AgnosticWeb.com

Back to the forum index

Linear

The following is copy from the weekly summary of Journel Science. It appears that the 250 mya Permian-Triassic ezxtinction was primarily due to volcanic eruptions, i.e.,bad luck:-Extinction's Cause and Effect
Nicholas S. Wigginton - 
CREDIT: GRASBY ET AL., NAT. GEOSCI. 4, 10.1038/NGEO1069 (2011)
 
 -At the Permian-Triassic boundary 250 million years ago, nearly 90% of marine animals went extinct. Unlike the dinosaurs' demise attributed to a giant asteroid impact 185 million years later, this extinction event was at least partially related to a long series of volcanic eruptions. A series of feedbacks in the ocean-atmosphere system as a response to these eruptions would have turned the oceans anoxic and suffocating to animals, but how marine life recovered is not well constrained. To track primary productivity after the mass extinction, Meyer et al. examined the carbon isotope signature from limestone deposits in south China. Large variations in the isotopic record suggest that autotrophic productivity was so high after the mass extinction that it maintained anoxia and choked out larger marine life, though the isotopes say little about how such a situation would have originated. Toward that end, a study by Grasby et al. suggests that volcanism also combusted nearby coal deposits in a series of events that are roughly coincident with downturns in productivity leading up to the mass extinction. The charred remains (shown left in comparison with modern combustion residue), which were found in sedimentary deposits in the Canadian arctic, may have added toxins, such as chromium, to ocean basins that could also have contributed to the declining state of marine biodiversity. -Earth Planet Sci. Lett. 10.1016/j.epsl.2010.12.033 (2011); Nat. Geosci. 4, 10.1038/ngeo1069 (2011).

4264 views

The following is copy from the weekly summary of Journel Science. It appears that the 250 mya Permian-Triassic ezxtinction was primarily due to volcanic eruptions, i.e.,bad luck:
> 
> Extinction's Cause and Effect
> Nicholas S. Wigginton 
> 
...-But don't you, in your own admission to teleology purport that this event was not a chance event? The development of mammals wasn't possible without the dinosaurs out of the picture.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"

4142 views

But don't you, in your own admission to teleology purport that this event was not a chance event? The development of mammals wasn't possible without the dinosaurs out of the picture.-You are right that the chixulub asteroid did in the dinosaurs, but I doubt that God threw some lightning bolts to steer the asteroid. My teleology theory is guidance built into DNA to allow for increased complexity, when the opportunity strikes. David Raup pointed out lots of bad luck in his book covering about six mass extinctions.

4115 views

But don't you, in your own admission to teleology purport that this event was not a chance event? The development of mammals wasn't possible without the dinosaurs out of the picture.
> 
> You are right that the chixulub asteroid did in the dinosaurs, but I doubt that God threw some lightning bolts to steer the asteroid. My teleology theory is guidance built into DNA to allow for increased complexity, when the opportunity strikes. David Raup pointed out lots of bad luck in his book covering about six mass extinctions.-But... you just said a short while ago that we men are an intended consequence of a genetic code programmed to be more complex... so where does divine intervention start and where does it stop?

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"

4187 views


> But... you just said a short while ago that we men are an intended consequence of a genetic code programmed to be more complex... so where does divine intervention start and where does it stop?-I believe that intervention is a drive to complexity code within the genome. Outside the genome, I don't know.

4091 views

DAVID: My teleology theory is guidance built into DNA to allow for increased complexity, when the opportunity strikes. David Raup pointed out lots of bad luck in his book covering about six mass extinctions.-From my position on the fence, I find the whole complexity argument impossible to ignore ... i.e. one simply cannot rule out design. But it is the next step in your teleological argument that I find so illogical: namely, that humans were planned from the very beginning. The whole history of life appears to depend on one environmental stroke of luck after another ... good for some, bad for others - but why should a UI rely on luck to accomplish something it has planned from the beginning? Doesn't the luck element suggest randomness rather than planning?

4222 views


> From my position on the fence, I find the whole complexity argument impossible to ignore ... i.e. one simply cannot rule out design. But it is the next step in your teleological argument that I find so illogical: namely, that humans were planned from the very beginning. The whole history of life appears to depend on one environmental stroke of luck after another ... good for some, bad for others - but why should a UI rely on luck to accomplish something it has planned from the beginning? Doesn't the luck element suggest randomness rather than planning?-You have a good point, but evolution started 3.7 billion years ago with the following background: the universe is extremely dangerous, and the Earth is quite unstable in its evolution. The 'random events' were expected to occur and to influence evolution. Mammals lay in wait, but not eradicated until the dinosaurs had their extinction, and mammala could then advance. Each expected extinction advanced evolution toward its future. Timing is the only true randomness. I am positiing God's thoughts at 3.7 million years ago. He assumed He had all the time necessary. The process would get to humans when it got there.

4117 views

David believes that God planned humans from the very beginning.-dhw: The whole history of life appears to depend on one environmental stroke of luck after another ... good for some, bad for others - but why should a UI rely on luck to accomplish something it has planned from the beginning? Doesn't the luck element suggest randomness rather than planning?-DAVID: You have a good point, but evolution started 3.7 billion years ago with the following background: the universe is extremely dangerous, and the Earth is quite unstable in its evolution. The 'random events' were expected to occur and to influence evolution. Mammals lay in wait, but not eradicated until the dinosaurs had their extinction, and mammals could then advance. Each expected extinction advanced evolution toward its future. Timing is the only true randomness. I am positing God's thoughts at 3.7 million years ago. He assumed He had all the time necessary. The process would get to humans when it got there.-The process would also get to the dinosaurs, the dodo and the duck-billed platypus when it got there. Do you think he planned them from the beginning too (a question also for Tony ... balance_maintained ... who I hope is still with us)? If he did, wouldn't that mean that the evolution of species was not random? If he didn't, why would he leave the evolution of every species except humans to luck? Since we are playing the game of positing God's thoughts and assuming his assumptions, is it not more consistent with all this randomness that, as we discussed earlier, he set up the mechanism and hadn't got a clue how it would turn out? Or that he liked the look of certain random developments, and did a bit of deliberate experimenting as things went along? I know this is old ground, but I am still not satisfied with the logic underlying the anthropocentric interpretation of evolution, with its planned dependence on unplanned strokes of luck.

4148 views

David believes that God planned humans from the very beginning.
> 
> dhw: The whole history of life appears to depend on one environmental stroke of luck after another ... good for some, bad for others - but why should a UI rely on luck to accomplish something it has planned from the beginning? Doesn't the luck element suggest randomness rather than planning?-> but I am still not satisfied with the logic underlying the anthropocentric interpretation of evolution, with its planned dependence on unplanned strokes of luck.-There were six major extinctions, and a myriad of minor ones. With all of the dangerous events that HAD to occur to create a designer universe and an extremely designed Earth, my SUPPOSITION of God's plan is reasonable, if not proveable. Remember that no one can really known God's exact thoughts. Best I can do.

4232 views

David believes that God planned humans from the very beginning, and I asked whether he thought God had also planned dinosaurs, dodos and the duck-billed platypus.-My question was not a flippant one. It opens up interesting areas of debate. I pointed out that if God did design the dodo etc., the implication was that the evolution of all species was planned. If he didn't, then all species except humans were the result of chance (which I find highly illogical). My question actually ties in with Matt's. He asked: "where does divine intervention start and where does it stop?" ... to which you replied: "I believe that intervention is a drive to complexity code[d] within the genome. Outside the genome, I don't know."-I really like this answer, as it allows for all divine scenarios, including those that I suggested. But the moment you take the step of assuming that God planned man, Matt's question comes fully into play: what else did he plan? It even leads to what I see as a possible crutch for creationists. One great obstacle Darwin had to overcome was the religious belief that God created all species separately. Your idea of pre-planning would allow for that belief AND for evolution as Darwin describes it, because even though all creatures evolved "naturally", each of them could have been pre-programmed, like man, to do so. In other words, they (dinosaur, dodo and duck-billed platypus) were created individually, but God simply organized the programme in such a way that they emerged (like man) when the time was "right". David, this could win you the go(l)d medal for Creationist of the Year!-Only it doesn't stop there. After all, your version of God is within and without the universe, which he is supposed to have created. Matt's question therefore still applies. God could also have pre-programmed the environmental changes that would lead to the pre-programmed species. After all, every step along the evolutionary trail would have required MATERIAL causes, assuming that God worked through science and not through magic. If he needed to stage an extinction, he would have done so precisely through the material means to which scientists attribute those extinctions (meteors, volcanoes or whatever). Then he wouldn't have had to rely on luck at all. -Of course you're right that no-one can really know God's thoughts. But although you don't KNOW them, you BELIEVE (see our epistemological framework) you have a good idea of what one of them was ... i.e. that God planned humans. So I hope you won't mind if we continue to probe the implications of this belief.

4149 views

David believes that God planned humans from the very beginning, and I asked whether he thought God had also planned dinosaurs, dodos and the duck-billed platypus.
> 
> Of course you're right that no-one can really know God's thoughts. But although you don't KNOW them, you BELIEVE (see our epistemological framework) you have a good idea of what one of them was ... i.e. that God planned humans. So I hope you won't mind if we continue to probe the implications of this belief.-I think you are thinking a bit too much about my theory of pre-planning! ;-() All I propose is that humans are the end point of evolution, with evolution driven to advance complexity in living organisms. Evolution is built like a branching bush, more so than a Darwinian tree. Complexity strikes out in many directions at the same time. Just look a the Cambrian Explosion: all at once 57 animal phyla appear, then reduced by selection to 37. The punctuated evolution we see in the fossil record supports vigorously the concept that this is the way the complexity drive mechanism works. -As a result dodoes, dinosaurs, and ducks all pop up. I've already explained that the dangerous universe and the contortions of Earth to make it the Earth we have today, provide lots of expected challenges for natural selection to be a big, if passive, player in the advancement of the branches of the bush of life. God started all of this, but didn't expect to step in for much management. I don't think He had to. Hippos, hens, and hyenas all appeared as if scheduled, but they appeared when they appeared. I hope this satisfies your philosophic questioning.- I can't carry my suppostions about God too far, and I try to make those suppostions have simple beginnings. I don't know if God is omniscient, omnipotent, all-caring, etc. as religions wish. There HAS to be a UI from the evidence I view, but after that, it is all questions.

4124 views

DAVID: I think you are thinking a bit too much about my theory of pre-planning! ;-() All I propose is that humans are the end point of evolution, with evolution driven to advance complexity in living organisms. [...] God started all of this, but didn't expect to step in for much management. I don't think He had to. Hippos, hens, and hyenas all appeared as if scheduled, but they appeared when they appeared. I hope this satisfies your philosophic questioning.-I can't carry my suppositions about God too far, and I try to make those suppositions have simple beginnings. I don't know if God is omniscient, omnipotent, all-caring, etc. as religions wish. There HAS to be a UI from the evidence I view, but after that, it is all questions.-Of course we have no idea if humans are the "end point", since the next five billion years or so may well produce a few surprises ... although I suspect that you and I won't be around to see them. However, I find myself much more at ease with all the above than with the specific pre-planning scenario, even though you have now lost your chance of nomination for Creationist of the Year. If I believed in God, my money would still be on the scientist setting things in motion and then seeing what would happen. But I appreciate your patience in dealing with my speculations!
 
Thank you also for clearing up the mystery of the backward worms.

4147 views

The Permian-Triassic extinction of 250 mya was the most severe. Up to 90% of all species lost (don't tell the EPA). The theory has always been a volcanic period, especially in Siberia. Now it appears to be verified:-http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/history-of-geology/2011/09/16/large-igneous-provinces-and-mass-extinctions/?WT_mc_id=SA_DD_20110916

4064 views

The Permian-Triassic extinction of 250 mya was the most severe. Up to 90% of all species lost (don't tell the EPA). The theory has always been a volcanic period, especially in Siberia. Now it appears to be verified:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/history-of-geology/2011/09/16/large-igneous-provinc...

New pinointing of the extinction:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111117143955.htm

3993 views

For the extinction about 250 million years ago, volcanoes:-http://www.livescience.com/52017-catastrophic-volcanoes-caused-biggest-tinction.html?cmpid=NL_LS_weekly_2015-08-28-"Geologists hauling hundreds of pounds of 250-million-year-old rocks from Siberia, through Russian and American customs, say luck was on their side. Not only did they successfully transport the huge haul, but they also may have confirmed the cause of Earth's worst mass extinction.-"The culprit? Catastrophic volcanic eruptions that spewed enough lava to cover Australia led to the die-off at the end of the Permian era, the researchers found. That die-off occurred about 250 million years ago and was the greatest mass extinction in Earth's history; 90 percent of marine species and 75 percent of land dwellers were wiped off the face of the planet over the course of about 60,000 years.-"Ancient volcanic rocks now provide the best evidence yet that catastrophic volcanic activity triggered the extinction, researchers say.-****-"Scientists knew that a key factor behind this disaster may have been one of the biggest continental volcanic eruptions on record. It occurred in what is now Siberia, currently called the Siberian Traps, and spewed out as much as 2.7 million square miles (7 million square kilometers) of lava. This magmatism, or movement of magma, may have injected massive amounts of global warming gases into the atmosphere, wreaking havoc on the environment. These eruptions also led to acid rain that may at times have made the ground as acidic as lemon juice."

3615 views

DAVID: For the extinction about 250 million years ago, volcanoes: -http://www.livescience.com/52017-catastrophic-volcanoes-caused-biggest-tinction.html?cmpid=NL_LS_weekly_2015-08-28
 
"Geologists hauling hundreds of pounds of 250-million-year-old rocks from Siberia, through Russian and American customs, say luck was on their side. Not only did they successfully transport the huge haul, but they also may have confirmed the cause of Earth's worst mass extinction.
 
"The culprit? Catastrophic volcanic eruptions that spewed enough lava to cover Australia led to the die-off at the end of the Permian era, the researchers found. That die-off occurred about 250 million years ago and was the greatest mass extinction in Earth's history; 90 percent of marine species and 75 percent of land dwellers were wiped off the face of the planet over the course of about 60,000 years."-Preprogrammed by God, who had preprogrammed 10% of marine species and 25% of land dwellers to survive so that they could eventually create the innovations necessary to produce humans? Or a random catastrophe which some organisms were lucky enough to survive so that they were able to continue the higgledy-piggledy process of evolution?

3602 views


> "The culprit? Catastrophic volcanic eruptions that spewed enough lava to cover Australia led to the die-off at the end of the Permian era, the researchers found." [/i]
> 
> dhw: Preprogrammed by God, who had preprogrammed 10% of marine species and 25% of land dwellers to survive so that they could eventually create the innovations necessary to produce humans? Or a random catastrophe which some organisms were lucky enough to survive so that they were able to continue the higgledy-piggledy process of evolution?-Random catastrophe. The survivors had survival mechanisms responses which had been honed to a fine point through previous catastrophes, all guided by God. Theistic evolution solves all problems.

3563 views

DAVID: The culprit? Catastrophic volcanic eruptions that spewed enough lava to cover Australia led to the die-off at the end of the Permian era, the researchers found." -dhw: Preprogrammed by God, who had preprogrammed 10% of marine species and 25% of land dwellers to survive so that they could eventually create the innovations necessary to produce humans? Or a random catastrophe which some organisms were lucky enough to survive so that they were able to continue the higgledy-piggledy process of evolution?-DAVID: Random catastrophe. The survivors had survival mechanisms responses which had been honed to a fine point through previous catastrophes, all guided by God. Theistic evolution solves all problems.-No more than faith in chance or faith in billions of individual intelligences. If you shut your eyes tightly enough, you won't see any of the problems.

3504 views

The cause of the Permian-Triassic extinction event about 252 million years ago was due to extreme heat on the Earth which damaged nutrition supply in the oceans. This came from massive eruptions in Siberia:-https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160824111100.htm-"After an extreme global warming 252 million years ago, a severe mass extinction of life took place on Earth. A new study in the Arctic has been seeking clues as to what limited return of life to world´s oceans after this event.-"96 percent of marine species, and 70 percent of terrestrial life died off in the Permian-Triassic extinction event, as geologists know it. It is also known as The Great Dying Event for obvious reasons.-"'The mass extinction was likely triggered by a explosive event of volcanic eruptions in what is now Siberia. These eruptions lasted for a million years and emitted enormous amounts of volatiles, such as carbon dioxide and methane, which made our planet unbearably hot." says Jochen Knies-***-"Our oceans are not a single body of water. They are comprised of layers and boundaries based on temperature (thermocline) and nutrients (nutricline) among others.-"'The high temperatures caused deepening of the thermocline and nutricline in the ocean so that upwelling of nutrients from the bottom to the surface of ocean ceased. With that the marine algae productivity was stalled," according to Knies.-"And without algae, which are the base of the food chain, the life in the ocean did not thrive.-"Once oceans finally started cooling 6-7 million years after the extinction, nutrient rich waters returned.-"'The boundaries that kept the nutrients from reaching the surface were weakened and the ocean waters were mixed. This caused the upwelling of nutrients, resuscitating the oceans, and leading to an explosion of life. The ecosystem voids created by the worst mass extinction in Earth history were finally filled." states Jochen Knies."-"In many ways the Permian-Triassic mass extinction reset the evolution of life, and paved the way for evolution of dinosaurs. They, in turn, died off in another mass extinction 66 million years ago." -Comment: This study shows the balance of nature is so important and current environment is part of that balance. Most extinctions are bad luck, described in previous entries.

3369 views

David's comment: This study shows the balance of nature is so important and current environment is part of that balance. Most extinctions are bad luck, described in previous entries. - Balance of nature simply means relations between living organisms and their environment. If the environment goes bust, the organisms go bust. And if extinctions are bad luck, it makes nonsense of the whole concept of divine planning and preprogramming. Your God carefully creates all these wonderful creatures, and then a bit of bad luck kills 99% of them! The whole process reeks of chance, and the only theistic explanation I can see is that this is how your God wanted it. In other words, he created all the conditions that would lead to an unpredictable ebb and flow of comings and goings (though he could do the occasional dabble if he felt like it). If you disagree, please give me an alternative theistic explanation for what you call bad luck.

