habit of supporting huge animals, so why not? And yes, we have amazing sonar/radar and satellites, but despite all that, I don’t believe that our government is so powerful that they managed to scour the WHOLE ocean (well “oceans”; but you know what i mean)… There’s an extremely possible chance that there are tons of undiscovered creatures lying around. I mean, I heard we just located a secret tribe of brazilian savages that were in plain sight apparently… If it took us this long to find a few people living in a pretty heavily populated country; what does this tell us about an unpopulated water mass that we don’t visit very often? I doubt we’ve ever have more than 10% of the world’s waters under surveillance in any given instance (and honestly, I believe the true value is more like a fraction of 1%, but I’m gonna overestimate just in case)… So even if we pool all our resources to checking 10% of the world’s oceans to find a creature, it’s possible that it’ll have moved by then. Sure, for a small lake like Loch Ness, it’s easy to disprove a monster’s existence, but for something like a sea serpent in, say, the Indian Ocean, who’s to say that a sea serpent might not pop out suddenly, eat a ship, and then just go under the sands again? I believe that snakes can easily change their pressure level to comfortably attack at surface level, and then rest miles underneath the sea.
YEAH RIGHT MAN SEA SERPENTS ARE REAL. SO IS GOD. BUT HEAR THIS – THE FUCKIN NARWHAL IS THE GOD OF AQUATIC MAMMALS MAN, WHAT OTHER WHALE HAS A FUCKIN WEAPON GLUED ONTO ITS HEAD AAAAAAAHAHAHA
To be honest i wish there was unicorns and all magical stuff but i am afraid there cant be. Oh and Gazelles are definately not a type of horse as they have horns, their feet are different meaning they are a totally different ungulate- even look on wikipedia!! Am i the only athiest here? Did you know whales used to be wolves!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND HORSES DONT NEED HORNS GROWING OUT OF THERE HEAD SO UNICORNS WILL NEVER HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The loch ness monster- oh my god give me hope- could not be real as those dinosaurs couldnt live now due to the concentration of carbon dioxide, nitrogen etc.
Dear Sohpie,
I hate to have to break this to you with your very own methods, but unicorns could easily exist. All it would take you be one mutation, and for that “mutated” horse to reproduce (whos to say mares don’t find horned horses sexy?), and spread the horn bearing gene. In a few generations if the horns helped the horses gain mates, you could see hundreds of unicorns. Also don’t say that the Nucleus couldn’t support another gene, or that a chromosome couldn’t be expanded on or added, because there is plenty of room in the nucleus for more chromosomes.
As for that wolves to whales theory that you seem to love to restate, unfortunately its a rather weak theory. Whales are actually more genetically similar to pigs then wolves, and if you want a second example, whales are more molecularily similar to hippos, so there are three theories, any of which could be right. (oh and they weren’t actually wolves, they were a species very wolf-like, mesonychids i believe it said)http://antiochapologetics.blogspot.com/2007/11/wolf-to-whale-evolution_12.html if you want a source.
Also don’t be too quick to discredit the existance or persistance of prehistoric species, especially underwater ones in enviornments that are uneffected by changing sea currents. Gas levels would hardly effect the deep sea habitats, and take for example this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH5qizXFTzM
a prehistoric shark that still persists to this day.
I almost forgot my good narwhalin friends, and their “horns”! They are infact not horns, and are actually tusks. You see, if you had looked into this at all, you would realize that narwhals are two toothed mammals, and almost all males have a elongated left tooth, which forms their “horn”. Some males do have two tusks, and only one recorded female has had two tusks. I’m also afraid that your little ice breaking theory is also misled, as the tusk has millions of nervous sensors located in it, which for one make it much to sensitive to use for bashing ice around, (which wouldn’t be that effective anyways) besides the fact it has a perfectly good skull for doing that as someone else pointed out. The second point is that the tusk is actually used for sensing pressure, temperature, particle gradients, etc.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/13/science/13narw.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5050264
http://www.scubascoop.co.uk/animals/narwhal_horn_mystery_solved.php oh wowz all i had to do was google “narwhal horn use” to find three supportive links on the first page!
Heres a hint from someone who is only 15,(thats right i can use my not fully developed brain! oh no whats my excuse?)wikipedia is not your friend, and is not an apropriate source, if you want people to believe what you post, give links that support what you’ve stated (that goes for everyone else here bickering!)
get better websites there no better than wikipedia
yeah and if a mutation did happen they would die out straight away and it wouldnt be a real unicorn as a definition of one is a horse with a horn and it can create miracles and miracles couldnt happen due to a mutation. Next you will say you believe in Cinderella. Think!!!!!!!!! That is all you need to do- it is not that hard!!!!!!!!
Nice post, Stuart! Oh right, and regarding carbon dioxide levels, etc; we have no proof that a dinosaur wouldn’t be able to survive something like that. We have blue whales; they’re pretty huge (supposedly bigger than the ultralosaurus). Ok, fine, I’m pre-empting that the cynics are going to say “well, they’re warm blooded, that’s why they can deal with extremes”. Fine, but what about other huge animals like alligators and komodo dragons? Sure, nowhere as big as a blue whale, but they’re still pretty large.
Dear dear stuart i will make this short and sweet as you dont seem to understand my long ones so i will just give you two simple FACTS!( oh and there not my very own methods as i would not be so stupid to come up with nonsense). 1) You cant just make chromasones from nowhere- obviously which you seem to be suggesting. 2)It is not about the nucleus having no room it is the DNA strands within the nucleus what cant stand or add any more- OBVIOUSLY!! oh i must add a third fact because i know they werent wolves but like you said wolf like and yes you would be right but just because they are more related to other living organisms doesnt mean they didnt descend from wolves as for example a hippo could be a sub species half way down the line so i dont know what you mean there. And as i said way before these prehistoric sharks adapted as a monster like the loch ness died out years ago so it could not still be living as after all it is survival of the fittest!!! hope you understand and like i said feel free to check out what i am saying!
Dear sophie,
I’m very sorry I didn’t explain the theory of evolution to you, you see the DNA is hardwored to make the exact same DNA, and evolution can only occur when the body makes a mistake while coding the DNA, granted this doesn’t happen often, and 99% of these are negative mutations, but that’s evolution. Natural selection is all about survival, such as if there is a drought in the sudan, then the giraffes with short necks will die, and only the long necks will reproduce. You see, before you claim I’m saying “you can just make chromosomes” you might want to know how those chromosomes came to be. As for not being able to support another gene, I wouldn’t know, and unless you’re a biologist, or can link some credable site, you’re just spewing nonsense.
On to your little wolf matter (again), using your logic, I could say that whales descended from humans, because “just because they’re more related to other living organisms doesn’t mean” they couldn’t descend from humans! You again have no scource at all, credable or not, to back up you information.
Now if you just admit defeat or run along I won’t have to keep shaming your posts =D
And ps, insulting people in your post only makes you seem desperate and petty
Oh and thank you uber:)
can i just say stuart havent what you have said to me just been what i have been saying, and ok i will give you a credible site go on to the evolution website and then you will find i am right. oh my god about the wolves i cant believe you are saying all this it just shows you want to sound clever and i will not just run along as i feel you need to know the truth. get over yourself so i dont think you have shamed my post you just think you have because when it comes down to it you dont know ANYTHING. What is your job?
