Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 60 (9208 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: The Rutificador chile
Post Volume: Total: 919,510 Year: 6,767/9,624 Month: 107/238 Week: 24/83 Day: 3/4 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why do we only find fossils?
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5158 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 91 of 136 (258613)
11-10-2005 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Modulous
11-10-2005 3:54 PM


Re: Fossilization vs Tar preservation
The problem is we can't find any aquatic ocean attached environments where whales are not present so all the areas are represented. So there are not areas A and areas B for a wide difference in form. We may see some different whale and dolphin species, but the basic forms are present everywhere.
So you don't have different areas.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Modulous, posted 11-10-2005 3:54 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Modulous, posted 11-10-2005 4:14 PM randman has not replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6755 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 92 of 136 (258618)
11-10-2005 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by randman
11-10-2005 4:01 PM


Re: Other relevant Lagersttten
Couple of corrections. First off, there is reason to think more animals could coexist together than do today, including mega-fauna, and the reason is the earth was not as populated by people and destructive development so the regions for populations would be much bigger, and certainly with more prey, that means more and larger predators would be able to be supported. The YECers have a perfectly valid point there.
That's incorrect. Ancient bison and Triceretops shared the same ecological nich. They roamed in large herds grazing on grasslands along with many other generations of sauropode that also filled the same niche.
The way a Niche works is that only a few creatures get to fill it and compete for resources. You can't have dozens of dozens of species in the same area eating the same thing as all the other creatures do. You would have total breakdown.
Check out Australia and the introduction of Rabits:
Rabbits in Australia - Wikipedia
When Rabbits were introduced to australia they totaly f*ked up the ecology:
quote:
The effect on the ecology of Australia was devastating. One eighth of all mammalian species in Australia are now extinct (rabbits are the most significant known factor), and the loss of plant species is unknown even at this time.
Huge areas of land in Australia have been cleared by tractors pulling chains in order to prepare the land for agricultural purposes. The rabbits easily thrived on the cleared land, and their population boomed.
Rabbits are also responsible for serious erosion problems as they eat native plants which would have retained soil. Some of this erosion may also be the result of settlers clearing much of Australia's land for farming and housing.
You can't just make a blanket statement that they "could all just live together", when all the evidence is that they couldn't. Ecosystems are very fragile and anything like the mass mingling of creatures you are suggesting would quickly upset it.
I think evaluating extinction rates compared to rates of observed new speciation is another fact demonstrating the same point. We see plenty of species going extinct and next to none forming anew. If extinction rates were constant, that alone disproves ToE models.
This is irrelivant to the conversation as I have already conceeded to you that the ToE is a load of horse crap.
On to the next point, some IDers propose a progressive creation and/or aided evolution. It appears at this juncture to me, that the evidence most backs ID models of one form or another. We see species seeming to emerge anew, although it is possible perhaps some of them existed prior as the creationists argue, but let's stick with the maxim if we don't see it in the fossil record at a given time, it probably wasn't there. Can we do that?
Agreed, sure.
So that suggests species emerged somehow as you suggest. Well, just being consistent with this maxim, if they had evolved or emerged for the most part based on ToE mechanisms, not ID mechanisms, we should expect to see the transitional forms present in the fossil record.
No, I conseeded ToE. It's not part of the discussion. How else did they get there since we both agree that ToE didn't happen, and that new creatures are definetly comming about.
your maxim: "if we don't see it in the fossil record at a given time, it probably wasn't there."
So whats your alternative solution to this problem?
This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-10-2005 04:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by randman, posted 11-10-2005 4:01 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by randman, posted 11-10-2005 4:20 PM Yaro has replied

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 243 days)
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 93 of 136 (258620)
11-10-2005 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by randman
11-10-2005 4:05 PM


Re: Fossilization vs Tar preservation
Feel free to take this over to the new topic, if it gets promoted. Yaro has asked that we 'take it outside' (so to speak).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by randman, posted 11-10-2005 4:05 PM randman has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5158 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 94 of 136 (258622)
11-10-2005 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Yaro
11-10-2005 4:13 PM


Re: Other relevant Lagersttten
Ancient bison and Triceretops shared the same ecological nich. They roamed in large herds grazing on grasslands along with many other generations of sauropode that also filled the same niche.
OK, let's put this to the test. Deer also roam about, right? How about moose? cattle? horses? bear (though not just grasslands?, lions? elephants? sheep? etc,....
Are you claiming that because bison lived in the North American grasslands that no other grazing species could co-exist on the same earth?
I guess all the deer, catttle, sheep, moose, horses, elephants, giraffes, lions, etc,...don't exist.
Nuff said on that point.
On the other point, I specifically mentioned ID as seeming to be the most plausible alternative at present.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Yaro, posted 11-10-2005 4:13 PM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Yaro, posted 11-10-2005 4:25 PM randman has replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6755 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 95 of 136 (258626)
11-10-2005 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by randman
11-10-2005 4:20 PM


Re: Other relevant Lagersttten
OK, let's put this to the test. Deer also roam about, right? How about moose? cattle? horses? bear (though not just grasslands?, lions? elephants? sheep? etc,....
Are you claiming that because bison lived in the North American grasslands that no other grazing species could co-exist on the same earth?
No, I am saying that Bison, triceretops, predecessors of triceretops, etc. All roamed the North american grassland. If they coexistd. All those species had to compeat for resources on the grassland.
ABE: also keep in mind that there were similar numbers of bison and triceretops. So we are talking MASSIVE populations of grazers. If rabbits can erode australia, immagine what hords of giant grass eaters would do.
You can apply similar scenarious to the other species you mentioned. And do read the article on australia and rabbits as it is highly relevant.
Anyway, I thought we agreed that there were differenet groups of animals at different times. That was the "maxim" So lets adress the rest of my previous post.
ABE: Explain what kind of ID, cuz there must have been new species comming into existance at different points in time as old species died off. If this is the case, what mechanism introduces the new species?
This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-10-2005 04:26 PM
This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-10-2005 04:28 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by randman, posted 11-10-2005 4:20 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by nwr, posted 11-10-2005 9:50 PM Yaro has replied
 Message 103 by randman, posted 11-11-2005 1:56 PM Yaro has replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4252 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 96 of 136 (258705)
11-10-2005 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Whirlwind
11-10-2005 10:03 AM


Re: Something wrong here...
Hi, WW, the trouble started when those predators ambled off the ark and started looking around for their first meals.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Whirlwind, posted 11-10-2005 10:03 AM Whirlwind has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6484
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 9.1


Message 97 of 136 (258709)
11-10-2005 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Yaro
11-10-2005 4:25 PM


Re: Other relevant Lagersttten
If rabbits can erode australia, immagine what hords of giant grass eaters would do.
Not a completely fair comparison.
The problem is not just that rabbits eat grass and other vegetation. The problem for Australia is the lack of natural enemies to control the rabbit population.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Yaro, posted 11-10-2005 4:25 PM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Yaro, posted 11-10-2005 9:54 PM nwr has replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6755 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 98 of 136 (258711)
11-10-2005 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by nwr
11-10-2005 9:50 PM


Re: Other relevant Lagersttten
Alright, fair enugh.
Although I ment it as a general example of how fragile ecosystems are and how easy they can be destabalized.
If your gonna say all the animals coexisted at one point you are going to have to expline how HUGE groups of bison and HUGE groups of triceretops didn't eat the landscape dry.
I mean, we are talking about a hebivore army here. Overgrazing happens all the time on farms, were talking overgrazing on a world wide scale here.
I think you see where I'm going with this. It's clearly an impossibilty that all those crits coexisted. Randman has accepted that point, so I would like to move the discussion on as to what mechanisim brings about new critters every few thousand years or so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by nwr, posted 11-10-2005 9:50 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by nwr, posted 11-13-2005 12:23 PM Yaro has not replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6755 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 99 of 136 (258793)
11-11-2005 8:27 AM


*bump*
*bump*

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by tardygm2, posted 11-11-2005 9:02 AM Yaro has replied

  
tardygm2 
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 136 (258798)
11-11-2005 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Yaro
11-11-2005 8:27 AM


Re: *bump*
deer are eaten by mountain lions

Samuel, Beth, samyy, Mitt, susan, whoever you are, stop these annoying nonsense posts. We've been through this several times before. One more such post and we will ban this registration as well.

This message has been edited by AdminJar, 11-11-2005 11:25 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Yaro, posted 11-11-2005 8:27 AM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Yaro, posted 11-11-2005 9:07 AM tardygm2 has not replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6755 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 101 of 136 (258800)
11-11-2005 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by tardygm2
11-11-2005 9:02 AM


Re: *bump*
So?
This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-11-2005 09:07 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by tardygm2, posted 11-11-2005 9:02 AM tardygm2 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Yaro, posted 11-11-2005 1:43 PM Yaro has not replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6755 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 102 of 136 (258876)
11-11-2005 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Yaro
11-11-2005 9:07 AM


bumpitty bump

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Yaro, posted 11-11-2005 9:07 AM Yaro has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5158 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 103 of 136 (258882)
11-11-2005 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Yaro
11-10-2005 4:25 PM


Re: Other relevant Lagersttten
The fact bison grazed the North American grassland does not negate the fact other creatures grazed other grasslands.
Got it?
In terms of explaining theoritical mechanisms for ID, I think we would have to get into physics and see what is physically possible, the nature of information specifically within QM and GR and physics in general, the entanglement phenomenon, etc,....
I would be glad to get into all of that.
Ned has threatened to ban me if I discuss these issues on the BiologicalEvo forum, but perhaps it is suffice to say, I believe modern physics indicates an ID mechanism present, and one that we ourselves may be able to harness and employ as well in direct engineering of reality.
Unfortunately, there is a lot of contention about certain physics discoveries, especially once they are applied to ID.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Yaro, posted 11-10-2005 4:25 PM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by BuckeyeChris, posted 11-11-2005 2:01 PM randman has replied
 Message 106 by Yaro, posted 11-11-2005 2:15 PM randman has replied

  
BuckeyeChris
Inactive Member


Message 104 of 136 (258884)
11-11-2005 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by randman
11-11-2005 1:56 PM


Re: Other relevant Lagersttten
In terms of explaining theoritical mechanisms for ID, I think we would have to get into physics and see what is physically possible, the nature of information specifically within QM and GR and physics in general, the entanglement phenomenon, etc,....
I would be glad to get into all of that.
Ned has threatened to ban me if I discuss these issues on the BiologicalEvo forum, but perhaps it is suffice to say, I believe modern physics indicates an ID mechanism present, and one that we ourselves may be able to harness and employ as well in direct engineering of reality.
Why don't you start the topic then, with your first post being your suggestion as to how those subjects could possibly suggest a mechanism for ID? I'd be curious to see what you come up with, not that I in any way see what you could be getting at.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by randman, posted 11-11-2005 1:56 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by randman, posted 11-11-2005 2:09 PM BuckeyeChris has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5158 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 105 of 136 (258887)
11-11-2005 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by BuckeyeChris
11-11-2005 2:01 PM


Re: Other relevant Lagersttten
I've posted about this in the past. You can look on some of the physics threads, or some old ID threads.
Basically, Ned said he would ban me, and I've been banned before. So unfortunately, the topic is more or less off-limits for the EVC.
I think there was someone else that listed some similar ideas on a Proposed topic, but the mods wouldn't take it up. A couple of us asked to have it released, but no luck.
If you google "entanglement", you can find some references to experimenters that beleive that it can hold the key to explaining how life began. Not sure if that means ID, but it sort of seems in that direction.
You may want to read up on some of John Wheeler's ideas. He argues that physical states do not exist as any one state until observed, and then definite form occurs. I think the best way to describe what physical things are is information which has the ability to and does manifest into a physical form. John Wheeler was and is a giant in the field of physics, now retired from teaching, but active still.
This message has been edited by randman, 11-11-2005 02:10 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by BuckeyeChris, posted 11-11-2005 2:01 PM BuckeyeChris has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Admin, posted 11-11-2005 9:03 PM randman 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