Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8945 total)
39 online now:
jar, PaulK, Tangle, Theodoric (4 members, 35 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Upcoming Birthdays: ONESOlivia, perfect
Post Volume: Total: 865,489 Year: 20,525/19,786 Month: 922/2,023 Week: 430/392 Day: 46/74 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is The Fossil Record an indication of Evolution?
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5407
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 76 of 88 (71828)
12-09-2003 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Ooook!
12-09-2003 8:08 AM


Oooook ... there's quite a bit of material on fish to tetrapod at Devonian Times -
http://www.mdgekko.com/devonian/ as well as at
http://www.origins.tv/darwin/tetrapods.htm - or anywhere that you can find anything about Jennifer Clack. Her book, Gaining Ground, has detail enough to reduce you to babbling.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Ooook!, posted 12-09-2003 8:08 AM Ooook! has not yet responded

  
Darwin's Terrier
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 88 (71833)
12-09-2003 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Ooook!
12-09-2003 8:08 AM


Hi Oook! I second Coragyps’s recommendation of the Devonian Times. Look especially at the Who’s Who bit, where there’s pics of the actual fossils as well as drawings etc.

Also Jenny Clack’s book is great, but awfully detailed. (By a spot of serendipity, I’m reading it currently, in tandem with a Pratchett as light relief.) If you get any refs to it, or need any text or pics scanned from it, just let me know. And if you need anything more, I’m in occasional contact with Per Ahlberg, and can ask him. (He lurks regularly over at the IIDB; I’ll have to try and get him here.)

If you can get hold of a copy (try www.abebooks.com), Carl Zimmer’s At the Water’s Edge is also an excellent introduction to many of the weird names of these early tetrapod fossils.

If you're feeling brave, this site will tell you more than you probably want to know about these things too; have a browse around the branches of the cladogram at the top. Highly recommended!

For specific papers, try PubMed, which will give you the abstracts for sure and often the full papers. Try searching on Jenny Clack, Per Ahlberg, Mike Coates, E Daeschler, etc. I have several useful papers as pdfs (thanks to Per!) too.

In a nutshell, give me a shout if there’s anything you need on this.

Cheers, DT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Ooook!, posted 12-09-2003 8:08 AM Ooook! has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Ooook!, posted 12-10-2003 7:03 AM Darwin's Terrier has not yet responded

  
NoBody
Unregistered


Message 78 of 88 (71999)
12-09-2003 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by mark24
12-09-2003 3:57 AM


Ok,

amino acids in proteins

So they can get character data from proteins?

------------------
But Who Am I?
NoBody


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by mark24, posted 12-09-2003 3:57 AM mark24 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by mark24, posted 12-10-2003 3:21 AM You have responded

    
mark24
Member (Idle past 3510 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 79 of 88 (72030)
12-10-2003 3:21 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by NoBody
12-09-2003 10:10 PM


Nobody,

Yup, amino acid sequences.

Mark


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by NoBody, posted 12-09-2003 10:10 PM NoBody has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by NoBody, posted 12-11-2003 8:44 PM mark24 has not yet responded

  
Ooook!
Member (Idle past 4130 days)
Posts: 340
From: London, UK
Joined: 09-29-2003


Message 80 of 88 (72041)
12-10-2003 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Darwin's Terrier
12-09-2003 9:35 AM


Thanks very much for all of the links (from both you and Coragyps) and for the very kind offers of help. There is plenty of stuff for me to get stuck into so I will take some time to digest the basics. I will probably then post back so I can check that I have it right in my head.

Cheers

Ooook!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 12-09-2003 9:35 AM Darwin's Terrier has not yet responded

  
NoBody
Unregistered


Message 81 of 88 (72385)
12-11-2003 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by mark24
12-10-2003 3:21 AM


Ok,

So the understanding is that all taxa have the same process for obtaining and expelling energy and thus we are related and not just similar? Keep in mind I have no bias opinion right now, but I am trying to understand macro-e better then I do currently.

------------------
But Who Am I?
NoBody

[This message has been edited by NoBody, 12-11-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by mark24, posted 12-10-2003 3:21 AM mark24 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by AdminNosy, posted 12-11-2003 9:09 PM You have responded
 Message 84 by mark24, posted 12-12-2003 4:18 AM You have not yet responded

    
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 82 of 88 (72389)
12-11-2003 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by NoBody
12-11-2003 8:44 PM


Topic Driftt
Isn't this wandering rather far afield from the fossil record?

Could you get back there and open another thread for this one. Thanks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by NoBody, posted 12-11-2003 8:44 PM NoBody has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by NoBody, posted 12-11-2003 9:34 PM AdminNosy has not yet responded

  
NoBody
Unregistered


Message 83 of 88 (72395)
12-11-2003 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by AdminNosy
12-11-2003 9:09 PM


Re: Topic Driftt
Seems like posts 59 & 60 are the posts, which point out that Sonic agreed to the loss.

------------------
But Who Am I?
NoBody


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by AdminNosy, posted 12-11-2003 9:09 PM AdminNosy has not yet responded

    
mark24
Member (Idle past 3510 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 84 of 88 (72471)
12-12-2003 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by NoBody
12-11-2003 8:44 PM


NoBody,

I've started a new topic here

Mark

------------------
"Physical Reality of Matchette’s EVOLUTIONARY zero-atom-unit in a transcendental c/e illusion" - Brad McFall


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by NoBody, posted 12-11-2003 8:44 PM NoBody has not yet responded

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 1757 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 85 of 88 (79199)
01-18-2004 4:36 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Sonic
11-30-2003 3:49 AM


Cross-checks prove dating systems
Greetings all,

quote:
Sonic : Dating methods are theoretical. Here is a question. Even if they are near to being correct, How do you know, I mean, How do you verify those dates? You can't, nobody has lived that long.

Absolute nonsense.

Dating methods are fully supported by numerous cross-checks which allow us to not only confirm the dating methods are correct, but even exactly HOW correct.

For example,
it is known for certain (from history and archeology) that Mt Vesuvius erupted in 79CE.

When lava from the region was recently dated, the result was about 70CE - showing an accurate result.

The fact that no-one now living was present at Vesuvius' eruption does NOT in the slightest limit our ability to date the event, and to confirm how accurate the dating was.

Your criticism of dating methods is based on pure ignorance - datings methods are regularly tested and checked and their accuracy is accepted by all who know the facts.

Iasion


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Sonic, posted 11-30-2003 3:49 AM Sonic has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Coragyps, posted 01-18-2004 10:16 AM Kapyong has not yet responded
 Message 87 by JonF, posted 01-18-2004 11:27 AM Kapyong has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5407
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 86 of 88 (79209)
01-18-2004 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Kapyong
01-18-2004 4:36 AM


Re: Cross-checks prove dating systems
When lava from the region was recently dated, the result was about 70CE - showing an accurate result.

And when the layers of ice in the Greenland ice cap were counted, the layer of ash with the chemical signature of Vesuvius matched up, too. And there's another 100,000 layers older than that one in that same core...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Kapyong, posted 01-18-2004 4:36 AM Kapyong has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 5532
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 87 of 88 (79217)
01-18-2004 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Kapyong
01-18-2004 4:36 AM


Re: Cross-checks prove dating systems
it is known for certain (from history and archeology) that Mt Vesuvius erupted in 79CE.

When lava from the region was recently dated, the result was about 70CE - showing an accurate result.

The abstract in Science: 40Ar/39Ar Dating into the Historical Realm: Calibration Against Pliny the Younger. The full text is available from there (free registration required for non-subscribers).

That and other useful links in www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=17&t=29&p=19 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=17&t=29&p=19">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=17&t=29&p=19


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Kapyong, posted 01-18-2004 4:36 AM Kapyong has not yet responded

  
MarkAustin
Member (Idle past 2130 days)
Posts: 122
From: London., UK
Joined: 05-23-2003


Message 88 of 88 (79375)
01-19-2004 8:34 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Sonic
11-30-2003 3:49 AM


quote:
Dating methods are theoretical. Here is a question. Even if they are near to being correct, How do you know, I mean, How do you verify those dates? You can't, nobody has lived that long.

Dating methods are not theoretical. They are based on practical observations and measurements. Taking radio-dating, the half-lives of radiactive substances are measured in the lab ( I've done it myself in a Physics practical at Glasgow University many years ago - and with a gold-leaf electroscope!). It is a total fallacy that you need to observe them over a complete half-life. Given a sufficiently large sample and sufficiently accurate instrumentation, observation over a very small (compared to the half-life) time suffices.

How do we know the half-lives are constant over time. Two reasons. First, a negative reason, is the half lives had changed then the physical laws in the past would differ in a way that would be observable today.

Secondly, a positive reason, observations of radioactive decay in supernova show exactly the same decay rates as measured today.

Thirdly, again positive, all the methods (radiometric and non-radiometric) agree within the limits of accuracy of the methods.

Finally, and linked to the previous point, if the timing rates have changed all these different methods would have to change by exactly the same ratio in order to preserve the concordance of the results. This is physically impossible, at least for radio-dating. Any conceviable way in which decay rates would change would change the decay rates of different elements in a different way.

There is a very good exposition of the subject here


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Sonic, posted 11-30-2003 3:49 AM Sonic has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019