Southern Nevada's wild horses (pic heavy)

[Sabre52]

True, North American paleo horses got to be pony sized. As shown but the fossil record, horses did not become extinct worldwide, just in the Americas. In Europe and Asia they thrived and that's where our modern horses came from, not from a direct line of evolution in North America. Again, as shown by the fossil record. Might even have been the same species in Europe or Asia as in North America but the American representatives went extinct until proven otherwise by fossils. The modern horse did not magically appear all of a sudden, it evolved in Europe and Asia. Last land bridge from Asia was about 12,000 years ago and the climate then was not friendly to horses living and crossing there but man did and the new predator, man, probably helped wipe out the remaining American horses. (again fossil record) Again, since Amerinds say their horses cam from SW Amerinds, Spanish origin is probably true but not necessarily true, as other pre Columbian Asian or European explorers could have brought them too. Still, your argument that modern horses "evolved" in the Americas as a continuous succession is unsupported by any fossil evidence and until proven otherwise, is science fiction.

OK, you really need to read more about the history of Spanish settlement too. Spanish missions were all over the interior southwest, far, far from the oceans or navigable waters. Heck we had them all over right around here. Ever heard of the Alamo *L* and lots predated that but many were destroyed by the natives, thus netting the natives "horses". And Sir Francis Drake right?.....Mel

[Deleted]

Amazing pics! Love the donkeys.

[zekesman]

Jun 24, 2017 0:13:52 GMT -5 vegasjames said:

Jun 23, 2017 9:05:34 GMT -5 zekesman said:

Those horses were about 2 feet tall. They went away the same time as the Mamoths, Saber tooths, Giant sloths, etc.  Pretty well proven theory.  Vic

Which species of prehistoric horse was found in Nevada?

chem.tufts.edu/science/evolution/horseevolution.htm

Not all prehistoric horses were only 2 feet tall.  So no, not a well proven "theory".

And if all the horses went prehistoric horses simply suddenly disappeared then where did the modern horse come from. Think about it.  Just because a species goes extinct that does not mean the whole family (as in kingdom, phylum, etc.) went extinct.

Or look at it this way. Dachshunds are decedents of wolves. Does that make wolves extinct or did inbreeding of different species just lead to new and more diverse species?

In fact if you look at the link I provided they mention "Dinohippus is believed to be the closest relative to Equus, the genus that includes the living horses, asses and zebras. Dinohippus fossils are found in the Upper Miocene of North America and date from 13 - 5 million years ago.".  Also if you look at the chart at the bottom they show that the modern horse actually developed from the prehistoric horses.  Point being that horses have existed for millions of years and various species existed across what it now known as North America. Some of the species could have simply went extinct due to the inbreeding of the different species leading to an entirely new species.  That does not mean a complete disappearance of the family, merely a transition from one species to another.  This is how we eventually came to the modern horse.  The modern horse did not just simply magically appear all of a sudden.

Something else that does not add up is that the Spaniards thought spotted horses were inferior and used solid, generally black horses, for military action. And so these were the horses that were brought to the "New World".  So where did the wild palominos and some of the others come from unless they either were already here or the Spanish horses inbred with already existing horses.

The claim that there is no record of the Native Americans not having horses prior to the introduction of the Spanish horses, which actually descended from North American horses, is not provable since 1. The Native Americans did not really keep much in the way of written records. 2. The Spanish did not travel that far inland and tended to stick closer to the coast.  Why do you think the Spanish Missions were so close to oceans or other waterways?  So the reports of Spanish were of limited value as well. 3. And we cannot rely totally on fossil records since for one we are discussing the modern horse, which means NOT old enough to have a fossil record.  Basically there is no way to prove or disprove whether or not the modern horse existed prior to Columbus arriving.  But there is some evidence against this considering the genetic diversity would be impossible in such a short time with what was brought over if other horses were not already here. And the report from Sir Francis Scott of seeing herds of wild horses on the West Coast not that long after Columbus' arrival.  There is no way the Spanish horses brought here could have bred and expanded so much in such a short interval.

