[_ Old Earth _] See my pretty sea shell?

[ELI]

See my pretty sea shell?


I found a think cake incrusted sea shell, high-up in the Desert Mountains once.

My geologist friend who works for Chevron told me its hundreds of millions of years old!

Wow!, I said, hundreds of millions of years old!

I asked him, how could that be? Aside from its odd crusty appearance, with a little spit and rubbing -- It looks just like the pretty sea-shell I found on the beach last summer?

That pretty sea-shell sure hasn’t changed much in four hundred million years, has it?

My guess is that pretty beach sea-shell just forgot to evolve : :D

God bless

Peace

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

This seems very cut and paste ish.
And it's not verifiable.
Name the mountain range and a precise location of the find. Give us a picture of the shell if possible.

 

[Barbarian]

If a population is well-adapted to the environment, and the environment does not change significantly, evolutionary theory predicts that natural selection will prevent evolution. This is called "stabilizing selection."

It doesn't happen a lot over many millions of years, because envirionments tend to change. But they do exist.

I'm not familiar with the case, but not long ago, it was discovered that relict fauna of reef animals were living in crevices here and there among the more recent ones, taking up niches not used by modern organisms.

I'll see if I can find some details for you.

 

[ELI]

You got me to laugh -- thank you

"evolutionary theory predicts that natural selection will prevent evolution"


BY ELI

evolutionary theory prevents the theory of evolution?

yes, I agree :

You slay me! : :

God bless

Peace

 

[ELI]

Used to find those shells all the time

This seems very cut and paste ish.
And it's not verifiable.
Name the mountain range and a precise location of the find. Give us a picture of the shell if possible.

BY ELI

Cut n paste, "See my pretty Sea shell" cut n paste!

No no no -- not cut n paste

I used to find those shells all the time, when I was younger :

It a well known fact that sea shells haven’t changed, its called stasis=(unchanging-things simply do not change) and the evolutionists don’t really have an adequate explanation for it.

The scientists find a tiny piece of skull fragment -- of a long extinct monkey or ape and then turn around and call it man? ! !! !! !

They really are painfully stupid and anyone that buys into their load deserves to be fooled by them.

The “Missing-link†they like to claim their searching for is the missing-link between all species –- not just between Ape and Man.

For the on-going process of evolution to be true, we would till have all sorts of weird things crawling out of the ocean to this very day.

If you really seek the truth, look into micro-biology and the awesome machine called the living cell.


God bless

Peace

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
"evolutionary theory predicts that natural selection will prevent evolution"

evolutionary theory prevents the theory of evolution?

Nope. It says that when a well-adapted population is in an unchanging environment, natural selection will prevent evolution.

You might know that there are other forms of selection that do cause evolution. When there are open niches in the environment, this tends to make populations split into two or more species, and a gradual change will lead to a population evolving in a different direction. I'm sure you'll agree that these are good examples of evolution, and well-documented in fact.

yes, I agree

Hey, you're right. It is kinda fun. But somehow, it seems a bit less than honest. Let's not play that game anymore, um?

 

[Barbarian]

It a well known fact that sea shells haven’t changed, its called stasis and the evolutionists don’t really have an adequate explanation for it.

Actually, Stephen Gould himself did an extensive study showing how shells in Bermuda had evolved over time and envirionment. You've been misled about that.

Limpets for example, evolved from coiled-shell mollusks; the evidence is extensive and well studied.

And the “Missing-link†they claim to search for is the missing-link between all species

No, it's "missing lynx". And they found it. It's not missing anymore. Seriously, though, "missing link" is not a scientific term, and I've never read it in the literature, except in context of a discussion of popular misconceptions.

 

[M82A1]

See my pretty sea shell?


I found a think cake incrusted sea shell, high-up in the Desert Mountains once.

My geologist friend who works for Chevron told me its hundreds of millions of years old!

^ Somone who doesn't know anything about Geology; Continental drift, mountain orogeny, etc.

God-Less!

War

 

[ELI]

That’s a fact

"Somone who doesn't know anything about Geology"

BY ELI

huh? : :

I'm pretty sure you don't understand your own babble or what're you talking about.

My geologist buddy who’s Christian and does indeed work for Chevron,
showed me as well as gave me rocks and shell fossils that are millions -- perhaps hundreds of millions of years old.

He graduated top of his class, thats why he works for Chevron. :D

But I really don’t need him to tell me the obvious or to have a some smarts and lick of common sense, which by the way, I see many so-called intellectuals woefully lack.

The shell fossils I find digging in my back yard or out in the middle of death valley or up in the mountains look pretty much like the pretty sea-shells I find on the beach today.

That’s a fact :

Peace --out





If you really seek the truth, look into micro-biology and the awesome machine called the living cell. This science alarms the dim-witted evolutionist

 

[Barbarian]

http://astrobiology.ucla.edu/ESS116/L06 ... lution.jpg

Summary of evolutionary changes in brachiopods. (which are not mollusks, but are often mistaken for them)

 

[Barbarian]

Affinities of limpets with the earliest snail-like organisms:

Range: Latest Cambrian (Late Dolgellian Age) to Recent; Worldwide

Phylogeny: Gastropoda : Orthogastropoda + Eogastropoda : Euomphalida ::: Patellogastropoda

Characters: the following primitive soft-body characteristics of the Patellogastropoda may also apply to the earliest Eogastropoda: $ the shallow mantle cavity; $ ctenidium without skeletal rods; $ paired excretory system; $ simple eye type; $ position of statocysts, (all from Haszprunar 1988 p.9], $ primitive-type sperm morphology (Koike, 1985; Healy, 1988; 1996), $ osphradium lacking true sensory cells; $ double-layered jaw plate (shared by Patellogastropoda and Cephalopoda) Sasaki 1998, primitively, paired paired and equal ctenidia and other organs [Knight, et al., 1960], some body asymmetry in later forms. [/quote]

The evolution of limpets involved a decrease in the spiraling of shells of Eogastropods. The dish-like structure of the limpet shell is topologically identical to coiled Eogastropod shells.

 

[Bryan]

"evolutionary theory predicts that natural selection will prevent evolution"

Man, the circular reasoning is working overtime in the evolution camp today!

Next thing you know, they'll be telling us "when you see a blue sky, it's important to remember that it's actually red".

 

[ELI]

stasis Thing simply do not change

Lack of change is called stasis

And the evolutionist hasn't any explanation for it. :D

All life denotes abrupt appearance of basic categories of life without any basic type having descended from some other category, and with no extensive change once the category appears.

Lack of change is known as stasis





If you really need the truth about life, look into micro-biology and the awesome machine called the living cell. This science alarms evolutionists

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Evolutionary theory says that when a well-adapted population is in an unchanging environment, natural selection will prevent evolution.

Man, the circular reasoning is working overtime in the evolution camp today!

Perhaps you don't know what "circular reasoning" is. Remember, natural selection comes in three forms, depending on the organism and the environment.

Stabilizing selection is the kind we most often see. If an population is well-adapted, random changes are much less likely to increase fitness. So, natural selection tends to prevent evolution from proceding. On the other hand, if the population is not well-adapted, then natural selection tends to favor change. It's very well understood, and can be mathematically demonstrated. This lasts until good fitness is obtained, and then the rate of evolution falls again.

Next thing you know, they'll be telling us "when you see a blue sky, it's important to remember that it's actually red".

Can you say "non-sequitur?" :

 

[Barbarian]

Lack of change is known as stasis

It a well known fact that all spesis came to be -- in abrupt appearances of basic categories (as strata well documents), without any type having descended from other categories, and with no extensive change once the category appears.

It's a well-known fact that Al Gore claimed to have invented the internet. But that "fact" turns out to be false, too.

"It ain't what folks don't know, it's what they know that ain't so."

You may be thinking of Gould's assertion that most species appear that way. Not all of them do. In his statement, Gould even discusses some that don't. Horses, ammonites, and forams are some of those that appear gradually.

The usual path for speciation seems to be allopatric, in which a small population is geographically separated, evolves rapidly in a limited area, and then moves out into larger areas. This explains Mayr's observation that aberrant populations tend to live in isolated areas.

 

[ELI]

This post is all about my Pretty Sea shell -- Stasis

If you would like to join-in on the topic thats well and good, but all I ask is you to please stay within the topic

Stasis cont.... . . .

life in equilibrium, or stasis

The fossil record shows abrupt appearance and stasis, this is well known fact.

Lack of transitional forms is exactly what should be the case if creation is true.

The fossil record supports abrupt creation of basic kinds much better than either slow or fast evolution.



Peace

 

[Barbarian]

This post is all about my Pretty Sea shell -- Stasis

If you would like to join-in on the topic thats well and good, but all I ask is you to please stay within the topic

That's what we're doing here. We're talking about how evolutionary theory accounts for stasis. As we noted before, we see both rapid evolution, and slow evolution over long periods of time. Stasis occurs, as you learned earlier, when a population is well-adapted to a relatively unchanging environment.

life in equilibrium, or stasis

The fossil record shows abrupt appearance and stasis, this is well known fact.

It also shows periods of rapid evolution, and other periods of gradual evolution in various populations. Would you like to learn how stasis and evolutionary change are related?

Lack of transitional forms is exactly what should be the case if creation is true.

That's right. If there were no such thing as evolution, there could be no fish with legs, or whales with legs, or intermediates between reptiles and mammals, or between salamanders and frogs, and so on. But there are.

The fossil record supports abrupt creation of basic kinds much better than either slow or fast evolution.

No, that's wrong. Because it can't explain transitionals, it fails to adequately cover the facts. That's why the vast majority of scientists accept evolutionary theory.

 

[ELI]

only different species?

The Barbarian
"That's right.
If there were no such thing as evolution, there could be no fish with legs, or whales with legs, or intermediates between reptiles and mammals, or between salamanders and frogs, and so on.
But there are"


BY ELI

That's right.
If there were no such thing as creation, there could be no fish with leg-like fin things, or small whale-like? things with legs, or a few seemingly apparent intermediates between reptiles and mammals, or between salamanders and frogs, and so on.
But there are.

I have got to warn you, The Barbarian
I have kind of a strange sense of humor? but I do have a good heart and never hold a grudge for very long.

I enjoy talking to you because you seem to have a good disposition and also because you didn’t nibble much on the troll-bait I set out.

Even when seemingly agitated you remain civil. That’s a very good sign to me. I apologize for being cavalier with you.

My string is all about stasis and I would like to discuss what seemingly appears to be explosions of life, as found in various strata boundaries.

It’s like these things just “popped-up†in strata, came out of nowhere in colossal explosions of life, then died off?

Then a thin layer of nothing, then we get another explosion of life, only different species?

God bless

Peace

 

[Barbarian]

The Barbarian observes:
"That's right. If there were no such thing as evolution, there could be no fish with legs, or whales with legs, or intermediates between reptiles and mammals, or between salamanders and frogs, and so on.
But there are"

That's right.
If there were no such thing as creation, there could be no fish with legs, or whales with legs, or a few seemingly apparent intermediates between reptiles and mammals, or between salamanders and frogs, and so on.
But there are.

True. But creationism is not creation. Creationism is diametrically opposed to creation. YE creationism requires life being created ex nihilo, and God tells us in Genesis that the earth and waters brought forth living things as He commanded. Creationism cannot account for the evidence of transitionals or for what God says in Scripture.

I have got to warn you, The Barbarian I have kind of a strange sense of humor? but I do have a good heart and never hold a grudge for very long.

Sounds like a good way to live.

I enjoy talking to you because you seem to have a good disposition and also because you didn’t nibble much on the troll-bait I set out.

I'm not easy to rile. And I usually walk away for a bit if I am. You don't want to see me upset. Ask BL.

Even when seemingly agitated you remain civil. That’s a very good sign to me. I apologize for being cavalier with you.

Forget it. No need to apologize.

My string is all about stasis and I would like to discuss what seemingly appears to be explosions of life, as found in various strata boundaries.

It’s like these things just “popped-up†in strata, came out of nowhere in colossal explosions of life, then died off?

Nope. For example, the "Cambrian Explosion" was preceded by a very long time of gradual increase in the variety of complex multicelled organisms. The "Explosion" was mostly a matter of the evolution of hard exoskeletons, which made possible a huge diversification of living things, mostly arthropods and mollusks.

Then a thin layer of nothing, then we get another explosion of life, only different species?

Not usually. But every now and then, we have a mass extinction, which clears the decks. The last one was the K-T boundary, evidently, the result of a huge meteor strike that wiped out all land animals larger than a few kilograms in mass.

Locally, that happens more often, due to various changes in climate, floods, etc.