User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 75 of 147 FirstFirst ... 256571727374757677787985125 ... LastLast
Results 593 to 600 of 1176

Thread: Where does everyone stand in regards to...

  1. #593

    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    543
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rubra,
    You still have not answered my question. How does the geologic column support recent creationism?
    Best Regards

    Mike King

    NCCPG National collection holder of Sarracenia

    http://www.carnivorousplants.uk.com

  2. #594
    StifflerMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    339
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I thought it might help to bring this up again, since I detect some undertones of misunderstanding regarding what is a theory in SCIENCE, as opposed to our everyday use of the word:

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Evolution of life is simply not a hypothesis or a guess or belief: it is a theory. This is what many people don't get: in science a theory explains a group of facts or phenomena, and has been repeatedly tested, is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena. For all intents and purposes, it is a fact: evolution occurs.
    Regarding the origins of life: if one makes a hypothesis about what happened, one needs to test that hypothesis. For instance, the famous experiment performed by Stanley Miller in the 50's. He had hypothesized that conditions on the young earth (ie reducing atmophere, lighting (always been there)) may have allowed the molecules within the atmophere to react to form molecules such as amino acids and nucleic acids which are essential to life. He did the EXPERIMENT and discovered that amino acids were present (later experiments found nucleic acids). These results lend a measurable degree of plausibility to his hypothesis...that's why it's in your science textbooks. As for creationism, someone needs to create a hypothesis, do an experiment and publish the results...until then...there's no plausibility as far as the scientific community is concerned...and that's why it's not in your textbooks.

  3. #595

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Texas City,TX
    Posts
    395
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (TheAlphaWolf @ Jan. 06 2005,9:12)]That's not ture. natural SELECTION is not random.
    It also said that genomes "leap". that's also not true. Evolution is GRADUAL.
    Well so much for the Cambrian Explosion. I guess that fossil evedince was planted by creationists. Yes I realize that there were orginisms present before that but where is the link?
    I always suspect everything could be a trap... thats why I'm still alive
    N.A.S.C. Region 9 Head Grower

    http://www.cpforums.org/gallery/ZAK

  4. #596

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Zone 9
    Posts
    455
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Mike, geologic columns hold billions of fossils, and no credible evidence from more than the mere thousands of years recorded by Biblical standards. And we do find widespread evidence of death at one specific point in time.

    Peter
    the cellist

  5. #597
    StifflerMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    339
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The Cambrian Explosion occured due to a mass extinction event. This opened up many biological niches, and the surviving organisms quickly (in geological terms) EVOLVED to fill these niches. This is known as puncuated evolution--niches open up and organisms quickly (remember, in geological ermsa only!) fill them via evolution. During times of relatively no change in the environment, the mutations that occur offer no advantage to the individuals that aquire them. However, when a considerable environmental change occurs, such as a mass extinction, mutations (whose rates have not changed (a gradual rate you might say)) confer variablity which allows organisms to adapt to the changed environment.

    As these organisms undergo these adaptation quickly (again, in geological terms), and as fossilization is a relatively rare event, fossilized remains of intermediate organisms are rather rare. But they are found: consider the half dinosuar-half bird fossils.

  6. #598
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    no u got it wrong. teeth, jaws and, aurmor evolved,causing a virtual natural 'arms race'
    that makes no logic

  7. #599
    StifflerMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    339
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Who's wrong Finch?

  8. #600
    StifflerMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    339
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ah, forgot the most important thing about the Cambrian Explosion...oxygen!! The reason for the mass extinction was due to the accumulation of oxygen in the atmosphere from cyanobacteria. Most all anaerobic organisms died. And those organisms that evolved to live in an oxygen atmosphere took over the NICHES opened up (ie outcompeted the anaerobes). Puctuated evolution in action. And yes Finch, eventually organisms evolved which had jaws, armor and teeth, and these competed for resources as always: the Cambrian Explosion resulted in massive amounts of fossilizible organisms, whereas before the world was small microbes which do not fossilize easily (soft bodied and microscopic to boot).

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •