Jump to content

iCenozoic

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About iCenozoic

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Maine, USA
  • Religion
    Christian Humanist
  • Mood
    Cheeseburger
  • Favorite Subjects
    food, rocks

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

191 profile views
  1. " Are we really doomed to see the rise of an ugly, sectarian branch of Islam that begins to take over nations and then launches new holocausts? " Sounds like what's going on in Iraq and Syria right now. Thankfully most of the world isn't interested in putting up with the nonsense, and major powers are dissecting isis and putting a lid on it. I think there is a problem though, in that technologically advanced weapons can destroy buildings, but they can't so easily destroy an ideology.
  2. And with countless mutations that do not appear to be driving populations in a particular direction, those that fixate, do so based on environmental factors. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/15/science/watching-bacteria-evolve-with-predictable-results.html?smid=nytcore-iphone-share&smprod=nytcore-iphone In both the lenski experiments and those in the link above, organisms fitness was driven by manipulation of resources (the environmental constraint) and competition from other populations of organisms. Which is observed natural selection.
  3. "Speciation could occur without the need to overcome IC. And what evidence is there that it happened via blind randommutations and selection? " Mutations are typically considered random in that without environmental pressures, they do not result in evolution in a particular direction. In many cases, populations will even evolve in one direction, then evolve back to the way they once were in the past. In other cases, organisms undergo mutation, then undergo back-mutations in which what once changed in one direction, changed back to the way it was before, genetically. Google "random walks" in paleontology. Or "back mutations" or "reverse mutations". And of course there are mutations caused by bombardment of DNA by subatomic particles. Which of course would be random. If I pick up a radioactive piece of shale, it could alter my DNA without necessarily producing cancer. Another idea just to consider, In the popular case of lenskis e.coli experiments, those bacteria underwent billions of mutations, before aquiring the hundreds of fixated beneficial mutations that they did. Different populations underwent different mutations and evolved in different ways. If mutations we're not random, one might expect populations to evolve in a particular direction or to evolve identically with other populations. We might not expect to see reverse mutations. We also might not expect populations to undergo billions of non fixated and seemingly useless mutations. The great variety of organisms in the Cambrian explosion has also been attributed to "randomness". At a time before natural selection took hold, organisms were evolving in all sorts of wild and bizarre shapes and forms. Thus is the opinion of Stephen J Gould at least, and his opinion appears justified.
  4. Irreducible complexity itself isn't really equivalent to ID, it isn't actually providing evidence of anything. It is simply a claim against something else. For that reason, there isn't anything for ID to teach. I typically look at the common bacterial flagellum claim. The original argument which failed in the Dover trials. Behes claims that systems such as the flagellum were irreducibly complex, in the sense that they would not function upon being reduced to individual parts. But as the common response goes, individual, functional parts of the flagellum do exist and serve alternative functions.
  5. I think irreducible complexity is something that has been a failed concept since the discussions were raised about the bacterial flagellum. Behes argument is more of an argument from ignorance, rather than an argument in favor of intelligent design. Aside from that, speciation has been observed In nature as a product of mutations and selection. I certainly don't agree that ID should be taught in schools, because there wouldn't be anything to teach.
  6. What do you mean by "unique" when referring to genetic material? If you begin with AAAA, and have a duplication, then you would have AAAA AAAA. Subsequent point mutations can act on either the original or duplicated genes so you could end up with something like AAAA AATA. By the end you have a quantitatively greater amount of DNA (sometimes referred to as information)and you have a novel sequence that did not exist prior to the duplication and point mutation. It is a unique sequence in the sense that there are none other like it nor were there any before it that were like it. If AAAA AATA produces proteins which assist sin the populations survival, that point mutation will become fixed and locked into the genetic sequence of the population. If AAAA AATA is detrimental to the populations survival, then they will be out-competed and will go extinct. If the sequence is neutral then the population will simply carry on.
  7. Im just pulling more old discussions out from the grave here. I just wanted to jump back into the discussion of the polish tetrapod tracks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_tetrapod_trackways#Holy_Cross_Mountains,_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiktaalik The boundaries of precisely when tetrapods evolved to walk on land is still being worked on (and will continue to be). But I thought the above wiki page was interesting. We have late devonian (360-375ish) tetrapodomorph tracks, in which there is confidence in terrestrial locomotion. This is how it is in most late devonian strata that is fossil bearing. You find regular tetrapod tracks from animals walking on land. Middle Devonian, 375-390 you have things like tiktaalik " The trackways are late Middle Devonian in age based on a palynological assemblage from the Valentia Slate Formation and the U-Pb radioisotopic dating of an interstratified air-fall tuff bed to ca. 385 Ma,[3] making these tetrapod trackways some of the earliest recorded, along with traces of early Middle Devonian (Eifelian) age from Poland.[4]The most extensive of the Valentia Island trackways is preserved in a fine-grained sandstone and records some 145 imprints in a parallel orientation of the left and right impressions. The systematic variation in size of the impressions affords distinction between tracks left by the manus and pes of the animal, but the trackway does not preserve any finer details. Other trackways at the same site preserve tail and body drag impressions; the nature of the impressions and that of the sandstone led to the interpretation that the setting was not saturated in water. Consequently, these tracks are interpreted as evidence of fully terrestrial locomotion." "In 2004, three fossilized Tiktaalik skeletons were discovered in rock formed from late Devonian river sediments on Ellesmere Island, Nunavut, in northern Canada.[50][51]Estimated ages reported at 375 MYA, 379 MYA, and 383 MYA." So you have these really early tetrapod tracks and the first skeleton of a tetrapod/fish hybrid. Then in the early devonian (390-410ish) you get things like the polish tracks being dated at 395 A collection of trackways and impressions is reported from the Wojciechowice Formation of the Holy Cross Mountains located in south-eastern Poland.[4] The Wojciechowice Formation is a shallow marine-fed tidal or lagoonal unit that dates to the Eifelian Stage of the Middle Devonian, approximately 395 million years ago based on conodont fossils and previous biostratigraphy on bounding units. The preservation of the track assemblage varies with some clearer tracks preserving finer morphology such as digitation while others are more vague, preserving only an outline. Showing consistency with the aforementioned tracks, these fall into two parallel rows of impressions and show no evidence of body or tail drag. Then of course we have fish dominating really dominating the early devonian. So we have clear fish domination in the early devonian (400) and prior, then tetrapod and terrestrial locomotion by the late devonian (385). Tiktaalik around 380 and the polish tracks around 395. So in this middle period, we have entered this discussion of, exactly where or when is the very first tetrapod? We are pulling these fish/tetrapod hybrids out of this gray area in the middle. Im curious to see what comes out of Antarctica here in the next few years. Research is ongoing. People area really working open this 20 million year window to figure out the most feasible explanation, within. Which in geologic time, 20 million years, really is...we are talking about back to back formations in a pretty brief window of time, of a much larger succession spanning billions of years of rock. I think part of why I wanted to make this post was just to point out that, the polish tracks and tiktaalik do not really conflict with one another in the sense that they both support the theory of evolution via the fossils succession. But rather, both the polish trace fossils and tiktaalik among the succession of other fossils, are pulling us into a discussion of fine tuned precision of when and how the fish to tetrapod transition occurred.
  8. I like the stereotypical image of a chimp walking upright that's been applied to my post. If I had a choice I'd have a fish sprouting legs or a reptile jumping into the sky or something.
  9. Number two is listed as "Darwin's point". I mean come on, we have an answer right there in the article.
  10. "is it just to accuse them of individual lethargy, or are they collectively responding to similar stimuli?" it would be a combination of the two. i agree that in many cases, a deeper cause beyond "laziness" is at play. and blacks are not the only race living on welfare. Statistically, more whites live off of food stamps than blacks.
  11. But really, the question of institutionalized racism, even if its from events from 100 years ago, is linked to decisions that people are making today. Some people in the ghetto are making decisions that we might agree with. Others are making decisions that we wouldn't agree with, and others are simply victims of circumstance being surrounded by certain forms of culture which may or may not be impacted by forms of racism. And just to clarify, if a person willfully chooses to live off of food stamps, this doesn't indicate genetic inferiority, it just indicates that some people are willing to make decisions that we might not agree with.
  12. Some African Americans, and whites, Hispanics and others, honestly aren't "trying as hard" as others. It doesn't indicate biological inferiority, it just demonstrates subjectively bad choices carried out by some. I have plenty of family members who have had and continue to have opportunities to leave the ghetto, but they willfully have and continue to simply choose free handouts.
  13. Just out of curiosity, did Stein and Sanders run on a platform of fighting ISIS? Otherwise, yes, both sides clearly have a grudge against countries like Iran and Syria.
  14. Well that's a bad idea because it would prevent whites from being police officers. You couldn't legally justify that.
×
×
  • Create New...