DARWIN'S MACROEVOLUTION: Why Unscientific?

Distraff:

Nobody knows what the primitive earth was like, because they weren't there at the beginning. All they can do is present speculations. So what point are you attempting to make here? And did you notice that Tecoyah dodged my QUESTION #1?


Alter2Ego

 

tecoyah:

I asked you a question that you are now dodging.

QUESTION #1 TO TECOYAH: Since it required the intervention of an intelligent being (Stanley Miller) to produce a few amino acids in the laboratory, why would it not all the more so require the intervention of an intelligent being aka JEHOVAH to create life from non-life?

Instead of answering the question, you came back with above tripe. You have now resorted to schoolyard insults, which only happens when someone realizes he or she is confronted with information that they cannot overcome.

Until you answer my QUESTION #1, do not write anything else to me. If you write to me again without answering QUESTION #1, you will be added to my Ignore List permanently -- along with the two dozen or so people that I have already sent there. So you have two (2) choices, as follows:

1. Answer QUESTION #1.
2. Do not write anything else to me.

Alter2Ego

 

The only intelligent intervention was setting up equipment. I would appreciate you ignoring me....please do so.

 

There are several major flaws with the idea that what Pasteur did disproved abiogenesis.

Boiling broth and waiting to see how long it takes to grow something is not a method that has ANY CHANCE of disproving abiogenesis. Let's remember that his boiled broth was allowed to stand in an OPEN glass. So his experiment WOULD allow contamination that would grow life forms if one waited for a week - regardless of abiogenesis. The entire design of the experiment was a solid fail deriving from lack of understanding that there are bacteria and other small life forms.

In fact, boiling will not kill all life forms, so even if he had sealed his experiment it would fail. Today, we "pasteurize" milk in order to cause it to last longer. Does THAT disprove abiogenesis? Obviously not as life forms arise in a sealed carton of pasteurized milk

Is abioenesis disproven if it takes longer that one person's lifetime for something to grow in Pasteur's glass? Obviously not.

Pasteur was an important scientist in a field that people just plain did NOT understand at that time.

 

??

Sanley Miller attempted to set up environments that were known to or were likely to have existed at some time and place in nature.

Interpreting that as requiring Miller for abiogenesis is total nonsense. What he did was to explore whether certain naturally occurring conditions were sufficient for abiogenesis.

 

Good post.

I would say that SETI is one method for looking for life, and we're significantly enhancing the search for life, but not just by that one method.

After all, a good number of our satellites have had the search for life as one of their significant objectives, and that is even more so today, with the EU satellites made to find and analyze more earth like planets.

So, I think we are increasing our search for life well beyond SETI.

 

Searching for life is unlikely to be fruitful outside our solar system for several reasons. Firstly we have the distances and what that means for time. Secondly would be the fact that we have no idea what that life is and how it might communicate. Third involves the incredible energies involved in pushing a signal the distances required....etc....

Life WILL be found pretty soon but it will be on local moons and probably microbial.

 

I agree. As always with the stars we would at best be looking at what happened in the distant past. By far our best options are inside our solar system.

Still, there are several satellites being designed and launched with the mission of finding Earth like planets and analyzing them for indications of life using spectroscopy, for example.

 

And we will soon be able to examine atmosphere content, we already know of Earth sized planets (Trapist comes to mind) and once the Webb launches the game will change dramatically again. Regardless we still have the aforementioned limitations I expect life to be found on Titan and Encelydus within a decade and Europa within two.

 

Scientists do have the rocks and sediment from that time and can judge from those. Its very interesting that the building blocks of life form by themselves in the very environment scientists think the early earth or at least parts of the early earth was like.

We also find them in meteorites. Its very interesting that the building blocks of life can form by themselves on some other planets or moons too. Maybe thats why amino acides and nucleotides are the building blocks of life, they are great, and are all over the place.

 

The time separation between humans and dinosaurs, about 60 million years, accounts for the human fossils being in the newest layers. Why would a global flood comingle the two to any great extent except in some extreme localized conditions?

IMO, the flood should be interpreted as a cataclysm involving a pole shift wherein waves were drastic enough to wash across continents and take out the layers that were not added to the sequence in the Grand Canyon strata. However, I think the timeline of the missing strata does not coincide with that of the last "global flood," when wooly mammoths with green fodder in their mouths were frozen stiff by the pole displacement that put them into an arctic zone, about 10,000 years ago.

 

Yeah, thats the answer. Humans and dinosaurs are 60 million years apart. Humans only appeared in the last 200,000 years. Thats why they are never together.

So if humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time, which is what some creationists claim, and a big flood came through, we would find them in the same layers since they lived at the same time at the same elevation.

How does the magnetic field changing somehow move the whole ocean? And waves washing across continents isn't the same as a global flood lasting a year. Try this, get two magnets, and a cup of water, and move them around. See what happens.

From evidence in our geological strata we know there have been hundreds of pole shifts in the past, the last one being 780,000 years ago with no flood. So how can the fossil record be the result of a pole shift when it shows hundreds of them at different times? In addition scientists say that the consequences of pole shifts boil down to more solar radiation, not mega-waves.

Or they were just frozen by especially bad winters. And how does a polar shift make a region freezing cold instantly? Again, get those two magnets and try that experiment for me. If they weren't originally living in an arctic region, then why so much hair like polar bears?

 

Darwin observed a wide variety of finches in various islands. The birds differed in the length, thickness, and shape of their bills according to the feeding niche that each type specialized in. All of them were adaptations (modifications) of the basic plain finch type and had become separate species (that probably could not cross-breed). I don't see how anyone could consider that scenario to be not a creative evolutionary example.

In taking advantage of the various feeding niches, the birds avoided extinction that the plain version would have had to face wherever its required food type was not available.

 

Ah, so it's a creationist issue, not so much a flood issue.

There can be magnetic pole shift without physical pole shift. The scientific viewpoint points the finger at the behavior of the molten iron core. Magnetic pole reversal on the sun can effect reversal on earth (According to Maurice Cotterell, there was a solar reversal that flipped Venus but not the earth in 627 A.D. IIRC, else it was 3113 B.C.). Hapgood's notion was that a buildup of Antarctic ice can become sufficient to cause a wobble that rebalances by effecting physical rearrangement. Velikovsky claimed that a near-miss by the transitioning planet Venus (some think more likely a comet) jerked the earth off its regular axis.

The grass and clover in their mouths and stomachs didn't grow in polar bear country.

 

Yes anyone can see the evolution of computers.

 

Then why does it today?

 

@Distraff
@Gelecski7238

Why Do Humans From All Over The Globe
have "myths" or oral histories of "dragons"? Dinosaurs.

Pre 60 Million Years ago, Human Towns and Cities would be
under how many feet of ocean today? Humans like coastal regions.

For a good time, Search, "aquatic ape".

 

There is more than a 60M year gap between the last dino and the first human.

That's a period that is 30 times as long as there have been humans on earth.

We should require real evidence before making an assumption so gigantic as to suggest there was an overlapping period.

 

"They" are not looking in the right places.
Those places are under water today.

. . . . between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities, and the years of the rise of the Sons of Aryas, there was an Age undreamed of, when shining kingdoms lay spread across the world like blue mantles beneath the stars - Nemedia, Ophir, Brythunia, Hyperborea, Zamora with its dark-haired women and towers of spider-haunted mystery, Zingara with its chivalry, Koth that bordered on the pastoral lands of Shem, Stygia with its shadow-guarded tombs, Hyrkania whose riders wore steel and silk and gold. But the proudest kingdom of the world was Aquilonia, reigning supreme in the dreaming west. . . .

How far from the truth could it be? Absolute?
What of the Persian Gulf or Mediterranean when they were not inundated with sea water?

Moi
Anti Out Of Africa too
Who needs stone when bamboo is so handy and easily sharpened to a spear.

​

 

Cool maps!!

But, I don't believe dinosaurs would stay inside the borders of today's Persian Gulf and Mediterranean Sea for 60M years!

 

No, but the earliest evidence of PeopleKind or civilization may have.
They occur where fresh water meets salt water.
Ref. The Aquatic Ape.
We evolved for that high protein nutrition most easily harvested in intertidal zones
and estuaries. The meeting of fresh and salt water.
We got sub cutaneous fat similar to aquatic mammals.
We got "hairless".
And we do not suffer denial of fresh water well, as other terrestrial critters.
We do like those delta areas. Now under sea water.
Oh and no apes or monkeys can swim as PeopleKind can.


Submit for your approval;
"We" are looking for pre 60M years ago people in the wrong places.

Somehow "dragon" (dinosaur) lore occurs all around the globe.
Ancient memories reinterpreted? Or what?
PLEASE enlighten Moi.

 

Or dinosaur bones. Or the silk road letting middle age people know about Chinese dragons. The dinosaur and human fossils are 60 million years apart and there aren't any dinosaur bones anywhere near the human ones. Technically some dinosaurs did survive, like crocodiles, and maybe there were other stragglers. But the closest thing to a dragon is a T-Tex, but those things need large prey that simple didn't exist in the human era.

If all the ice in the world melted, sea levels would be 250 feet higher. The bible is very clear that the entire planet was submerged, not just the coast. And I'm pretty sure there were a lot of people living more than 250 feet above sea level.

 

He didn't produce the amino acids. He simple simulated the early earth environment and they formed on their own. If a planet had a place with that environment, they will form on their own there as well. We have found these building blocks on meteorites as well. The building blocks of life are actually quite common and just need to be put together.

 

I don't believe we're looking for fossils in the "wrong places" in that we're excited by fossils wherever we find them. So, when someone finds an interesting fossil, scientists look more in those locations.

Also, there are many places where land has risen about the water level, exposing fossilized sea life in places like down state Illinois, the US Southwest, etc.

Ancient humanoids developed brains that allowed for living in numerous environments - in trees, on the plains, on water. I wouldn't dispute "Aquatic Ape" concerning the importance of shorelines, but I think fossil records show that as one of many. There's a great section on a tribe who lives in trees today in the "Human Planet" film series. They cook on fires, raise their kids, etc. on platforms 60 feet above ground with stone age equipment in their jungle. At one point, they used their stone age solutions to rescue those who were using modern climbing gear to film them.

 

Regardless of the issue of climate zone technicalities, the beasts were suddenly entombed in frozen ice at a latitude further north from where their usual food could grow.