3318 views

David's comment: This study shows the balance of nature is so important and current environment is part of that balance. Most extinctions are bad luck, described in previous entries.
> 
> dhw: Balance of nature simply means relations between living organisms and their environment. If the environment goes bust, the organisms go bust. And if extinctions are bad luck, it makes nonsense of the whole concept of divine planning and preprogramming. Your God carefully creates all these wonderful creatures, and then a bit of bad luck kills 99% of them! The whole process reeks of chance, and the only theistic explanation I can see is that this is how your God wanted it. In other words, he created all the conditions that would lead to an unpredictable ebb and flow of comings and goings (though he could do the occasional dabble if he felt like it). If you disagree, please give me an alternative theistic explanation for what you call bad luck.-We don't know if the Chicxulub asteroid was God's doing or not. The 'bad luck' quote is in the title of David Raup's highly regarded book. What seems to be true is that with each giant extinction, evolution advanced to more complex forms. If God is at work the process is working. Humans are here. Not at all unpredictable.

3326 views

David's comment: This study shows the balance of nature is so important and current environment is part of that balance. Most extinctions are bad luck, described in previous entries.-dhw: Balance of nature simply means relations between living organisms and their environment. If the environment goes bust, the organisms go bust. And if extinctions are bad luck, it makes nonsense of the whole concept of divine planning and preprogramming. Your God carefully creates all these wonderful creatures, and then a bit of bad luck kills 99% of them! The whole process reeks of chance, and the only theistic explanation I can see is that this is how your God wanted it. In other words, he created all the conditions that would lead to an unpredictable ebb and flow of comings and goings (though he could do the occasional dabble if he felt like it). If you disagree, please give me an alternative theistic explanation for what you call bad luck.-DAVID: We don't know if the Chicxulub asteroid was God's doing or not. The 'bad luck' quote is in the title of David Raup's highly regarded book. What seems to be true is that with each giant extinction, evolution advanced to more complex forms. If God is at work the process is working. Humans are here. Not at all unpredictable.-You obviously share Raup's view that most extinctions are bad luck, since you have stated it yourself. Bad luck and good luck are synonymous with chance. This means your God either couldn't or didn't want to control the environment, except for the occasional dabble. And if he couldn't or didn't control the environment, most of the consequences would also have been unpredictable (part of the great entertainment, perhaps). As for humans, leaving aside the question of who or what would have been capable of making predictions, I thought your whole difference campaign was based on your belief that they were NOT predictable, and it needed some really special dabbling from your God to produce them.

3296 views

DAVID: We don't know if the Chicxulub asteroid was God's doing or not. The 'bad luck' quote is in the title of David Raup's highly regarded book. What seems to be true is that with each giant extinction, evolution advanced to more complex forms. If God is at work the process is working. Humans are here. Not at all unpredictable.
> 
> dhw: You obviously share Raup's view that most extinctions are bad luck, since you have stated it yourself. Bad luck and good luck are synonymous with chance. This means your God either couldn't or didn't want to control the environment, except for the occasional dabble. -Raup's 'bad luck' is his way of saying that sudden environmental changes caused extinctions. My interpretation and his is that this means the life that became extinct couldn't adapt fast enough to survive, no more. It does not imply God hurled Chicxulub or not. He may have.-> dhw: And if he couldn't or didn't control the environment, most of the consequences would also have been unpredictable (part of the great entertainment, perhaps). As for humans, leaving aside the question of who or what would have been capable of making predictions, I thought your whole difference campaign was based on your belief that they were NOT predictable, and it needed some really special dabbling from your God to produce them.-You are off on a tangent. Evolution shows us there was a strong drive to create humans out of apes. Their physical and mental capacities are different in kind from apes, and in this portion of known evolutionary history extinctions played no role unless one looks back 60+ million years ago to Chicxulub and goodbye dinos.

3267 views

DAVID: We don't know if the Chicxulub asteroid was God's doing or not. The 'bad luck' quote is in the title of David Raup's highly regarded book. What seems to be true is that with each giant extinction, evolution advanced to more complex forms. If God is at work the process is working. Humans are here. Not at all unpredictable.

dhw: You obviously share Raup's view that most extinctions are bad luck, since you have stated it yourself. Bad luck and good luck are synonymous with chance. This means your God either couldn't or didn't want to control the environment, except for the occasional dabble. -DAVID: Raup's 'bad luck' is his way of saying that sudden environmental changes caused extinctions. My interpretation and his is that this means the life that became extinct couldn't adapt fast enough to survive, no more. It does not imply God hurled Chicxulub or not. He may have.-I doubt if many people would deny that sudden changes caused extinctions, or that those organisms which couldn't survive didn't survive. I thought we'd long passed that stage of discovery. My question is how your God's control or non-control of the environment reflects on your concept of divine preplanning. However, I take Raup's point and yours: it's bad luck either way on the organisms slaughtered either by chance or by God's choice. Not sure how such a comment helps us understand the process of evolution, though.-dhw: As for humans, leaving aside the question of who or what would have been capable of making predictions, I thought your whole difference campaign was based on your belief that they were NOT predictable, and it needed some really special dabbling from your God to produce them.
DAVID: You are off on a tangent. Evolution shows us there was a strong drive to create humans out of apes. -It is you who jumped from extinctions to greater complexity to humans. If we believe in common descent, evolution only shows us that humans descended from apes, just as every other organism descended from preceding organisms. Or are you telling us that there was a strong drive for earlier organisms to produce weaverbirds, elephants and duckbilled platypuses? 
 
