Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   When science use biblic words (Re: Lazarus Taxa / Ghost Lineage)
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 13 (98875)
04-09-2004 8:02 AM


Dear all,
Feel free to give your opignion about this term:
LAZARUS TAXA
Do you think this is a step toward a reconciliation?
See more about here: http://palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/publs/Benton/1999Wignall.pdf
PS. This is my first hundred post and I would like to thanks you all. I can't easily detect classic jokes in replies. But reading and posting here were very instructive.
Denesha

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 04-10-2004 2:45 PM Denesha has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 6156 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 2 of 13 (99107)
04-10-2004 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Denesha
04-09-2004 8:02 AM


What is it?
When I clicked on the link it wouldn't go through.
Could you please explain what Lazarus Taxa is? It sounds like a Dinosaur.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Denesha, posted 04-09-2004 8:02 AM Denesha has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Denesha, posted 04-10-2004 3:46 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 13 (99113)
04-10-2004 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by One_Charred_Wing
04-10-2004 2:45 PM


Re: What is it?
Dear Born2preach,
It takes arround 20 seconds to download this PDF file with a low speed modem. But you need Acrobat to read it. I didn't mention that.
So, it's my goodness day, here is the intro:
From Wignall & Benton, 1999
Better now?
Denesha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 04-10-2004 2:45 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 04-10-2004 9:07 PM Denesha has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 6156 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 4 of 13 (99145)
04-10-2004 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Denesha
04-10-2004 3:46 PM


Neat
Neat is all I can really say about it. I don't think there's anything wrong with calling it 'Lazarus' at all; but a fossil is still dead. Since it just wasn't visible for awhile I would've called it the 'phantom'. But that's just me.

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Denesha, posted 04-10-2004 3:46 PM Denesha has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Denesha, posted 04-11-2004 4:53 AM One_Charred_Wing has not replied

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 13 (99187)
04-11-2004 4:53 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by One_Charred_Wing
04-10-2004 9:07 PM


Re: Neat
Hi Born2preach,
Another term is used for a similar phenomenon: Ghost lineage
"A ghost lineage is an evolutionary lineage for which no fossil record exists, but the presence of which is inferred from related organisms separated by vast stretches of time".
(from Evowiki)
Strange. Some scientists prefer "ghost" rather than "Lazarus".
In fact both are overstated. The fossil lack is due to gaps, minimum population maintained in an undiscovered yet refuge area and regular low demography below the threshold of fossil record.
Denesha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 04-10-2004 9:07 PM One_Charred_Wing has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 04-11-2004 3:48 PM Denesha has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 6 of 13 (99286)
04-11-2004 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Denesha
04-11-2004 4:53 AM


Re: Neat
The fossil lack is due to gaps,
I can also be taken as strong evidence that not all specimens become fossils (which should be intuitively evident), and very strong evidence that an absence of evidence of "transitional" fossils is not evidence of an absence of transitionals -- as it could easily be the same phenomonon as the {ghost\lazarus} fossil records.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Denesha, posted 04-11-2004 4:53 AM Denesha has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Denesha, posted 04-11-2004 4:55 PM RAZD has replied

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 13 (99303)
04-11-2004 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by RAZD
04-11-2004 3:48 PM


Re: Neat
Thank you Abby,
We could try to complicate a bit more if the gap includes a mass extinction or not.
Answers couldn't be simple.
Denesha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 04-11-2004 3:48 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by RAZD, posted 04-11-2004 6:30 PM Denesha has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 8 of 13 (99307)
04-11-2004 5:42 PM


Topic moved / Topic title modified
Thread moved here from the Coffee House forum.
Also added the "(Re: Lazarus Taxa / Ghost Lineage)" part to the topic title.
Adminnemooseus
[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 04-11-2004]

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 9 of 13 (99312)
04-11-2004 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Denesha
04-11-2004 4:55 PM


Re: Neat
We could, but it would not be necessary.
Probably the best known example would be the Coelacanth -- where are all the intermediate fossils between prehistoric and modern specimens?
Lost in time but not just because of mass extinctions.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Denesha, posted 04-11-2004 4:55 PM Denesha has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Denesha, posted 04-12-2004 5:21 AM RAZD has replied

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 13 (99355)
04-12-2004 5:21 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by RAZD
04-11-2004 6:30 PM


Incompleteness to blame
I agree Abby. This classic example is quite good and underscores the incompleteness of our fossil documentation. But if we analyse closely this present case we observe that Coelacanth was probably and gradually becoming in the scope of cryptozoology during the timer-scale. Honestly, we should recognise how lucky we are to observe our day’s biodiversity. I don’t think that Paleontologists in three or four million years (if they will be some) will find any fossils of this fish in our day’s sediment because of the Taphonomic Biases. For those not familiarised with this term, TB are all the filters affecting the incorporation of a past organism in the fossil documentation.
Coelacanth is a good example of huge gap but both fossil and recent related fish are known now. Have your heard about Megachasma. This huge shark was first described in 1976. No fossil form is known.
A little known huge fish coming from nowhere.
See here for more: http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/...descript/Megamouth/Megamouth.htm
Denesha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by RAZD, posted 04-11-2004 6:30 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by RAZD, posted 04-12-2004 12:33 PM Denesha has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 11 of 13 (99412)
04-12-2004 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Denesha
04-12-2004 5:21 AM


Re: Incompleteness to blame
yes, I've heard about megamouth (I thought the whale shark was another recent "find" but found it was discovered in 1828).
One would logically think that any specimens that died a natural death would sink to the seafloor and thus fossilization would require sediment to cover and tectonic plate shifting for access and discovery. One wonders how many fossils are buried in the ocean floors.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Denesha, posted 04-12-2004 5:21 AM Denesha has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Denesha, posted 04-13-2004 7:05 AM RAZD has replied

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 13 (99627)
04-13-2004 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by RAZD
04-12-2004 12:33 PM


Re: Incompleteness to blame
Unfortunately, there are not many fossils down there. Sedimentation rate is too slow. Most of the material was disintegrated before diagenesis starts (an other biblic word). Our fossil documentation is filled up with holes.
Consider the case that all the early phylogenetic stages of a lineage have been existed only under inadequate fossilisation condition in exception of one species (which we have fossils). If this fossil will fall on a zealous taxonomist hand, he will create a species, a genus, certainly a family and perhaps a superfamily. If the same fossil fall in a evolutionist hand, he will suggest a ghost/lazarus effect to connect this fossil (whatever the spatial & temporal jump invoked) with something known to date AND according to his own perception of this fossil. Both produce a poor scientific result.
Denesha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by RAZD, posted 04-12-2004 12:33 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by RAZD, posted 04-13-2004 9:18 AM Denesha has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 13 of 13 (99637)
04-13-2004 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Denesha
04-13-2004 7:05 AM


Re: Incompleteness to blame
Yes. That biblical words were used by people immersed in a biblical culture is not surprising. If they had used Mandarin or Hindu words that would have been surprising ...
... I will remember this the next time the issue of "missing links" is raised.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Denesha, posted 04-13-2004 7:05 AM Denesha has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024