As this graph shows, significant changes in body size - one evolutionary trait that can be tracked through the fossil record - take about one million years before major changes accumulate and persist. (Graphic courtesy of Oregon State University)
In research that will help address a long-running debate and apparent contradiction between short- and long-term evolutionary change, scientists have discovered that although evolution is a constant and sometimes rapid process, the changes that hit and stick tend to take a long time.
Give or take a little, one million years seems to be the magic number.
No doubt about it. Creationism is fake at best, and a psychosis at worst.
So the question is, when the animals stepped off the ark a few thousand years ago, how did they manage to get from one "kind" to another WITHOUT the required time?
And no, it isn't an "interpretation of data.
And for the record:
""This isn't just some chance genetic mutation that takes over," he said. "Evolutionary adaptations are caused by some force of natural selection such as environmental change, predation or anthropogenic disturbance, and these forces have to continue and become widespread for the change to persist and accumulate. That's slower and more rare than one might think."
In other words, this is how mutations add up...and stay that way. it's time ladies and gents, simple, straightforward time.
I don't believe it. Prove it to me and I still won't believe it.
~Any Creationist~ (But honestly Douglas Adams)
"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
Slipnish: So the question is, when the animals stepped off the ark a few thousand years ago, how did they manage to get from one "kind" to another WITHOUT the required time?
And no, it isn't an "interpretation of data.
iama: The Creation account in Genesis 1 states, very clearly, that ALL of the KINDs of plant and animal life-forms were created on Day 3, Day 5 and Day 6 of The Creation week.
What exists, today, is a great variety WITHIN each of the created KINDs of plant and animal life-forms. These KINDs, existing worldwide, having phenotypical variations, if brought back together, would hybridize, or reproduce with each / some of the variations of their originally created KINDs, as per, Genesis 1.
Certainly, the fossil record is the exact same data, and the living plant and animal life-forms are there somewhere in the world's different habitats / environments / world-locations.
Same data, different interpretation.
.
The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin . "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." . Justice is receiving what you deserve. Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve. Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve. .
Slipnish: So the question is, when the animals stepped off the ark a few thousand years ago, how did they manage to get from one "kind" to another WITHOUT the required time?
And no, it isn't an "interpretation of data.
iama: The Creation account in Genesis 1 states, very clearly, that ALL of the KINDs of plant and animal life-forms were created on Day 3, Day 5 and Day 6 of The Creation week.
What exists, today, is a great variety WITHIN each of the created KINDs of plant and animal life-forms. These KINDs, existing worldwide, having phenotypical variations, if brought back together, would hybridize, or reproduce with each / some of the variations of their originally created KINDs, as per, Genesis 1.
Certainly, the fossil record is the exact same data, and the living plant and animal life-forms are there somewhere in the world's different habitats / environments / world-locations.
Same data, different interpretation.
Very different data, very different interpretation.
You consider the bible to be 'data' wheras science does not.
Science also has data like 'this rock is 2 billion years old' which you do not have.
And science clearly shows the fossil record to support evolution over 3 billion years or more, which is not your interpretation. The big difference is the science makes sense and your 'forced assumptions' do not, as they do not match the data.
--------------------------------------------------------- What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" do you not understand? --------------------------------------------------------- Wind speeds of Mach 2 would messily disassemble most consumer electronics. ---------------------------------------------------------
Slipnish: So the question is, when the animals stepped off the ark a few thousand years ago, how did they manage to get from one "kind" to another WITHOUT the required time?
And no, it isn't an "interpretation of data.
iama: The Creation account in Genesis 1 states, very clearly, that ALL of the KINDs of plant and animal life-forms were created on Day 3, Day 5 and Day 6 of The Creation week.
Well, it's wrong. That didn't happen.
What exists, today, is a great variety WITHIN each of the created KINDs
"Kinds" is not a scientific word and it is virtually meaningless.
of plant and animal life-forms. These KINDs, existing worldwide, having phenotypical variations, if brought back together, would hybridize, or reproduce with each / some of the variations of their originally created KINDs, as per, Genesis 1.
But nothing in Genesis is true. That's a problem for you, isn't it?
Certainly, the fossil record is the exact same data
No it doesn't. It demonstrates evolution of a period of around 3 billion years and no global floods ever.
, and the living plant and animal life-forms are there somewhere in the world's different habitats / environments / world-locations.
Same data, different interpretation.
One set of data and only one rational scientific interpretation. Anything else is lala-fantasy land stuff.
Certainly, the fossil record is the exact same data, and the living plant and animal life-forms are there somewhere in the world's different habitats / environments / world-locations.
Same data, different interpretation.
A major problem with this assertion is that the fossil record shows the rise and extinction of different species over time. For instance, 70 million years ago theropods were a major type of predators, but 70 thousand years ago all the theropods are gone and we have cats (in the grand, i.e., felids) as a major type of predator. Conversely, there were no tigers around when T. Rex hunted prey.
Back to Slip's point, how do Creationists account for the apparent million year time frame needed to "fix" major phenotypic changes? Even assuming a pool of all possible kinds at some point, it still takes a million years of major changes to stabilize.
Slipnish: So the question is, when the animals stepped off the ark a few thousand years ago, how did they manage to get from one "kind" to another WITHOUT the required time?
And no, it isn't an "interpretation of data.
iama: The Creation account in Genesis 1 states, very clearly, that ALL of the KINDs of plant and animal life-forms were created on Day 3, Day 5 and Day 6 of The Creation week.
What exists, today, is a great variety WITHIN each of the created KINDs of plant and animal life-forms. These KINDs, existing worldwide, having phenotypical variations, if brought back together, would hybridize, or reproduce with each / some of the variations of their originally created KINDs, as per, Genesis 1.
Certainly, the fossil record is the exact same data, and the living plant and animal life-forms are there somewhere in the world's different habitats / environments / world-locations.
Same data, different interpretation.
d_p_m: Very different data, very different interpretation.
iama: How can the vast worldwide sedimentary layers and the fossils which they contain, be DIFFERENT DATA?? The fossils are the fossils. They don't change just because a creationist is looking at them, vs an evolutionist!
d_p_m: You consider the bible to be 'data' wheras science does not.
iama: There are many scientists who take The Bible as reliable historical data. Science is neutral regarding The Creation and The Bible. Science is the human activity conducted upon the data of The Creation and of The Bible. Theology is the science related to The Bible.
d_p_m: Science also has data like 'this rock is 2 billion years old' which you do not have.
iama: Not so! The Creation has given scientists data, which evolution scientists have interpreted as evidencing that 'this rock is 2 billion years old.' Scientists DON'T have the historical parameters related to the history of 'this rock.' What scientists have gathered is radioactive ions decaying at a steady rate, now. There are other data evidences which can cause a scientist to interpret 'this rock is NOT 2 billion years old.'
If you are serious about understanding the Creationist's understandings concerning radiometric dating, take the time to read through the following, especially, the second one:
d_p_m: And science clearly shows the fossil record to support evolution over 3 billion years or more, which is not your interpretation. The big difference is the science makes sense and your 'forced assumptions' do not, as they do not match the data.
iama: The geological science has determined that the world wide sediments, including those existing in the mountain ranges which are sedimentary-laid-down-deposits, were laid down by catastrophic waters. The fossils contained within those same sedimentary layers, worldwide, record the catastrophic destruction of The Flood waters as they, firstly, destroyed marine life, and the terrestrial life, subsequently. Much of the terrestrial life was not fossilized, but died, decayed, or was consumed. The '3 billion years of more,' figure is there, ONLY, because of the speculation's requirements for long-ages!
The biblical The Flood, explains the sedimentary layers, worldwide, containing the myriad of catastrophically destroyed life-forms. There are no 'forced assumptions' required when The Bible's Genesis' accounts are taken as historical reality recordings of what actually happened.
.
The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin . "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." . Justice is receiving what you deserve. Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve. Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve. .
Science is the human activity conducted upon the data of The Creation
There is no scientific basis for 'The Creation'. Any assumption that there is/was a Creation or a Creator is unscientifc. There is no 'data of The Creation'
The bible is not scientific data, it's a book of myths, and tribal history. It contains bias and errors, and where the contents are amenable to scientific testing, often provably wrong.
Theology is NOT science of any kind. Theology is a collection of shared or not so shared opinions about religion, and different theologies come to vastly different conclusions about theology, depending on who is doing the theology. For example, many aspects of your theology would be laughable to a Roman Catholic Theologian, and even more so to a Hindu or Zoroastrian theologian.
Science, on the other hand, converges on the same testable conclusions, no matter who is doing the science.
--------------------------------------------------------- What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" do you not understand? --------------------------------------------------------- Wind speeds of Mach 2 would messily disassemble most consumer electronics. ---------------------------------------------------------
Tasman Walker is another engineer pretending to be a scientist.
And he midrepresents radionucleide dating techniques.
He's a little too high profile to be simply ignorant, so he's another liar.
--------------------------------------------------------- What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" do you not understand? --------------------------------------------------------- Wind speeds of Mach 2 would messily disassemble most consumer electronics. ---------------------------------------------------------
For My Mother: In Praise of a Life Lived
Chasing an Elusive God
Why Christianity Is Dying But Spirituality Is Thriving?
On the Frontlines An interview with Yael Eckstein, Senior Vice President of the ...
Ray Liotta, Seth Green Join an All-Star Cast in Indie Film ‘The Identical’ “We want to bring films with a redeeming value to the world. One of ...
A Life of Hope The fact that you’re standing here today with breath in your lungs ...
Habits for a Heart Healthy Lifestyle Heart disease is a top killer worldwide -- but our lifestyle choices ...
Emotional Equations Using brilliantly simple math that illuminates universal emotional ...
Are You a Compulsive or Binge Eater? Do you struggle with your weight? Find out more about compulsive and ...
Faith, Freedom and Rocker John Schlitt “We are making choices on greed and stupidity. The truth is that our ...
Robert Griffin III: Not the Average Rookie Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III continues to wow ...
Green Powders to Add to Your Diet Now Green powders are a great way to boost your health, keep your energy ...
Natural Deodorants That Actually Work What's that smell? Not us! We’ve been on a mission to find the best ...
Birth of a Habit How long does it take to form a new habit? How long should it take ...
Madly In Love With ME “I will never settle for less than my heart and soul desire.”
Is It Love If You're All Cranky When You Give It? Love is the answer to everything in life.
Living A Meaningful Life You are what you love and you love whatever you give your attention ...
"The Bible" a Labor of Love for Famed Producer, Wife The five-week, 10-hour TV special was nurtured by "Touched by an ...
Who Should Be Allowed to Pray for President Obama? It seems preposterous, but there’s a major debate over who is worthy ...