DAVID: Their physical and mental capacities are different in kind from apes, and in this portion of known evolutionary history extinctions played no role unless one looks back 60+ million years ago to Chicxulub and goodbye dinos. -So if they are different in kind, how does that make them predictable?

3336 views

dhw: However, I take Raup's point and yours: it's bad luck either way on the organisms slaughtered either by chance or by God's choice. Not sure how such a comment helps us understand the process of evolution, though.-Getting rid of the old allows for new species to develop,i.e., dinosaurs, no more.-> dhw: If we believe in common descent, evolution only shows us that humans descended from apes, just as every other organism descended from preceding organisms. Or are you telling us that there was a strong drive for earlier organisms to produce weaverbirds, elephants and duckbilled platypuses?-The only strong drive I see is for humans. See today, convoluted human evolution entry.
> 
> DAVID: Their physical and mental capacities are different in kind from apes, and in this portion of known evolutionary history extinctions played no role unless one looks back 60+ million years ago to Chicxulub and goodbye dinos. 
> 
> dhw: So if they are different in kind, how does that make them predictable?-I'm looking retrospectively at how we appeared.

3310 views

dhw: If we believe in common descent, evolution only shows us that humans descended from apes, just as every other organism descended from preceding organisms. Or are you telling us that there was a strong drive for earlier organisms to produce weaverbirds, elephants and duckbilled platypuses?
DAVID: The only strong drive I see is for humans. See today, convoluted human evolution entry.-If you believe in common descent, every species is the result of convoluted evolution. I don't know what is the difference between a strong drive, a drive and a weak drive. I would suggest that evolution is the consequence of an in-built drive (possibly built in by your God) for survival and or improvement, and somewhere along the evolutionary line interbreeding may well have played a role in the production and survival of most new species (broad and narrow senses).
 
DAVID: Their [human] physical and mental capacities are different in kind from apes 
dhw: So if they are different in kind, how does that make them predictable?
DAVID: I'm looking retrospectively at how we appeared.-If prediction was the art of looking retrospectively at what has already happened, we would all be infallible prophets! However, knowing what has happened does not mean that it had to happen that way - only that it did happen that way.-DAVID (under Convoluted human evolution) DNA has shown that our evolutionary tree is very bushy and more like a river delta with streams in every direction:
https://aeon.co/ideas/human-evolution-is-more-a-muddy-delta-than-a-branching-tree?utm_s...-I like the image, and can see a clear parallel, as the streams simply make their own way from the delta, as conditions dictate. If your God specially wanted to create homo sapiens, why could he not simply have created homo sapiens (as he did in Genesis)? Ah, but your hindsight powers of prediction tell us that this is what happened, and so this is the predictable way God must have wanted to do it. We should not even suggest that this is the way organisms followed their own paths to survival (Sapiens) and extinction (Neanderthals and Denisovans). God - see your next comment - had to guide the latter to oblivion.-DAVID's comment: Looks like a guided evolution to me since the pattern is so unusual compared to other primate species.-Most species (general sense) evolve into different species (specialized sense): a quick google reveals that there are 13 species of crocodile, 18 species of bat in the UK alone, and 88 species of cetaceans, all presumably descended from a common ancestor, and millions of species (both senses) have become extinct. Other species of human also became extinct, which proveswhat? The duckbilled platypus, you will be fascinated to hear, is the sole living representative of its family (Ornithorhynchidae) and genus (Ornithorhynchus), though a number of related species have been found in the fossil record. (Wikipedia) I wonder why God would have guided evolution to produce the duckbilled platypus. But then I keep wondering why God would have specially guided the weaverbird to build its nest. We should not ask such questions, should we? Whatever is here was meant to be here, so God must have guided it to be here.