 So I just spent some time looking for the Sir Francis Drake Quote. the only place I could find it was on Mormon Apologist sights. The theory I was stating is that horses went extinct in The Americas a the same time as he Mammoth. Why would there be horses in California and not Mexico? We can rely on fossil records. We would find horse bones in the same strata that we find Amerind bones. We have LOTS of Anizasi and Peblo artifacts in Utah. I do no recall hearing of any horse bones found. They would have probably been eaing hem if they were available. Why don't we find any Mammoth, Sabre Tooth, or Giant Sloth around with the native horses?   Vic

[orrum]

Animal genetics are very complex as they relate to color. Palomino is not a color gene but a gene modifier.

The original hotblood horses came from China, probably the Arabian breeds ancestors. The China hotblood were spotted. All horse breeds produce what is called Cropout Overo Spotting. Even thoroughbreds and arabs! I raised, showed, and trained American Paint Horses all my life. We try ed hard to get that wild splashed Medicine Hat pattern!

Read Dr Phil Sponenbergs book, he and it's the leading authority on horse color genetics. He is at my alma mater Va.Tech.

Saber52 gave you the straight up facts on horses in the Americas. The Spanish were conquerors so they brought many breeds including donkeys and mules from their subjects in other countries to the Americas.

[vegasjames]

Jun 24, 2017 7:46:48 GMT -5 Sabre52 said:

True, North American paleo horses got to be pony sized. As shown but the fossil record, horses did not become extinct worldwide, just in the Americas. In Europe and Asia they thrived and that's where our modern horses came from, not from a direct line of evolution in North America. Again, as shown by the fossil record. Might even have been the same species in Europe or Asia as in North America but the American representatives went extinct until proven otherwise by fossils. The modern horse did not magically appear all of a sudden, it evolved in Europe and Asia. Last land bridge from Asia was about 12,000 years ago and the climate then was not friendly to horses living and crossing there but man did and the new predator, man, probably helped wipe out the remaining American horses. (again fossil record) Again, since Amerinds say their horses cam from SW Amerinds, Spanish origin is probably true but not necessarily true, as other pre Columbian Asian or European explorers could have brought them too. Still, your argument that modern horses "evolved" in the Americas as a continuous succession is unsupported by any fossil evidence and until proven otherwise, is science fiction.

OK, you really need to read more about the history of Spanish settlement too. Spanish missions were all over the interior southwest, far, far from the oceans or navigable waters. Heck we had them all over right around here. Ever heard of the Alamo *L* and lots predated that but many were destroyed by the natives, thus netting the natives "horses". And Sir Francis Drake right?.....Mel

You totally missed my point. I give up.

[Sabre52]

*S* Whatever. Don't believe I did miss your point but think you missed mine. I enjoy science fiction and interesting hypotheticals, but in the end, I am a scientist. As the sayings go, You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink and no sense beating a dead horse. *L*. Yep enough...Mel

[Deleted]

Maybe no fossil record of such recent organisms, but, we can use a similar record.

The archeological one.

zekesman makes a good point.

[vegasjames]

And there is still the fact that the Spanish horses were black so where did the pintos, palaminos, non-albino whites, etc. come from? Black is a dominant gene. That is the actual science I was pointing out. If the wild horses were actually from the escaped Spanish horses then the majority of those horses would be black, not the colors we are actually seeing in the wild horses. And even if there were other recessive color genes in those horses there is no way that kind of diversity of a non-dominant gene could have occurred in such as short time period. So obviously a lot of real science is being overlooked.

[zekesman]

Jun 26, 2017 15:29:23 GMT -5 vegasjames said:

And there is still the fact that the Spanish horses were black so where did the pintos, palaminos, non-albino whites, etc. come from? Black is a dominant gene. That is the actual science I was pointing out. If the wild horses were actually from the escaped Spanish horses then the majority of those horses would be black, not the colors we are actually seeing in the wild horses. And even if there were other recessive color genes in those horses there is no way that kind of diversity of a non-dominant gene could have occurred in such as short time period. So obviously a lot of real science is being overlooked.

 OK I have not studied the colors of the Spanish horses. Other than that he evidence seems very thin. I assume that they could have brought over horses from other nations hey were dealing with, like the germans. I know it is common for armies to get stock from where ever when needed. Even if they bred for a single color I think they would have kept the most desirable for use in Spain, and shipped the rest off to a country they knew the would be leaving them in. I know hat you are sold on them being native, but you will have to convince me on more that they should be black. Not trying to be a dick I am just wondering why you believe this with what seems to be insurmountable evidence against your theory.  Vic

[vegasjames]

Jun 26, 2017 18:15:34 GMT -5 zekesman said:

Jun 26, 2017 15:29:23 GMT -5 vegasjames said:

And there is still the fact that the Spanish horses were black so where did the pintos, palaminos, non-albino whites, etc. come from? Black is a dominant gene. That is the actual science I was pointing out. If the wild horses were actually from the escaped Spanish horses then the majority of those horses would be black, not the colors we are actually seeing in the wild horses. And even if there were other recessive color genes in those horses there is no way that kind of diversity of a non-dominant gene could have occurred in such as short time period. So obviously a lot of real science is being overlooked.

 OK I have not studied the colors of the Spanish horses. Other than that he evidence seems very thin. I assume that they could have brought over horses from other nations hey were dealing with, like the germans. I know it is common for armies to get stock from where ever when needed. Even if they bred for a single color I think they would have kept the most desirable for use in Spain, and shipped the rest off to a country they knew the would be leaving them in. I know hat you are sold on them being native, but you will have to convince me on more that they should be black. Not trying to be a dick I am just wondering why you believe this with what seems to be insurmountable evidence against your theory.  Vic

The Spaniards thought of other colors in horses being inferior. So they only used black horses in their armies and those were the horses brought over.

And there is not insurmountable evidence against the horses being native.  In fact a theory is a hypothesis backed by evidence.

Also look up the definition of extinction.  It DOES NOT always mean the animal disappeared completely as I pointed out before.  If horse S breeds over times with horses T, U, V, W, X and why eventually forming horse Z and yes horse S gets bred out of existence then that is an extinction event. That does not mean that horses went extinct.  This only means that the one species was bred to extinction while its relatives are still in existence.

People need to take their blinders off when looking at science. Not everything is black and white.

Let me give another example since people still seem to be stuck solely on fossil records.  There were ancient species of shark such as various relatives of the great white and makos to name a few.  They are extinct and there is no fossil records showing a transition from let's say megalodon to the great white.  Does that mean that megalodon and other ancient relatives of the great white went extinct then the modern great white suddenly appeared out of nowhere?  Same with makos, sand sharks and the various other species with extinct relatives.  According to some if there is no fossil record it simply is not true.  Apparently that line of thinking is false and involves looking at real science with blinders on.

In fact, a true scientist knows that absolutes are rare.  Look at how long they also thought that the burning in muscles during intense exercise was from lactic acid.  Some scientists still stick to this myth despite being disproven decades ago because some people just refuse to let go of old beliefs.

So how do you know that horses completely disappeared from what is now known as the Americas millions of years ago? Did the Spaniards survey all the Americas when they arrived to determine there were no horses?  If not who made that decision that horses were not here? How do we know that the animals simply did not migrate elsewhere during an event, such as a temperature change, then migrated back later?  That would also mean the animals still existed but we may not have a fossil record for them since they migrated back at some point that was too early for fossilization.  Or maybe fossils got buried to deep through an event like the great flood when the ice dam broke in what is now Canada and brought rock and debris all the way down to what is now the plains.  As we can see just relying on a fossil record is far from being scientific and there is no way to prove 100% whether horses were here or not when the Spaniards arrived.  But there are things that question the HYPOTHESIS that horses were "reintroduced" to the Americas by the Spaniards.  For example as I pointed out the genetic diversity that exists when the introduced horses would have had dominant black genes.  According to real science this would be impossible.

Regardless debating over something that is impossible to prove either way is ridiculous.

The whole initial point is the wild horses are supposed to be protected and the BLM is violating Federal law by harassing the horses even to the point of their dying.  This all to benefit the cattle industry, which does a lot of damage to the land. And since these horses are such as part of our history, regardless of how long they have been here they should remain protected the law enforced against the lawbreaking BLM!!!

[Deleted]

Jun 26, 2017 15:29:23 GMT -5 vegasjames said:

And there is still the fact that the Spanish horses were black so where did the pintos, palaminos, non-albino whites, etc. come from? Black is a dominant gene. That is the actual science I was pointing out. If the wild horses were actually from the escaped Spanish horses then the majority of those horses would be black, not the colors we are actually seeing in the wild horses. And even if there were other recessive color genes in those horses there is no way that kind of diversity of a non-dominant gene could have occurred in such as short time period. So obviously a lot of real science is being overlooked.

400 years is plenty of time for natural selection to take place in previously rare colors.

And modern horse colors have been mixed in for 250 of those years.

Prevelance of color today had literally zero to do with how these horses got here.

Sorry James. Not on board with that one.

[vegasjames]

Jun 26, 2017 22:01:10 GMT -5 @shotgunner said:

Jun 26, 2017 15:29:23 GMT -5 vegasjames said:

And there is still the fact that the Spanish horses were black so where did the pintos, palaminos, non-albino whites, etc. come from? Black is a dominant gene. That is the actual science I was pointing out. If the wild horses were actually from the escaped Spanish horses then the majority of those horses would be black, not the colors we are actually seeing in the wild horses. And even if there were other recessive color genes in those horses there is no way that kind of diversity of a non-dominant gene could have occurred in such as short time period. So obviously a lot of real science is being overlooked.

400 years is plenty of time for natural selection to take place in previously rare colors.

And modern horse colors have been mixed in for 250 of those years.

Prevelance of color today had literally zero to do with how these horses got here.

Sorry James. Not on board with that one.

Not with black dominant genes.  And as I pointed out there should still be a dominance of black genes and thus black horses in the wild horse population if they were from the horses brought over at that time.  Yet we rarely see black horses in the wild horse population. If it were not a dominant gene to begin with then it may be a different story.

Furthermore, since the Spanish considered other colors of horses other than black to be inferior then it seems that they would have tried to breed out other colors in horses, which would further strengthen the black gene dominance by culling out horses of other colors.

As I said before there is no way to prove one way or the other so the whole debate is not going to go anywhere.

[Sabre52]

I think James main argument is that modern type European and Asian horses developed in North America first, which they likely did about 800,000 years ago. Thus, since they are the same species as Asian and European horses, wild horses here are actually a native species. Where we differ in our take though, is James seems to believe they did not become extinct here, which the fossil record shows they did, about 12,000 years ago. So basically, what the science shows, is the modern horse developed here, went to Europe and Asia, became extinct in the Americas, and was later re introduced from European and Asian sources. All the color argument is basically nonsense as all horses carry genes for colors and spots etc and since native Americans loved wild patterns in their horses (ie the Appaloosa) they obviously bred the colors into the population just as Europeans did for the colors and patterns they liked.

Again, unless we find fossils to prove otherwise, the fossil record proves the extinction one way, not the other. It's just that James chooses not to believe it *S*.....Mel

[zekesman]

@shotgunner, vegasjames I went to Shotgunners link, put in two black horses for sire and dam. First generation had a 6% chance for a red coat. Then I put in a black sire and red dam 37.5% black 37.5% red 25% dun so you can see that i would not take long. Vic

[Deleted]

Jun 27, 2017 13:37:58 GMT -5 zekesman said:

@shotgunner, vegasjames I went to Shotgunners link, put in two black horses for sire and dam. First generation had a 6% chance for a red coat. Then I put in a black sire and red dam 37.5% black 37.5% red 25% dun so you can see that i would not take long. Vic

www.animalgenetics.us/Equine/Coat_Color/Index.asp

Black is actually a recessive trait.

And many colors are truly dominant. In which only one parent need have the color for 50% (or all) of the offspring to show it.

Certainly 80 generations is plenty to mix up the Spaniards genetics into what you see today.

James I think you want this to be true. No amount of want in the world will changes simple facts.

[parfive]

'Wildies' have roamed free in Alberta for at least 100 years.     2:54

www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-40719929/wildies-have-roamed-free-in-alberta-for-at-least-100-years




Chincoteague pony swim     2:12

news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/08/chincoteague-famous-pony-swim-horses/


This week’s swim     4:56

www.aol.com/article/news/2017/07/27/ponies-swim-across-islands-in-annual-event-in-virginia/23052930/

[parfive]

www.reviewjournal.com/news/science-and-technology/fossil-from-nevada-cave-spurs-discovery-of-extinct-horse/

[1dave]

Dec 31, 2017 1:52:55 GMT -5 parfive said:

www.reviewjournal.com/news/science-and-technology/fossil-from-nevada-cave-spurs-discovery-of-extinct-horse/

Updated December 27, 2017 - 9:10 am

In the early days of the Great Depression, a team of researchers led by famed archaeologist Mark Harrington unearthed a treasure trove of animal fossils and ancient artifacts from a cave in the mountains east of Las Vegas.

Some of the bones found inside Gypsum Cave were so well preserved, they were mistaken for modern specimens and filed away in museum collections, where they went largely overlooked until recently. (Las Vegas Review-Journal)

Now a horse skull collected from the cave during Harrington’s expedition in 1930 and 1931 is helping scientists identify a new type of extinct, stilt-legged horse that died out during the last ice age.

“The skull didn’t look particularly old or particularly ancient. It looked like last week’s lunch,” said paleontologist Eric Scott, who helped track down the mislabeled fossil on a shelf at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. “Someone had even written in pencil across the top of the skull: ‘modern sample, wild horse or burro.’”

Instead, it turned out to be 13,000 years old and scientifically significant: the most complete skull ever found of a so-called “New World stilt-legged horse.”

“Here’s this priceless fossil that’s just sitting there being ignored,” said Scott, an ice age horse expert with California State University, San Bernardino, who has worked extensively in Southern Nevada.

A horse that isn’t modern

Scott was part of the international team of researchers that described the new genus of horse in a study published Nov. 28 in the journal eLife.

Their findings are based on analysis of ancient DNA extracted from the Gypsum Cave skull and other well-preserved bones from Natural Trap Cave in Wyoming and the Klondike gold fields of Canada’s Yukon Territory.

Before the new study, the lightly built horses with the long, thin leg bones were thought to be related to the modern Asiatic wild ass or simply a separate species within the genus that includes living horses, asses and zebras. The new results reveal that these extinct horses were not closely related to any living population. They were an evolutionary dead end that diverged from the main trunk of the family tree leading to Equus, the genus that includes modern horses, some 4 million to 6 million years ago.

The prevailing theory was MAN the HORRIBLE crossed the Bering Straights and ate everything in sight.

Discovery of the "Black Mat - with diamonds in it!" has changed that. Apparently a comet skipped off the atmosphere about 13,000 years ago traveling from Southern California to Maine and scorched the earth at about 10,000 degrees F, wiping out most life - Including man (that had come from France, NOT Asia). A few survivors from caves and deep canyons began repopulating, and more crept in from Mexico - mainly Bison-Bison replacing Bison-Antigua. Perhaps there were a few horses, mammoths, sloths, but they didn't last long.

[Sabre52]

Cool "black mat" reference Dave. Remembered reading something about that and I went back and read more articles. Interesting hypothesis and it sounds more and more like the comet, along with the cooling that followed, that cut off a warming period, pretty much devastated much of North America at the time......Mel

[1dave]

Dec 31, 2017 11:18:06 GMT -5 Sabre52 said:

Cool "black mat" reference Dave. Remembered reading something about that and I went back and read more articles. Interesting hypothesis and it sounds more and more like the comet, along with the cooling that followed, that cut off a warming period, pretty much devastated much of North America at the time......Mel

A local rock club member asked me to come over to his farm in the Escalante Desert - was a lake 5,000 years ago. He had dug a hundred foot trench 6 feet deep. About 3 feet down was the black mat layer everywhere the trench reveled it! Made a believer out of me.