And the inevitable hatred spewing by the “scientist cynic” has commenced. I will admit that I’m biased towards Stuart, but let’s just get the facts straight:
a. Evolution is a theory, and lot a law. Hence “the theory of evolution” and not the “law of evolution”. As such, since it’s a theory to begin with, we can’t “prove” anything as being true or false about evolution.
b. Assuming the current consensus is correct, evolution is *believed* to be caused when DNA mutates and thus causes a “deformed” child. Now, if this deformed child has its own kids, there’s a chance the child will too have this deformity. Deformity can mean anything from super powers to a missing heart. Obviously the child with a missing heart dies as soon as its umbilical cord is cut (natural selection prevents it from having children; whereas the superpower creature [no, I don't believe that "superpowers" are probable, I'm just making a facetious post] will probably survive long enough to find a mate, whose children may also inherit this specialty.
c. I believe Sophie said earlier that because horses don’t need horns that evolution will not cause them to have horns. And that even if one of them happened to have a horned child that the gene wouldn’t be passed on since there’s no need for a horn. Well, that’s been proven false. I can’t remember the exact word (it starts with an L, something like “lachyten’s theory”?), but it’s been shown that evolution has nothing to do with how much a certain body part is used. For example: just because a giraffe stretches its neck a lot, it doesn’t mean that its children will eventually grow longer necks. This has been proven by a scientist who cut off the tails of newborn mice for 20 generations in a row. As soon as a mouse gave birth, he cut the baby’s tail off. Then, when that tailless mouse had a child, it too got its tail cut off. And so on, 19 more times.
The 21st generation mouse (surprise) had a tail. You might argue that it’s too short a span to prove anything, but still, it made no difference; at the very least, one of the 20 generations should have had a slightly deformed tail, but no, they were perfect.
Furthermore, the point of “they died out long ago, so they can’t exist because of harsh temperatures” was said before. Yet, the same thing was said about the coecalynth. But sure enough, there’s a recently found colony of them. It was also said that krakens were just rumors. Yet we’ve found them in the wild and have even captured a couple of their young and dissected them and whatnot. If you don’t believe me, type “giant squid japan” in google.
Anyhow, because of all that reasoning above, I believe it’s possible for a horse to have a horn grow out. Chromosomes are extremely complex, and we can’t claim to be God. There’s a possibility that we haven’t fully uncovered how chromosomes work (if we did, we’d have invented life by now, but we haven’t. And no, cloning/artificial insemination is NOT creating life on our own). As such, there’s a good chance that even if chromosomes have limits that horses haven’t filled their’s. Besides, who’s to say that even if the chromosome IS filled that a horse’s skull gene doesn’t grow a mutation that causes the calcium to grow into a hard elongated lump?
Anyhow, this is especially more likely to occur if a horse decides to mate with a rhino or similar creature. Mules and lygers and such weird creatures exist due to cross breeding, so there’s a chance that a horse may give birth to a creature who’s almost fully horse except for a rhino’s horn. (granted, the poor child would have no genitals, but oh well)
I believe it was Lamarck’s theory of use and disuse.
you got lamarkism and darwinism mixed up u idiot. It was Lamarks theory what got proven wrong by darwin- duh. Unless Lamark was reincarnated and his theory was so ridiculous anyway.
Sophie, I’m sorry if I come off as “wanting to sound clever” by typing clean and coherent posts. I’ve tried being courteous and patient, but you have yet to show me anything substantial to back up any claims you have made. “the evolution website” Isn’t even a source, more or less a crediable one, I’m sure there are hundreds of evolution websites, but even if I clicked on one, I doubt there would be anything to back up the specific points you have made.
While I’m at it, could you please explain what this “truth” I should know is, because if it is how to better comprehend incoherent english, I would love to know it. Also, uber, you are most likely biased towards me, because unlike my counterpart, I actually realize what it takes to formulate and structure a debate, despite my only debate education being common sense.
Luckily for you sophie, I will admit I don’t know much, but if you think about it, no one knows much, and if you had a shred of intellegence you would realize how weak of an insult that was. But if you must get this personal to try to win a debate about evolution, then I’ll tell you that aside from working in the lab with my father (who is a chemist with an h-index of 78) I don’t have a job. But then again I’m only 15. So sophie, care to tell me what your evolutionist expertise job is at 14(as you told us earlier), and please, being stubborn and petty hold no qualifications. One day you will learn that you don’t know everything,and you aren’t always right, but I guess it goes to show that maturity and intellegence don’t come with age, or vice versa.
oh so you are 15 thenand am i correct you have been doing about darwinism i wouldnt actually know since i passed my science GCSE at the age of 12 and just finishing my a level. I must admt i am still doing my english gcse and am doing perfectly well i just dont think it is important.
Anyway i never sais i was right but at least i am telling you theories which have evidence whilst you are saying ones what nobody has come up with. But if you want to prove your own theories right you will make alot of money so go ahead.
you probably went on the wrong site it is the pbs evolution site and if you can be bothered which you clearly havent been just watch the videos.
uber it is called lamarkism and darwinism was after lamarkism. It was lamarkism proven wrong not darwinism, be careful of that mistake.
oh and i am so so so sorry for not being your intellectual equal as you are so so so mature. Unfortunately for you stuart you have not got a shred of intelligence as when i asked what job you had i was just curious but of course everybody is just out to get you. so get a bit of maturity yourself and stop acting supreme because you really are not but just keep on believing since you yourself have no maturity as you have clearly stated you know nothing so stop wasting our tme and go away.
Fortunately or unfortunately, I don’t know, we don’t take the GCSE in Missouri, but we did cover darwinism when I was 13.
As for theories, I gave you the theory of evolution, and the theory of natural selection, but hey, if you want to credit me with these theories, I will gladly accept, and happily direct you to one of the thousands of sites that support the theories that apparently no one came up with, although Darwinism is primarily based on natural selection.
As for bothering, no I couldn’t be bothered to go find evidence for your points, thats why you provide links. If you give me a full web adress, where all I have to do is click a link or copy and paste it, I’ll be happy to check out whatever videos or articles you provide. Its really not that hard, seeing as I provided 5 sites in my original post, which took all of 10 minutes.
Sophie, if you would stop and review all your posts, and then all mine, you would realize the extreme irony of your last remarks, and how futile it is to regurgitate my remarks in a feeble attempt to insult me once again. Besides, who is the one who became inflamed by the sarcastic title, and ended up steering the converstation away from narwhals and unicorns, into a debate where you hardly read my posts (based on the rediculousness of your remarks) and try to claim you’re right by pure stubborness.
But really, the only thing I’d like to figure out, is what your problem with what I have said is. In my first post, I came out and explained how a unicorn could occur in nature, based on the theories of evolution and natural selection (which I believe you support) and I was met with hate, and facts which I assume where made up, as you failed to provide any source.
So unless you can provide some substantial evidence of why unicorns can’t exsist, as was the original topic, then I am done here, because what is the point of arguing about a topic when your opponent provides nothing to disprove or dispute?
they were mixed up theories with your bits added on them to make you sound as if you know more. But believe it or not because i dont give a monkeys uncle you are typing rubbish.
Ah, yes. Thanks butterpants. That’s what I was thinking of.
well actually stuart you was not talking about natural selection as you missed a few vital points and without them points it makes no sense and in essence totally messed your ideas up.
Anyway I think we should start afresh and so i can explain clearly so just forget everything what has happened and i will try to explain better, so no more insults from me or you.
x sophie x
Sounds good to me. =D
I am glad we have seen eye to eye.
there is no way that there can be such thing as unicorns as the is no way chromasones can be made
those of you who have left essays. you guys are nuts.
just to let you all know, I actually have a unicorn and a luck dragon. they are very intelligent and make great pets!
to FAT and mongchacha
just because you dont understand something doesnt mean you have to ridicule other people as it makes you look even more stupid.
sophie, i think i look pretty intelligent. maybe you lack a sense of humor and were not able to sense the light-hearted silliness of this blog entry. but just fyi, the question that is also the title of this blog entry was NOT serious. but i forgive your lack of humor, as your serious and heated comments have caused my friends and i to laugh quite heartily! so thank you!
u definately dont sound it- intelligent i mean.
xsophiex ;-)
unfortunately for you and your obviously stupid friends- no offence – just because it started with a joke does not mean you cant talk about something else or have you such a lack of humour you laugh at people who are trying to explain something. Get a life as you must talk about the same thing over and over again since you seem to be implying i can only talk about a joke as it was the starting point of a conversation so i think you need to get a better sense of humour and laugh at something a bit more funny as to me you are pretty dull if you find that funny.
I mean if you would like to join the world of things what are really lame to laugh at i can give you a few! Bye hope i never have a dull supposed to be funny conversation with you again
lots of love sophie. hope you laugh at this with your lack of knowing what is funny and to your equally dull friends.
you narwhal
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
that is so funny NOT!!!!!!!
I think that the likelyhood of unicorns ever have existed is not impossible but most likely they didn’t. If there once was a unicorn species which died out it was probably from the same reason narwhals are shrinking in numbers, elephants and other animals being hunted for trophies. I believe creatures changed and died out from natural selection(evolution) it’s silly not to, it can even be observed in bacteria in real time where generations come and go so quickly you can see mutated strains that adapt better eventually overtake previous ones. Though i don’t believe in the big bang. If you think about it totally logically and unbiased, matter spontaneously coming in being from nothing, absolutely nothing is just as impossible as a God having always been there, So me personally i choose the God way. Even still i am a science maths person i’m doing biology, physics, methods and Spesh maths year 12 so i’m not informed on all the theories there are but i do research into things and most foundation scientists who made the ‘laws’ still didn’t believe their own theories were complete and often believed in God. So that’s what i have to say
someone who talks a bit of sense finally. It is hard to believe the big bang theory but if you go in depth it is actually very easy to understand and before any body flies off the handle yes it is a theory but has more evidence leading to it than god ever will. One member of my family is quite religious and cant believe that i am an athiest as i did go to church for a few years of my life so i have dealt with both sides and the science way is definately way more sensible. I mean the virgin birth, since they are suggesting that it means they are suggesting Mary is a lizard. Thats not vey nice and i thought religion was supposed to be all luvvie dovvie!!!!!
so meaning god is the foundation for people who dont fully understand then?
ok sophie and stuart. i can see that you are both smart, but please be quiet. I am trying to say this in a nice way and im sorry if this sounds offending!!!!!
BEST REGARDS, GRANT
BTW I am 13 and have passed a college entry SAT test and numeros others (just bragging cuz everyone else is !). I appreciate that all of you (Xpecially sophi {-_-}) are posting. But, the main reason here, in my opinion is not the stupid assinine comment about unicorns, but that picture of the beheaded whale. I have a fundraising license for Texas and i hold major fundraising events for the whales and have saved over 2000. This picture makes me feel horrible inside because i have given up most of my social life for saving these animals. People dont understand that these whales are little boys and girls favorite animals. That these whales are living, breathing creatures of GOD’s kingdom. The narwhal is my favorite whale, and seeing one dead makes me feel like i am not fulfilling my destiny to save the whales. SO, FOR ALL YOU SICK FUC*S OUT THERE THAT HAVE SOME SICK THRILL ON KILLING THESE GODLY CREATURES, YOU CAN SUCK MY DINGLY DANGLE. i
;;i;; <— middle finger
best regards,
Grant
P.S. I love you Sophie lol (internet crush: smart girls are better than hot ones <3
P.P.S i wrote too much to go back and reread, but i hope i make sense
Not saying you are not hot sophie, just saying that smart girls are better than pretty airheads :)
Sophie- your two main points:
A) that you cannot create additional chromosomes
B) Horses cannot have horns
Are both wrong.
A) Downs Syndrome is a mutation which is caused by the accidental duplication of a chromosome during cell meiosis/mitosis (not sure which one). According to your own theory of evolution (Darwinism), if this chromosome duplication was beneficial then the species would perpetuate the mutation. Resulting in an added chromosome.
A case example of something along these lines is the fact that chromosome count often differs from genus to genus. Even though many of these genii are supposed to have come from a common ancestor, they differ in chromosome count due to beneficial mutations.
With that clarified, your argument about not being able to manipulate chromosome count is most likely irrelevant due to the fact that the genetic information for something as simple as a horn or tusk takes only a fraction of one chromosome.
B) Horses cannot have horns. This too is incorrect. The same genetic information that causes rhinos to have horns and narwhals to have tusks and elephants to have tusks and some types of lizards to have spiny little growths all over is duplicable in horses.
This can be explained by a parallel phenomenon which is the appearance of fins on whales, wings on birds, and hands on humans. The difference in these appendages is not as extreme as one may think. In fact, the primary differences in bone structure among all three appendages is the result of group of gene clusters knows at the HOX genes. These genes are what regulate the positioning and proportions of the various appendages available to mammals. For example, xrays of a birds wing and a human hand will show almost identical bone structures with the only difference being in the proportion of various bones. A birds wing is a human hand with highly elongated fingers.
The above is true. It follows that it is possible to genetically elongate the incisors of a horse through the snout in what would be classified as a horn. At this point I do not think anyone is researching such an absurd mutation but it is most likely possible. Maybe when it comes your time to do doctorate work (which I’m sure someone like you will get around to) you might look into the matter.
With that I cannot say I am not impressed with your tenacity and interest in sciences at your age. I am not familiar with the education system you are in but congratulations on finishing your GCSE (general course in science and engineering?)
Ask away if you have any questions I would love to explain more
Quoted from the March 11 reply:
“Get a life AS you must talk about the same thing over and over again SINCE you seem to be implying i can only talk about a joke AS it was the starting point of a conversation SO i think you need to get a better sense of humour and laugh at something a bit more funny AS to me you are pretty dull if you find that funny.”
Sounds like Miss Teen South Carolina has been reading the dooby
human with horn
http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/8629/unicornsz6.jpg
right with what u say mike i only read the first paragraph since i couldnt be bothered readin the rest but not every whale or horse is going to hav downs syndrome and explain to me why having a horn on the top of their head wuld be useful? nd grant congratulations on ur college entry. and jf wht do u mean by tht?
la perra,
There is recent evidence that strongly suggests that Narwhals use their “horn” for neither fighting with other males OR echolocation. The “horn” is actually a tooth (an incisor), and it is covered in tons of sensory receptors to sense water temperature, salinity, etc. Although it is a nice thought, I doubt a horse would have use for an aquatic sensory tool. Unicorns are generally thought to have a horn growing from the top of their heads, NOT a tooth. For these reasons, I think it’s a stretch to suggest that a horse would ever have a structure synonymous with the Narwhal tooth; no use for it, and no theory that the unicorn’s “horn” is an incisor like the Narwhal’s. But, no need to have your dreams shattered by this. You keep right on looking for unicorns, and let me know when you find one because I’ll be quite excited myself : )
waaaaaaa hoooooooooo tashina is the best!!!!!!!!
Sophie- you’re obviously too immature and closed minded to discuss this
hehe another one trying to sound mature, one thing i wuld say about me is that i am very mature just shows how wrong people can be, it just makes you sound pathetic but i will discuss it with u if u like. and how am i closed minded when i hav simply been sayin whats tru? you know life is simple just humans make it complicated- thats all ive got to say.
see ya mature mike hehe – GROW UP!!!!!!!!!!!! all this silly name calling is pathetic
SEE UNICORNS ARE REAL SOMEHOW IN GREEK LEGENDS AND\OR MEDIAVEL TIMES UNICORNS WERE ALIVE AND DIED OUT! BUT NOW IN 21CENTURIE THE NEW ONES ARE FORMING! FROM THOSE WHALES OR WATEVER THEYR CALLED-FINALLY WE CAN ACTUALY HAVE REAL UNICORNS IF THEY DONT DIE OUT! IF PEOPLE WONT KILL THEM! IF A SPISHIE WILL SOMEHOW GO IN TO A HORSE OR TRANSFORM IN THE HORSE WTEVER COLOUR WE CAN HAVE UNICORNS BEING BORN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOW WOW WOW WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!