3333 views

dhw:I would suggest that evolution is the consequence of an in-built drive (possibly built in by your God) for survival and or improvement, and somewhere along the evolutionary line interbreeding may well have played a role in the production and survival of most new species (broad and narrow senses). - Agreed
> 
> dhw: If prediction was the art of looking retrospectively at what has already happened, we would all be infallible prophets! However, knowing what has happened does not mean that it had to happen that way - only that it did happen that way. - However, if a result is highly unusual, as in the production of human and their level of consciousness, one can strongly suggest something or somebody monkeyed with the works.
> 
> DAVID (under Convoluted human evolution) DNA has shown that our evolutionary tree is very bushy and more like a river delta with streams in every direction: - > https://aeon.co/ideas/human-evolution-is-more-a-muddy-delta-than-a-branching-tree?utm_s... 
> If your God specially wanted to create homo sapiens, why could he not simply have created homo sapiens (as he did in Genesis)? - Did you miss thee point? The other streams interbred with humans giving them immunity and other attributes the humans had not developed and were helped by. - > 
> DAVID's comment: Looks like a guided evolution to me since the pattern is so unusual compared to other primate species.
> 
> dhw; We should not ask such questions, should we? Whatever is here was meant to be here, so God must have guided it to be here. - If one looks for purpose one finds it.

3360 views

dhw: If prediction was the art of looking retrospectively at what has already happened, we would all be infallible prophets! However, knowing what has happened does not mean that it had to happen that way - only that it did happen that way.

DAVID: However, if a result is highly unusual, as in the production of human and their level of consciousness, one can strongly suggest something or somebody monkeyed with the works.-If God had to dabble, you can hardly say the appearance of humans was predictable! Here is the exchange that started this discussion:
DAVID: If God is at work the process is working. Humans are here. Not at all unpredictable.
Dhw: I thought your whole difference campaign was based on your belief that they were NOT predictable, and it needed some really special dabbling from your God to produce them.-One moment we have evolution geared to the inevitable production of humans (predictable), and the next, God has to step in and monkey - nice pun! - with the works (unpredictable). Well, let's drop the subject. It's pointless anyway. No one can possibly know what was or wasn't predictable. Humans are here, and the process produced them. That's all we know.-DAVID (under Convoluted human evolution) DNA has shown that our evolutionary tree is very bushy and more like a river delta with streams in every direction:
https://aeon.co/ideas/human-evolution-is-more-a-muddy-delta-than-a-branching-tree?utm_s...
dhw: If your God specially wanted to create homo sapiens, why could he not simply have created homo sapiens (as he did in Genesis)?-DAVID: Did you miss the point? The other streams interbred with humans giving them immunity and other attributes the humans had not developed and were helped by.
-So your God was incapable of giving homo sapiens his (limited) immunity and other attributes without first guiding/dabbling other species of human into existence and then guiding/dabbling them to extinction? Here's another hypothesis: they just evolved (perhaps as per intelligent-cell-mechanism), and natural selection resulted in them dying out and homo sapiens surviving.
 
DAVID's comment: Looks like a guided evolution to me since the pattern is so unusual compared to other primate species.
dhw; I wonder why God would have guided evolution to produce the duckbilled platypus.We should not ask such questions, should we? Whatever is here was meant to be here, so God must have guided it to be here.
DAVID: If one looks for purpose one finds it.-I'm still waiting for a platypussy purpose, but thank you for this very honest assessment of your thought processes.

3336 views

DAVID: If one looks for purpose one finds it.
> 
> dhw: I'm still waiting for a platypussy purpose, but thank you for this very honest assessment of your thought processes.-I'm sorry you can't see purpose.

3411 views

DAVID: If one looks for purpose one finds it.-dhw: I'm still waiting for a platypussy purpose, but thank you for this very honest assessment of your thought processes.-DAVID: I'm sorry you can't see purpose.-If I wear my theist hat, I can certainly see that a divinely designed mechanism producing all kinds of weird, platypussy wonders might serve the purpose of satisfying curiosity, providing relief from eternal boredom, having fun, learning new things etc. I can also see in all organisms, including the platypus, the purpose of survival. But what I cannot see is how the platypus - as unique in its way as homo sapiens, being the sole survivor of its wider family - can be part of your God's great plan to produce you and me. And you can multiply that example by all the other millions of extant and extinct natural wonders and evolutionary innovations which you insist also required God's personal intervention.

3266 views


> dhw: If I wear my theist hat, I can certainly see that a divinely designed mechanism producing all kinds of weird, platypussy wonders might serve the purpose of satisfying curiosity, providing relief from eternal boredom, having fun, learning new things etc. I can also see in all organisms, including the platypus, the purpose of survival. But what I cannot see is how the platypus - as unique in its way as homo sapiens, being the sole survivor of its wider family - can be part of your God's great plan to produce you and me. And you can multiply that example by all the other millions of extant and extinct natural wonders and evolutionary innovations which you insist also required God's personal intervention. - You wear two hats, so you must be two-headed. I still invoke the balance of nature to explain it, plus a drive to extreme inventiveness to see what evolves.

3304 views

With some causative reasons:

https://cosmosmagazine.com/palaeontology/big-five-extinctions

"End Ordovician, 444 million years ago, 86% of species lost

"Graptolites, like most Ordovician life, were sea creatures. They were filter-feeding animals and colony builders. Their demise over about a million years was probably caused by a short, severe ice age that lowered sea levels, possibly triggered by the uplift of the Appalachians. The newly exposed silicate rock sucked CO2 out of the atmosphere, chilling the planet.

"Late Devonian, 375 million years ago, 75% of species lost

"Trilobites were the most diverse and abundant of the animals that appeared in the Cambrian explosion 550 million years ago. Their great success was helped by their spiky armour and multifaceted eyes. They survived the first great extinction but were nearly wiped out in the second. The likely culprit was the newly evolved land plants that emerged, covering the planet during the Devonian period. Their deep roots stirred up the earth, releasing nutrients into the ocean. This might have triggered algal blooms which sucked oxygen out of the water, suffocating bottom dwellers like the trilobites.

"End Permian, 251 million years ago, 96% of species lost

"Known as “the great dying”, this was by far the worst extinction event ever seen; it nearly ended life on Earth. The tabulate corals were lost in this period – today’s corals are an entirely different group. What caused it? A perfect storm of natural catastrophes. A cataclysmic eruption near Siberia blasted CO2 into the atmosphere. Methanogenic bacteria responded by belching out methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Global temperatures surged while oceans acidified and stagnated, belching poisonous hydrogen sulfide. “It set life back 300 million years,” says Schmidt. Rocks after this period record no coral reefs or coal deposits.

"End Triassic, 200 million years ago, 80% of species lost

"Palaeontologists were baffled about the origin of these toothy fragments, mistaking them for bits of clams or sponges. But the discovery of an intact fossil in Scotland in the 1980s finally revealed their owner – a jawless eel-like vertebrate named the conodont which boasted this remarkable set of teeth lining its mouth and throat. They were one of the first structures built from hydroxyapatite, a calcium-rich mineral that remains a key component of our own bones and teeth today. Of all the great extinctions, the one that ended the Triassic is the most enigmatic. No clear cause has been found.

"End Cretaceous, 66 million years ago, 76% of all species lost

"The delicate leafy sutures decorating this shell represent some advanced engineering, providing the fortification the squid-like ammonite required to withstand the pressure of deep dives in pursuit of its prey. Dinosaurs may have ruled the land during the Cretaceous period but the oceans belonged to the ammonites. But volcanic activity and climate change already placed the ammonites under stress. The asteroid impact that ended the dinosaurs’ reign provided the final blow. Only a few dwindling species of ammonites survived. Today, the ammonites’ oldest surviving relative is the nautilus. Will it survive the sixth great extinction?"

Comment: Raup claims in his book, all who lost had bad luck. The website has great pictures with a great artists version of a trilobite

1456 views

DAVID: My teleology theory is guidance built into DNA to allow for increased complexity, when the opportunity strikes. -dhw: > From my position on the fence, I find the whole complexity argument impossible to ignore ... i.e. one simply cannot rule out design. But it is the next step in your teleological argument that I find so illogical: namely, that humans were planned from the very beginning. -Now an interesting finding: backwards evolution, where two worms have become less complex. My theory of increasing complexity from a mechanism in DNA is under attack:-http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-02-simple-marine-worms-distantly-humans.html

4301 views

David has alerted us to the phenomenon of two worms that have evolved backwards.-DAVID: My theory of increasing complexity from a mechanism in DNA is under attack.-I don't understand why backwards evolution should undermine your theory. Just as vestigial structures are those that are no longer needed, why shouldn't our friends the worms get rid of complexities not needed for current environmental conditions? That doesn't mitigate against other creatures becoming more complex, in accordance with their needs, does it? But I'm out of my depth, so perhaps you could explain the problem to us non-scientists.

4244 views

David has alerted us to the phenomenon of two worms that have evolved backwards.
> 
> DAVID: My theory of increasing complexity from a mechanism in DNA is under attack.
> 
> I don't understand why backwards evolution should undermine your theory. Just as vestigial structures are those that are no longer needed, why shouldn't our friends the worms get rid of complexities not needed for current environmental conditions? That doesn't mitigate against other creatures becoming more complex, in accordance with their needs, does it? But I'm out of my depth, so perhaps you could explain the problem to us non-scientists.-You make a good point. My problem with the finding is the size of the proposed regression. The worms had a distant theoretical relationship to humans in the genome through a common ancestor. The authors of the study have assumed the worms were more complex in their beginning existence, since they are genomically related to a more complex ancestor. However, upon reflection, humans share the same genes with one-celled organisms, and some genes are turned on and some off in various ways in different organisms. These worms may not have been as phenotypically complex as the authors suppose, but were a simple offshoot, filling a necessary niche in evolution. -As a result of this pattern of thought on my part, I'll still vigorously stick to my theory that the original genomes in original life carried a mechanism to drive complexity, as a general pattern.

4116 views

RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum