Poll: Mermaids

[jakeEHTlovless]

so recentley, i went on a discovery binge and came upon a series about mermaids and self proclaimed evidence of wich blah blah blah. i was really into it, until every video they showed as evidence was incredibly fake! i mean what the hell. if there is evidence of this fairytale, then what try and pull a fast one with the same computer graphics you've been using the entire show. what BS is the discoverey channel trying to prove. i mean, ive got a open mnd and all, but hell, you can tell these kind of things from miles away. I want you guys to explain this nonsense to me.

 

[Elfgore]

Out of all mythological creatures (excluding Bigfoot and the Yeti) Mermaids have the 3rd highest chance of existing. Now before you all go crazy the percent of mermaids existing are like .00000000000000001% out of 100%, the only reason is because the ocean being so massive we may find something yet. So in the short I do not believe in them.

Now the long part. Next to Bigfoot and the Yeti, a mermaid could actually make logical sense if you view it the way the show explains evolution. Apes had to flee into ocean because of some threat or climate change, adapt to survive by growing fins and gills, BOOM mermaid. But it is still very very very unlikely they could exist. So I understand how people could believe in them, but I do not.

 

[Lilani]

Now the long part. Next to Bigfoot and the Yeti, a mermaid could actually make logical sense if you view it the way the show explains evolution. Apes had to flee into ocean because of some threat or climate change, adapt to survive by growing fins and gills, BOOM mermaid. But it is still very very very unlikely they could exist. So I understand how people could believe in them, but I do not.

Eh, I dunno. As far as I know, pretty much every animal that evolved either into or out of water (whales, frogs, etc) were already pretty amphibious to start with. But something going straight from a full mammal to an amphibian, or full mammal all the way to fish? I'm not saying it's impossible or that it's never happened, but I've never heard of an evolutionary leap that far.

I am willing to accept that something like a Yeti is out there, though. I mean, its size would make sense because it could keep warmer that way in the mountains, and monkey-like arms and legs would be handy for scaling that high. And of course copious amounts of fur would be necessary for survival. So a giant mountain ape sounds perfectly logical to me.

As for the Bigfoot, I think the locations some of them are "spotted" in are rather dubious. I mean, the American south? Really? A giant ape covered in HUGE amounts of fur hanging out in a place that frequently gets over 100 degrees during the summer and with unreasonable amounts of humidity to go with it? I don't think so. And if it's got the ability to walk on two legs, surely it's got the ability to migrate out of that climate, so why the fuck do they still search in the heat of summer? Surely the point behind evolving the ability to walk on two legs would be specifically for moving and migrating better.

 

[Elfgore]

Now the long part. Next to Bigfoot and the Yeti, a mermaid could actually make logical sense if you view it the way the show explains evolution. Apes had to flee into ocean because of some threat or climate change, adapt to survive by growing fins and gills, BOOM mermaid. But it is still very very very unlikely they could exist. So I understand how people could believe in them, but I do not.

Eh, I dunno. As far as I know, pretty much every animal that evolved either into or out of water (whales, frogs, etc) were already pretty amphibious to start with. But something going straight from a full mammal to an amphibian, or full mammal all the way to fish? I'm not saying it's impossible or that it's never happened, but I've never heard of an evolutionary leap that far.

I am willing to accept that something like a Yeti is out there, though. I mean, its size would make sense because it could keep warmer that way in the mountains, and monkey-like arms and legs would be handy for scaling that high. And of course copious amounts of fur would be necessary for survival. So a giant mountain ape sounds perfectly logical to me.

As for the Bigfoot, I think the locations some of them are "spotted" in are rather dubious. I mean, the American south? Really? A giant ape covered in HUGE amounts of fur hanging out in a place that frequently gets over 100 degrees during the summer and with unreasonable amounts of humidity to go with it? I don't think so. And if it's got the ability to walk on two legs, surely it's got the ability to migrate out of that climate, so why the fuck do they still search in the heat of summer? Surely the point behind evolving the ability to walk on two legs would be specifically for moving and migrating better.

Now I don't disagree with you on the Mermaid evolution, but keep in mind Humans started off as fish, so who knows? But that process took like several hundred billion years I think, and since apes are where the split would start Mermaids would have to be the fastest species in the history of the world at evolving.

 

[BeeGeenie]

Out of all mythological creatures (excluding Bigfoot and the Yeti) Mermaids have the 3rd highest chance of existing. Now before you all go crazy the percent of mermaids existing are like .00000000000000001% out of 100%, the only reason is because the ocean being so massive we may find something yet. So in the short I do not believe in them.

Now the long part. Next to Bigfoot and the Yeti, a mermaid could actually make logical sense if you view it the way the show explains evolution. Apes had to flee into ocean because of some threat or climate change, adapt to survive by growing fins and gills, BOOM mermaid. But it is still very very very unlikely they could exist. So I understand how people could believe in them, but I do not.

It seems like it would be vastly more likely for mermaids to evolve independently, like dolphins, or walruses, or something, than for apes to return to the sea. Then again, I can't see how arms, hands, noses, etc. could become an adaptive trait in the ocean, so maybe you're right. Suddenly I feel like watching "Water World" again. <.<

 

[FalloutJack]

If they ever were to exist, and not even the modern world can seem to prove it as of yet, then I suspect they'd be predatory, given the nature of the sea and how the more highly-evolved beinga put themselves on the highpoint of the food chain via ingenuity. I don't think there are any, but I'll keep just open enough a mind to believe a fact when I see one. That's at least fair of me.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Now I don't disagree with you on the Mermaid evolution, but keep in mind Humans started off as fish, so who knows? But that process took like several hundred billion years I think, and since apes are where the split would start Mermaids would have to be the fastest species in the history of the world at evolving.

Not hundreds of billions of years, the universe is only 13 or 14 billion years old.

IIRC, multi celled life has only existed for a few billion, land animals for a few hundred million.

Primates didn't exist when dinosaurs did, and that was only 60 million years ago.

You'll also note that sea mammals like whales and dolphins don't have gills, they breathe air same as we do. Evolving gills evidently is no small thing.

 

[J Tyran]

I am willing to accept that something like a Yeti is out there, though. I mean, its size would make sense because it could keep warmer that way in the mountains, and monkey-like arms and legs would be handy for scaling that high. And of course copious amounts of fur would be necessary for survival. So a giant mountain ape sounds perfectly logical to me.

It is unusual how two indigenous cultures on opposite sides of the world have an identical mythical mountain ape creature, the two first nation cultures mythology for these creatures is thousands of years old. It is almost impossible for them to have ever been in contact so why have such a close myth for these creatures?

Its obviously not proof but its food for thought.

The mountain gorilla was only discovered at the turn of the last century and no research was done until the 60s, these species can remain unidentified.

Now I don't disagree with you on the Mermaid evolution, but keep in mind Humans started off as fish, so who knows? But that process took like several hundred billion years I think, and since apes are where the split would start Mermaids would have to be the fastest species in the history of the world at evolving.

Primates didn't exist when dinosaurs did, and that was only 60 million years ago.

You'll also note that sea mammals like whales and dolphins don't have gills, they breathe air same as we do. Evolving gills evidently is no small thing.

Pinnipeds like seals are thought to have evolved from ursids around 20 million years ago, in that short time they have become highly specialized aquatic creatures even though they still breath air. An ape could theoretically evolve at the same speed given the right conditions.

 

[Thaluikhain]

It is unusual how two indigenous cultures on opposite sides of the world have an identical mythical mountain ape creature, the two first nation cultures mythology for these creatures is thousands of years old. It is almost impossible for them to have ever been in contact so why have such a close myth for these creatures?

Its obviously not proof but its food for thought.

The mountain gorilla was only discovered at the turn of the last century and no research was done until the 60s, these species can remain unidentified.

I'd say it's interesting, in that the idea of a bestial version of humanity is something you see in cultures all over the world. Europe, Australia, Asia, America.

Now, clearly, there aren't isolated pockets of unidentified hominids almost literally everywhere, it seems to point to a commonality in culture.

I very strongly disagree that a hominid could remain unidentified in the US. There are certain small pockets of the world left where this might (maybe) be the case, but the US nowdays does not contain any of them.

 

[Surpheal]

so recentley, i went on a discovery binge and came upon a series about mermaids and self proclaimed evidence of wich blah blah blah. i was really into it, until every video they showed as evidence was incredibly fake! i mean what the hell. if there is evidence of this fairytale, then what try and pull a fast one with the same computer graphics you've been using the entire show. what BS is the discoverey channel trying to prove. i mean, ive got a open mnd and all, but hell, you can tell these kind of things from miles away. I want you guys to explain this nonsense to me.

Its a mockumentary, and every one of the researchers were paid actors. Just so you know.

Its a hoax, a joke played on you by the discovery channel. Just like the documentary on how dragons existed and how they killed their own babies to maintain "dominance."

Its like April fools, but not in April. They do it every so often to get ratings up.

This is in fact the second time it was shown on the Discovery Channel for Monster Week. The first time it was played, so many people thought it was real that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and a few others, ran replies that there is no evidence of mermaids existence.

There was also another one of these mocumentaries from Discovery that did the same thing with dragons.

 

[Soxafloppin]

You probably watched "Mermaids: A Body Found" or its sequel, which were mockumentaries, all paid actors made to be a spoof of an actual documentary.

Mermaids are fictional creatures, yo.

 

[Yopaz]

The evolution of mermaids is in fact impossible no matter how you look at it.

As fish evolving human characters or a hominid evolving fish characters. Neither of these things are possible.

Believe me or not, but it can all be found in this book. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Evolution-Douglas-Futuyma/dp/0878932232/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1369913401&sr=8-5&keywords=evolution

It's a myth and honestly I think How I Met Your Mother actually explained a more viable hypothesis to the origin of them than anyone in this thread.

Now you might say that you should be careful about debunking myths because because of the discovery of such creatures as giant octopus and squids confirming a lot of the old stories. It should also be mentioned that the sea serpent stories are believed to be early discoveries of a giant herring. If only it had phycoerythin pigments... (cookie to the first one to get this one)

You'll also note that sea mammals like whales and dolphins don't have gills, they breathe air same as we do. Evolving gills evidently is no small thing.

Actually, there's a hypothesis claiming that for us to evolve gills is impossible. The hypothesis states that a if a complex structure is removed through evolution it can never come back through further evolution. I can't remember the name of the hypothesis though. I just wanted to add to what you said, what you said was quite good as it was.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Of course they are. They're the vital evolutionary link between modern humans and our fish ancestors. "Out of Africa" is last year's theory, now it's all about "Out of the Atlantic". The difference between them and the fake simian common ancestor is that mermaids are still around for science to study.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Do they still count as mermaids once they lose their virginity and aren't maidens anymore?

Cause otherwise that's very backwards.

 

[The Lugz]

so recentley, i went on a discovery binge and came upon a series about mermaids and self proclaimed evidence of wich blah blah blah. i was really into it, until every video they showed as evidence was incredibly fake! i mean what the hell. if there is evidence of this fairytale, then what try and pull a fast one with the same computer graphics you've been using the entire show. what BS is the discoverey channel trying to prove. i mean, ive got a open mnd and all, but hell, you can tell these kind of things from miles away. I want you guys to explain this nonsense to me.

'Truth' is an interesting thing.
as spielberg puts it,
Indianna jones: Archaeology is the search for fact... not truth. If it's truth you're looking for, Dr. Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall.

so there are many answers to this post, let's explore a few

Science grad answer:
if you want a semi scientific answer, then the answer is no they do not exist
-statistically, from human perspective this is true.

Science lecturer answer:
if you want a slightly more scientific answer the answer is, it's possible but the odds are astronomical that we haven't seen one / filmed one or dug up it's bones yet. ( ie observed it, or it's effect on the environment )
-see how dogmatic science can be? it's the same answer but with bigger words. 'we don't know'

Astronomer's answer,
there's a quote i'm forgetting the author of, but essentially if you take a cup of water that is not representative of the sea, if you take one plannet that is not representative of a solar system, if you take one solar system that is not representative of the milky way, ect.
the point being our sample size to decide if something is statistically true or false is far too small to even be relevant, the only answer we can give to any question is 'we cannot be sure, but it works here'
-more thought provoking, perhaps but still no answer..

Philosopher's answer
the answer is we don't know what secrets the universe holds, we are small insignificant things wading through a sea of ignorance to the answers we make many mistakes along the way.
-here we have it, the true answer can only be we can't tell, we are too small our influence too limited that we cannot give an accurate answer.

all are correct from different view points.

Solve:
do a little dance
'make a little love, get down tonight'
thanks for singing to me website. lol.

 

[Evil Smurf]

no, but unicorns are real.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Seriously Sirens, mermen and Mermaids were pretty scary back in the day.

As an aside, sirens used to be coastal harpies or somesuch, later on they became mermaids.

I wish I could lure sailors to their deaths

 

[Aabglov]

so recentley, i went on a discovery binge and came upon a series about mermaids and self proclaimed evidence of wich blah blah blah. i was really into it, until every video they showed as evidence was incredibly fake! i mean what the hell. if there is evidence of this fairytale, then what try and pull a fast one with the same computer graphics you've been using the entire show. what BS is the discoverey channel trying to prove. i mean, ive got a open mnd and all, but hell, you can tell these kind of things from miles away. I want you guys to explain this nonsense to me.

If this happened to be "Mermaids: Body Found" you should know that the video was intentionally fake. More for entertainment than fact. Mermaids aren't real until Jeremy Wade of River Monsters catches one on a rod and reel.