Question on evolutionary Rates

quote:

---

Using 200,000 years per speciation that would

---

Actually, the meaning of "species" is pretty ill-defined for organisms that do not reproduce sexually.Where do you get the "200,000 years per speciation" from?-

quote:

---

How is it possible for Modern man to evolve from Eukaryotic Cells in only 7500 speciations when it took 11,500 to go from single cell to Eukaryotic Cells?

---

I dunno. How was it that it took the Hebrews 40 years to get from Egypt to Canaan, when the distance is less than a couple of hundred miles? Especially when someone can walk that distance in about a month.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Heh. That is a good point. Biologically, there isn't much difference between a human and a worm, and not much more difference between a worm and a collar flagellate.On the other hand, biochemically, a bacterium is very, very, different from a collar flagellate.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

quote:

---

Foraminifers are sexual and asexual, but not conscious (so sexual selection not a factor).

---

If MartinV starts polluting this thread, I will blame you.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

quote:

---

But if you say OK forget all those problems we had a new species every 200,000 years you would have the 7500 levels.

---

Even assuming that the 200,000 year per speciation is correct (and I doubt that it is), then what is the problem with 7500 "levels"?

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

quote:

---

The question remains with only 7500 levels how did modern man evolve from the Eukaryotic Cells.

---

I'm not sure why you are so hung up on the number of levels. Here are skulls indicating the evolutionary path from Australopithecus africanus (B) to modern Homo sapiens (N) (from Theobald's essay, of course). In my opinion, we see a pretty good transition from basically an upright chimp to humans in only 10 species (10 levels) taking 2.6 million years (260,000 years per level). With this amount of change (from chimp to modern human) in 2.6 million years, I don't see why we can't get from primitive mammal to human in 200 million years, or from fish to human in 400 million years, or protozoan to human in 1 billion years.In fact, we do see these transitionals.I fail to see a problem with these theoretical numbers or one's understanding of what these theoretical numbers mean when we have actual data that indicates that the transition has taken place.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Nice list, Codegate.Be aware that the names of those groupings are not necessarily standard. They seem to go with the cladistic classification system which is still somewhat of an idiosyncracy among systemists, one reason being that there is as yet no standard naming convention for the various groups (the claims of the proponents for phylocode notwithstanding).

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Did you actually read what assumptions exactly were "hard to swallow", or are you engaging in the usual creationists practice of pulling quotes out of context?Added by edit:
Anyway, you have yet to explain why your "7500 levels" presents any sort of problem. There is no problem as far as I can see.Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

quote:

---

Sorry I have been too busy to post.

---

Heh. Who hasn't been?-

quote:

---

Now for quote mining.

---

Good job! A bunch of random quotes always trumps physical evidence. Thumbs up!

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Hello, I.I should have taken some time to respond to this post properly.The problem is that you are veering off from the question that you brought up. You keep saying something about "7500 levels" and that humans could not have evolved from a protozoan in 2 billion years with only 7500 levels, or something like that.I have shown a picture of a sequence of skulls clearly showing a transition from a bipedal chimplike ape to modern human in only "10 levels" over 2.6 million years. You may not believe that this is actually what happened, but the plentitude of fossil remains spanning the last 2.6 million years clearly show that this is a possibility, whatever your complaint about "levels".Further more, if fossils clearly show the possibility of a chimp-like creature evolving into humans in only 2.6 million years, then there is no conceptual difficulty that I can see for humans to evolve from an egg-laying rat-like creature in 200 million years, or humans evolving from a fish-like creature in 375 million years, or humans evolving from an undifferentiated worm about a billion years ago, or even humans evolving from a choanoflagellate sometime before that.-

quote:

---

Like I said that is too much to swallow.

---

Sure, but I think you're taking too big a mouthfull at a time, and are eating junk that isn't even good for you to begin with. In other words, I think that you are deliberately searching for "problems".At any rate, I don't think your "problems" concerning "levels" really makes a lot of sense. This "level" business certainly doesn't seem to provide any kind of conceptual problem.Edited by Chiroptera, : Heh. "Chronoflagellate" indeed!

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Who's talking about proof? We're trying to figure out why you claim to have a conceptual difficulty with humans evolving from a protozoan in one or two billion years.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine