Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Tuesday, November 18, 2008 | Science : Evolution and Biology | print version Print | Comments |

Audio The Sea Turtle's Tale: Back to the sea, and back again to the land

Richard Dawkins


quicktime Audio requires QuickTime Player. Download the free player here.
4.3 MB : 9:27
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.

Text version at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2005/feb/26/scienceandnature.evolution

Also see:
The Lava Lizard's Tale
The Giant Tortoise's Tale

In "The giant tortoise's tale" I described ancestral tortoises floating inadvertently across from South America, colonising the Galápagos Islands by mistake, subsequently evolving local differences on each island and giant size on all of them. But why assume that the coloniser was a land tortoise? Wouldn't it be simpler to guess that marine turtles, already at home in the sea, hauled up on the island beaches as if to lay their eggs, enjoyed what they saw, stayed on dry land and evolved into tortoises? No. Nothing like that happened on the Galápagos islands, which have only been in existence a few million years.

There is good evidence that the most recent common ancestor of all today's tortoises, including those on the mainlands of America, Australia, Africa and Eurasia, as well as the giants of Galápagos, Aldabra, the Seychelles and other oceanic islands, was itself a land tortoise. In their recent ancestry, to misquote Stephen Hawking, it's tortoises all the way down. The various giant tortoises of the Galápagos islands are certainly descended from South American land tortoises.

If you go back far enough everything lived in the sea: watery alma mater of all life. At various points in evolutionary history, enterprising individuals within many different animal groups moved out onto the land, sometimes even to the most parched deserts, taking their own private sea water with them in blood and cellular fluids. In addition to the reptiles, birds, mammals and insects which we see all around us, other groups that have succeeded out of water include scorpions, snails, crustaceans such as woodlice and land crabs, millipedes and centipedes, spi ders and their kin and various worms. And we mustn't forget the plants, without whose prior invasion of the land none of the other migrations could have happened.

Moving from water to land involved a major redesign of every aspect of life, from breathing to reproduction: it was a great trek through biological space. Nevertheless, with what seems almost like perversity, a good number of thoroughgoing land animals later turned around, abandoned their hard-earned terrestrial re-tooling, and trooped back into the water again. Seals and sea lions (such as the breathtakingly tame Galápagos sea lion) have only gone part-way back. They show us what the intermediates might have been like, on the way to extreme cases such as whales and dugongs. Whales (including the small whales we call dolphins), and dugongs with their close cousins the manatees, ceased to be land creatures altogether and reverted to the full marine habits of their remote ancestors. They don't even come ashore to breed. They do, however, still breathe air, having never developed anything equivalent to the gills of their earlier marine incarnation.

Other animals that have returned from land to water are pond snails, water spiders, water beetles, Galápagos flightless cormorants, penguins (Galápagos has the only penguins in the northern hemisphere), marine iguanas (found nowhere but Galápagos) and turtles (abundant in the surrounding waters).

Iguanas are adept at surviving accidental oceanic crossings on driftwood (well-documented within the West Indies), and there can be no doubt that the marine iguanas of Galápagos trace back to just such a piece of living flotsam from South America. The oldest of the existing Galápagos Islands is no older than 3m years. Since the marine iguanas evolved here and nowhere else, you might think this sets a maximum limit on the date of their return to the water. The story is more complicated, however.

The Galápagos islands were made, one after the other, as the Nazca tectonic plate moved, at about 10 cm per year, over a particular volcanic hotspot under the Pacific Ocean. As the plate moved east, from time to time the hotspot punched through, delivering another island along the production line. This is why the youngest islands are towards the west and the oldest to the east. But, at the same time as the Nazca plate continues to move east, it is also being subducted under the South American plate. The easternmost islands sink under the sea, at a rate of about one centimetre per year. It is now known that, although the oldest existing island is only 3m years old, there has been an eastward-moving and sinking archipelago in this area for at least 17m years. Islands now submerged could have provided the initial haven for iguanas to colonise and evolve, at any time during that period. There would have been plenty of time for them to island-hop before their original ancestral island sank beneath the waves.

Turtles went back to the sea much longer ago. They are, in one respect, less fully given back to the water than whales or dugongs, for turtles still lay their eggs on beaches. Like all vertebrate returnees to the water, they breathe air, but in this department they go one better than whales. Some turtles extract additional oxygen from the water through a pair of chambers at the rear end, richly supplied with blood vessels. One Australian river turtle, indeed, gets the majority of its oxygen by breathing, as an Australian would not hesitate to say, through its arse.

There is evidence that all modern turtles are descended from a terrestrial ancestor who lived before most of the dinosaurs. There are two key fossils called Proganochelys quenstedti and Palaeochersis talampayensis dating from early dinosaur times, which appear to be close to the ancestry of all modern turtles and tortoises. You might wonder how we tell whether fossil animals, especially if only fragments are found, lived on land or in water. Sometimes it's pretty obvious. Ichthyosaurs were reptilian contemporaries of the dinosaurs, with fins and streamlined bodies. The fossils look like dolphins and they surely lived like dolphins, in the water. With turtles it is a little less obvious. One neat way to tell is by measuring the bones of their forelimbs.

Walter Joyce and Jacques Gauthier, at Yale University, took three key measurements in the arm and hand bones of 71 species of living turtles and tortoises. They used a kind of triangular graph paper to plot the three measurements against one another. Lo and behold, all the land tortoise species formed a tight cluster of points in the upper part of the triangle; all the water turtles cluster in the lower part of the triangular graph. There was no overlap, except when they added some species that spend time in both water and land. Sure enough, these amphibious species show up, on the triangular graph, half way between the "wet cluster" and the "dry cluster". Well then, to the obvious next step: where do the fossils fall? The hands of P. quenstedti and P. talampayensis leave us in no doubt. Their points on the graph are right in the thick of the dry cluster. Both these fossils were dry-land tortoises. They come from the era before our turtles returned to the water.

You might think, therefore, that modern land tortoises have probably stayed on land ever since those early terrestrial times, as most mammals did after a few of them went back to sea. But apparently not. If you draw out the family tree of all modern turtles and tortoises, nearly all the branches are aquatic. Today's land tortoises constitute a single branch, deeply nested among branches consisting of aquatic turtles. This suggests that modern land tortoises have not stayed on land continuously since the time of P. quenstedti and P. talampayensis . Rather, their ancestors were among those who went back to the water, and they then re-emerged back onto the land in (relatively) more recent times.

Tortoises therefore represent a remarkable double return. In common with all mammals, reptiles and birds, their remote ancestors were marine fish and before that various more or less worm-like creatures stretching back, still in the sea, to the primeval bacteria. Later ancestors lived on land and stayed there for a very large number of generations. Later ancestors still evolved back into the water and became sea turtles. And finally they returned yet again to the land as tortoises, some of which, though not the Galápagos giants, now live in the driest of deserts.

I have described DNA as "the Genetic Book of the Dead". Because of the way natural selection works, there is a sense in which the DNA of an animal is a textual description of the worlds in which its ancestors were naturally selected. For a fish, the genetic book of the dead describes ancestral seas. For us and most mammals, the early chapters of the book are all set in the sea and the later ones all out on land. For whales, dugongs, marine iguanas, penguins, seals, sea lions, turtles and, remarkably, tortoises, there is a third section of the book which recounts their epic return to the proving grounds of their remote past, the sea. But for the tortoises, perhaps uniquely, there is yet a fourth section of the book devoted to a final - or is it? - reemergence, yet again to the land. Can there be another animal for whom the genetic book of the dead is such a palimpsest of multiple evolutionary U-turns?

Comments 1 - 50 of 154 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #286429 by maton100 on November 18, 2008 at 2:54 pm

 avatarI love turtles.

Other Comments by maton100

2. Comment #286482 by Szymanowski on November 18, 2008 at 3:47 pm

 avatar
palimpsest
I'll bet Richard became a zoologist and wrote this essay solely for the opportunity to use the word "palimpsest" in a sentence.

Other Comments by Szymanowski

3. Comment #286510 by DeepFritz on November 18, 2008 at 4:29 pm

 avatarThe Ancestors tale is my favourite piece of all of Richard's works. It is a supreme achievement and a beautiful series of stories about why living creatures are the way they are.

I think the Redwood's tale (talking about carbon dating) should be compulsory learning material (infact the entire book should be) for every schoolkid.

Other Comments by DeepFritz

4. Comment #286526 by mdowe on November 18, 2008 at 5:27 pm

 avatarRe: 2. Comment #286482 by Szymanowski

That's a real word? ... I thought it was just a typo =P

Other Comments by mdowe

5. Comment #286534 by Brian English on November 18, 2008 at 6:22 pm

 avatar
Whales (including the small whales we call dolphins)
Minor quibble, but Orcas (Killer Whales) are dolphins and are not small.

Other Comments by Brian English

6. Comment #286536 by Titania on November 18, 2008 at 6:34 pm

 avatar1. Comment #286429 by maton100

I love turtles.


I love Dawkins. I could read his work and listen to him speak all day long and never tire.

Other Comments by Titania

7. Comment #286540 by Titania on November 18, 2008 at 6:49 pm

 avatar
Tortoises therefore represent a remarkable double return. In common with all mammals, reptiles and birds, their remote ancestors were marine fish and before that various more or less worm-like creatures stretching back, still in the sea, to the primeval bacteria.


I hope wooter doesn’t read this blasphemy or he will post the video again. Just in case he does;

http://www.skeptics.com.au/articles/dawkins.htm

Other Comments by Titania

8. Comment #286541 by Layla Nasreddin on November 18, 2008 at 6:51 pm

 avatar#2 Szymanowski
I'll bet Richard became a zoologist and wrote this essay solely for the opportunity to use the word "palimpsest" in a sentence.


Silly, if that were his true goal in life, he could have just become an antiquarian or an ancient historian. Then he could write lengthy treatises on, say, the Archimedes palimpsest. :-P

I love turtles (and tortoises) too, and it's always a pleasure to learn more about them (and other animals) from somebody whose passion for the subject shines through every sentence.

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

9. Comment #286547 by rod-the-farmer on November 18, 2008 at 7:47 pm

 avatarLayla, is that not the National Geographic girl ? What a haunting beauty.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

10. Comment #286550 by transylvanian on November 18, 2008 at 7:55 pm

 avatarSzymanowski said: "I'll bet Richard became a zoologist and wrote this essay solely for the opportunity to use the word 'palimpsest' in a sentence."

I think being able to slip "panglossian" in there occasionally is pretty great, too.

Other Comments by transylvanian

11. Comment #286557 by Elles on November 18, 2008 at 9:47 pm

 avatarIt's probably just a British thing, but please tell me that I'm not the only one who laughed at Richard's pronunciation of Iguana.

It's not my fault that I've heard it pronounced completely differently all my life...

Other Comments by Elles

12. Comment #286559 by Sittingduck on November 18, 2008 at 9:51 pm

 avatar
One Australian river turtle, indeed, gets the majority of its oxygen by breathing, as an Australian would not hesitate to say, through its arse.


A turtle that reminds me of some political pundits inhabiting the US airwaves....

Other Comments by Sittingduck

13. Comment #286568 by N. Fidel on November 18, 2008 at 11:04 pm

The Ancestor's Tale is Professor Dawkins' best book by long odds, and the best part: he's apparently still writing it. The computer print-outs of this and other tales published exclusively on this board are comfortably wedged in my copy of this fantastic tome.

Any possibility of their inclusion in future reprints?

Other Comments by N. Fidel

14. Comment #286578 by Jesse. on November 19, 2008 at 12:31 am

I love these additional stories to the ancestors tale. It's my favorite among his books by far. My thanks to the professor for writing and posting this.

Other Comments by Jesse.

15. Comment #286581 by robotaholic on November 19, 2008 at 12:39 am

 avataromg i love Richard Dawkins - he's performing again! THIS is getting back to basics. THIS is Dawkin's being #1

Other Comments by robotaholic

16. Comment #286590 by Alun ap Rhisiart on November 19, 2008 at 1:09 am

 avatarRod, the photographer is Steve McCurry, from Magnum, a great photographer, as you say.
http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx?VP=XSpecific_MAG.PhotographerDetail_VPage&l1=0&pid=2K7O3R13O2CM&nm=Steve McCurry

Other Comments by Alun ap Rhisiart

17. Comment #286601 by Ian on November 19, 2008 at 2:13 am

Having only a sketchy knowledge of what a palimpsest is, I wikied it and found the following:

..the consumption of old codices for the sake of the material was so great that a synodal decree of the year 691 forbade the destruction of manuscripts of the Scriptures or the church fathers, except for imperfect or injured volumes. Such a decree put added pressure on retrieving the vellum on which secular manuscripts were written.


Religion does poison everything.

Other Comments by Ian

18. Comment #286605 by Roger Stanyard on November 19, 2008 at 3:04 am

 avatarElles, well how do non-English pronounce Iguana?

Other Comments by Roger Stanyard

19. Comment #286606 by rod-the-farmer on November 19, 2008 at 3:23 am

 avatarNorth Americans typically pronounce it as IG-WANA. It is unusual to hear IG-YOU-WANA. I suspect it is a bit like JAG-YOU-AR. West of the pond you hear mostly JAG-WAR. In rare cases you will hear that middle U pronounced by someone who owns one of those cars, and wishes to appear correct, based on the pronunciation used by the manufacturer. Personally, I just say JAG.

Far more common in N. America is a similar mis-pronunciation, of PORSH. Even among their owners. Dropping the final E sound drives me nuts.

To get the point across I say (falsely) that I own a COR-VET-EEE.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

20. Comment #286609 by JRTate on November 19, 2008 at 3:37 am

 avatar
Far more common in N. America is a similar mis-pronunciation, of PORSH. Even among their owners. Dropping the final E sound drives me nuts.

To get the point across I say (falsely) that I own a COR-VET-EEE.


Do you ever stop to take a second to listen to yourself or just think about how petty you're being, rod?

Other Comments by JRTate

21. Comment #286626 by rod-the-farmer on November 19, 2008 at 4:35 am

 avatarAncient turtle discovered on Skye

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7736786.stm

How timely.

And as for JRTate, I NEVER consider myself petty in this regard. Proper use of your native language is a sign of your level of education. What would you think of someone who mis-pronounced your own name ? Repeatedly, even after you took the time to correct them. Would you feel insulted ? Would you feel the person doing it was being deliberately rude, or just mentally challenged and unable to speak properly ? When we teach our infant children to speak, hopefully we try to teach them the "right" way to say words. That is so they will be understood by all who hear them. Next time you go by a Porsche dealer, drop by and ask them how they pronounce the name of the car they sell. It is rude and/or ignorant to mis-pronounce the name. Pick one. Or both.

Reminds me of the old joke - What is the difference between a Porsche and a Porcupine ?

Answer - On the Porcupine, the pricks are on the outside.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

22. Comment #286667 by Layla Nasreddin on November 19, 2008 at 5:53 am

 avatar#17 Ian
Having only a sketchy knowledge of what a palimpsest is, I wikied it and found the following:
..the consumption of old codices for the sake of the material was so great that a synodal decree of the year 691 forbade the destruction of manuscripts of the Scriptures or the church fathers, except for imperfect or injured volumes. Such a decree put added pressure on retrieving the vellum on which secular manuscripts were written.


It's hard to imagine a time when writing materials were so expensive that people would go to such lengths to clean off and reuse them.

Religion does poison everything.


Well...Jews in the Middle Ages, and sometimes even today, avoided destroying or reusing any piece of writing with the name of God on it (hence why some write God as G-d) and would instead put them away in a geniza, a storeroom, in the synagogue. A chance discovery of such a room in Cairo, the Cairo Geniza, has been one of the most important sources of first-hand documentation of Middle Eastern medieval history, with 200,000 manuscripts dating from medieval times to the 19th century. Had the original owners of these manuscripts not had such an irrational belief, we would be the poorer for not having them. (Then again, I suppose it could be said that life was made much poorer for countless numbers of people because of silly religious rules like that one...)

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

23. Comment #286673 by Layla Nasreddin on November 19, 2008 at 6:09 am

 avatar#9 rod-the-farmer
Layla, is that not the National Geographic girl ? What a haunting beauty.

I was wondering how long it would take somebody to notice! Yes, this is an outtake picture of Sharbat Gula, one they didn't use at the time. I was a bit disappointed when they found her again that the National Geographic staff didn't offer to help her emigrate somewhere, or at least offer her some of the money she's helped them earn. (Well, maybe they did, but she or Mr. Sharbat Gula turned it down -- they didn't say.)

One of the reasons I picked it was because I frequently try to hide my face, whether I'm nervous, embarrassed, frightened...I can easily see why many women prefer to hide their faces, honestly.

Incidentally, about tortoises:
And finally they returned yet again to the land as tortoises, some of which, though not the Galápagos giants, now live in the driest of deserts.

I knew somebody who owned a desert tortoise, not uncommon as pets around here, who acted almost like a dog. He would beg for food, scratch at the door, and liked being "petted". He was so cute!

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

24. Comment #286684 by Lucas on November 19, 2008 at 6:50 am

 avatarRod - Dude, iguana and jaguar are both Spanish/Mexican words. The are pronounced with Spanish inflection. Porche is not mispronounced, it's just shortened for ease of use into a single syllable like many words. British folk can be forgiven for mispronouncing Spanish/Mexican words, but Americans should not be. Freakin' Canadians, yeesh ...

By the way, and way off topic, everyone take a look at the aurora shot on Saturn on today's APOD. Weird shit.

EDIT: Replaced "infliction" with "inflection", thanks to jabber.

Other Comments by Lucas

25. Comment #286689 by jabber on November 19, 2008 at 7:04 am

 avatar@ Rod the farmer
"To get the point across I say (falsely) that I own a COR-VET-EEE."

correctly, that should be Corvett-uh, with a guttral rhotic consonant on the R.
- Porsche, which should correctly be pronounced Porch-uh not Porsh-ee..that would , i suppose, make someone who has been Porche-d by someone who is a Porsch-er (as in poacher - poachee).

I dont think its petty to insist on correct pronunciation - in the Orient (the continent, not the local restaurant), that approach could get you into serious trouble!

Never confuse precision for pedantry

oh - and Lucas, i have never heard of a Spanish infliction - unless you're talking about what they did to the Aztecs....i suspect you may mean affliction, or possibly inflexion?

Other Comments by jabber

26. Comment #286693 by Riley on November 19, 2008 at 7:15 am

 avatarI definitely have enjoyed the Ancestor's Tale. I especially like the short story quality of the book. I can open it up to any section and read something interesting.

However, when reading this book and thinking about the process of natural selection, I couldn't help thinking that the process by which we come into being is not statistically improbable. It seems to me to be very probable, if not inevitable, given the amount of time we've had.

I don't mean "us" exactly, but rather "us": cell-based, seeing, hearing, smelling, sexually-reproducing, intelligent life.

Other Comments by Riley

27. Comment #286695 by jabber on November 19, 2008 at 7:23 am

 avatari own a VW which i pronounce - FolksVargen - *wink*

Other Comments by jabber

28. Comment #286713 by rod-the-farmer on November 19, 2008 at 8:30 am

 avatarThanks, jabber. Porsche actually comes in at least two varieties. Back porches (911 et al.) and front porches (924, 944 and 928). Mid-engined versions are less common, and mostly race cars. I have driven a number of them, and raced against more. They are great cars. Wish I could afford to buy & service one.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

29. Comment #286717 by God fearing Atheist on November 19, 2008 at 8:37 am

 avatar
#286695 by jabber
i own a VW which i pronounce - FolksVargen - *wink*


I once had a Pakistani lecturer with a thick accent. I tried to imagine him speaking German. :-)

Other Comments by God fearing Atheist

30. Comment #286727 by Stafford Gordon on November 19, 2008 at 9:25 am

Those Turtles! They just can't make up their minds can they.

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

31. Comment #286734 by timtimes on November 19, 2008 at 9:45 am

 avatarGood stuff.

Other Comments by timtimes

32. Comment #286774 by aquilacane on November 19, 2008 at 10:51 am

 avatarLucas wrote:

"By the way, and way off topic, everyone take a look at the aurora shot on Saturn on today's APOD. Weird shit."

Yes I saw, can't say that it is weird; however. I don't have a long enough record of Saturn's typical behaviour to make such a classification. What I do find weird is humanities ability to turn their ignorance into a qualitative judgment about something else. "I" am ignorant of that, therefore "it is" weird.

They did not expect this "strange aurora". To which I reply: "So what?; your expectations are irrelevant after the fact of discovery and truth. Observe and accept. The very fact that we are human, is sufficient to assume we are totally or partially incorrect about almost everything we expect. I just hate how surprised we always are when we realize we don't know shit.

Other Comments by aquilacane

33. Comment #286779 by Lucas on November 19, 2008 at 10:54 am

 avatarActually, jabber, "inflection" is what I was going for. Off by just one letter, "e" instead of "i".

Other Comments by Lucas

34. Comment #286783 by Lucas on November 19, 2008 at 11:02 am

 avataraquilacane - Um, okay. I'm not sure your post made any sense, but what I thought was "weird" was that the aurora covers the whole pole instead of just a strip (as they explain in the text), that the picture shows the aurora occurring just at the point where the hexagonal shape is most pronounced, and that the hexagonal shape exists at all. Might this have something to do with the way the magnetic forces of Saturn pull the cloud particles around? Yes. Have we seen anything like it before? No. Do we know the mechanism behind the hexagon? No. So we are ignorant of how this is working, and it is an unexpected development, so it is weird.

There. That was stupid.

Other Comments by Lucas

35. Comment #286794 by aquilacane on November 19, 2008 at 11:09 am

 avatarI know this is totally off topic but I'm on rant now. I've rewritten the blurb from APOD to give it a more thoughtful tone. (edits have been capitalized in the "Proper explanation")

Original Explanation: What's causing this unusual aurora over Saturn? No one is sure. Infrared images by the robotic Cassini spacecraft of the north pole of Saturn have uncovered aurora unlike any other seen previously in our Solar System. The strange aurora are shown in blue in the above image, while the underlying clouds are shown in red. The previously recorded, also-strange hexagon cloud patterns are visible in red below the aurora. These Saturnian aurora can cover the entire pole, while auroras around Earth and Jupiter are typically confined by magnetic fields to rings surrounding the magnetic poles. More normal auroral rings had been previously imaged around Saturn. The recently imaged strange auroras above Saturn's north pole can change their global patterns significantly in only a few minutes. The large and variable nature of these auroras indicate that charged particles streaming in from the Sun are experiencing some type of magnetism above Saturn that was previously unexpected.

Proper Explanation: What's causing this PREVIOUSLY UNDETECTED aurora over Saturn? No one is sure. Infrared images by the robotic Cassini spacecraft of the north pole of Saturn have uncovered aurora unlike any other seen previously in our Solar System. The UNFAMILIAR aurora are shown in blue in the above image, while the underlying clouds are shown in red. The previously recorded, ALSO-UNFAMILIAR hexagon cloud patterns are visible in red below the aurora. These Saturnian aurora can cover the entire pole, while auroras around Earth and Jupiter are typically confined by magnetic fields to rings surrounding the magnetic poles. More FAMILIAR auroral rings had been previously imaged around Saturn. The recently imaged UNFAMILIAR auroras above Saturn's north pole can change their global patterns significantly in only a few minutes. The large and variable nature of these auroras indicate that charged particles streaming in from the Sun are experiencing some type of magnetism above Saturn that was previously NOT CALCULATED.

Rant off...

Other Comments by aquilacane

36. Comment #286816 by aquilacane on November 19, 2008 at 11:22 am

 avatarI'm not shittin' on you Lucas, I just don't find anything weird or strange just new and probably normal. I may be a stranger to it, but it's not strange.

Other Comments by aquilacane

37. Comment #286915 by Lucas on November 19, 2008 at 1:48 pm

 avatarNo worries. Sorry to set you off.

Other Comments by Lucas

38. Comment #287034 by scottishgeologist on November 19, 2008 at 4:29 pm

 avatarRod, thanks for the BBC "Skye turtle" link. What is interesting about this story is that it is one of those missing link "gap closers"

Actuall, Skye is a cool sort of place- geology is fascinating - some rather neat dinosaur tracks were found there a few years ago:

http://www.hunterian.gla.ac.uk/collections/museum/dinosaur/dinosaur.shtml

Of course, it also needs to be pointed out that places like Skye have large numbers of Calvinist YEC fundies.....

:-)
SG

Other Comments by scottishgeologist

39. Comment #287038 by Goldy on November 19, 2008 at 4:41 pm

 avatarTalking of gaps and all, I found this quite interesting
http://judson.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/all-hail-the-apple-maggot/

Other Comments by Goldy

40. Comment #287041 by Brian English on November 19, 2008 at 4:50 pm

 avatarSG, Skye also has the quarry where they filmed the rabbit scene from Python's Holy Grail movie. I believe parts of Highlander were filmed on the mountains there. It was a bloody gorgeous place. Pity about the godbots I suppose.

Other Comments by Brian English

41. Comment #287050 by Goldy on November 19, 2008 at 5:23 pm

 avatarBrian - gorgeous, except for small black flies that bite.
Picked up a couple fo geology mates of mine who'd been doing some mapping there for their undergrad degree. Couldn't find them on the first day so slept in my car (a mini) and left the window open a crack for fresh air. Come next morning, I looked like a leper. Not one patch of bare flesh was untouched by these small creatures of Satan.

Found my mates in the end, had a great time, big ends went on the mini and had to buy another engine in Morpeth. Loved those summers....

Other Comments by Goldy

42. Comment #287052 by mandydax on November 19, 2008 at 5:26 pm

 avatarI was just wondering a couple days ago when seeing some CG orcas whether there were any examples of a water-land-water-land evolution. Now I know. Oh, and I just love Richard's lecturing style: his cadence, his pace, his clarity of voice. I could listen to him all day. :)

Other Comments by mandydax

43. Comment #287053 by Jedi Knight on November 19, 2008 at 5:26 pm

Ancient turtles discovered on Skye, Scotland

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7736786.stm

Other Comments by Jedi Knight

44. Comment #287273 by Ian on November 19, 2008 at 11:01 pm

#22 - Layla Nasreddin

Thanks for your interesting post and it's good to know some people had a proper respect for wisdom.

I guess I'll have to amend that to religion poisons most things. ;)

Other Comments by Ian

45. Comment #287274 by scottishgeologist on November 19, 2008 at 11:02 pm

 avatarAh yes, the Skye midges!

Voracious appetite (but only the females apparently!) Can make a holiday complete misery.

One of the great challenges about Scotlands west coast - all the places with seriosuly good geology (and good climbing) all have hideously bad midges - Rum, Skye, Mull, Knoydart, Torridon....

And regarding the faith heads in Skye, there is an account in Derek Coopers book "Skye" ( 1970) describing a preacher called Donald Munro which goes:

"So powerful was his oratory, so complete his conversion from the works of the devil, that he was able to convince his flock that the only way to eternal reward was to renounce the wiles of music. He named a day when they were to bring their fiddles and bagpipes to the head of Loch Snizort for a big public conflagration. The response was gratifying for Munro and he was able to warm his body and soul at a monumental bonfire. It was not only music that men liek Munro objected to - they were almost entirely succesful in in stifling the oral tradition of story telling and other manifestations of native culture"

I believe that the preacher in this incident is actually an ancestor of Donnie Munro, erstwhile singer in the band Runrig (devil's music as some more recent faith heads have said....)

:-)))
SG

Other Comments by scottishgeologist

46. Comment #287275 by Brian English on November 19, 2008 at 11:15 pm

 avatarSG, what period is the Great Glen Fault? Is all of Scotland from the same period? One wee Craton?

Other Comments by Brian English

47. Comment #287276 by Brian English on November 19, 2008 at 11:18 pm

 avatarWiki says it's Silurian, and that it's part of a fault that originally covered parts of Nth America, but has been split by the Mid-Atlantic ridge. Cool. Such young rocks up north. :)

Other Comments by Brian English

48. Comment #287277 by Layla Nasreddin on November 19, 2008 at 11:27 pm

 avatar#44 Ian
Thanks for your interesting post and it's good to know some people had a proper respect for wisdom.

I guess I'll have to amend that to religion poisons most things. ;)


Oh, it had NOTHING to do with wisdom, in this case...just an OCD reaction towards The Name (Ha-Shem in Hebrew, which is what some Orthodox Jews call God), a compulsive saving of any scrap of paper that happened to have certain letters in a certain order written on them.

Once in a while you'll see really obsessive Muslims do something similar with papers that have "Allah" or verses from the Qur'an on them. Worn Qur'ans are often stored in special storage rooms or buried in special graveyards, as one is not supposed to throw out or destroy the "Words of Allah". Unhappily, people have actually been attacked and killed by fanatical mobs in Pakistan, among other places, because it was claimed that they had somehow "desecrated" a Qur'an or just papers with Qur'anic verses on them, even if completely unknowingly because they were illiterate.

I think all this just serves to point up the truth of your (and Christopher Hitchens's) oft-quoted remark that religion poisons everything!

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

49. Comment #287278 by mmurray on November 19, 2008 at 11:28 pm

 avatar

Ah yes, the Skye midges!

Voracious appetite (but only the females apparently!) Can make a holiday complete misery.


Reminds me of a cycling holiday on the south island of NZ. Lying in the tent listening to the midges bashing around in the gap between the inner and outer tents. We were all safely zipped in but it was morning and nature was calling ....

Nearly as vicious as the Kea's but less inclined to eat you brake cables.

Spectacular scenery -- mind you Australians are rather mountain deprived -- you can walk up our highest peak on an afternoon stroll from the car park.

Michael

Other Comments by mmurray

50. Comment #287395 by scottishgeologist on November 20, 2008 at 5:32 am

 avatarBrian

There is actually a lot of questions regarding the Great Glen Fault. Check this web site:

http://www.scottishgeology.com/outandabout/classic_sites/locations/great_glen_fault.html

and you'll see what I mean

Incidentally, the scottishgeology.com site is maintained by Dr Neil Clark of Glasgow University, who was involved in the Skye Dinosaur footprints article I gave the link for above.

Try here for piccies:

http://www.hunterian.gla.ac.uk/collections/museum/dinosaur/dinosaurs3.shtml

(I like the dinosaurs at the bottom of the page - all we need to make the scene complete is Adam and Eve.......... :-)))))))))))))))))))))))

Rock on!
SG

Other Comments by scottishgeologist
Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 3 4 | Next | Last

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: