A Whale of a Tale

Well, your "poof" answer is one interpretation. You are correct that it is time for Randman to offer an interpretation. I've not noticed another one other than the "poof" answer. Maybe RM has one. I think the expression that applies is "put up or shut up".This message has been edited by NosyNed, 01-03-2006 11:25 AM

This isn't asking for the mechanism. It is asking for a description of what unfolded in time. The mechanism is a separate issue.ABE
A link to that mechanism thread would be nice that is what is usually done in this kind of case.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 01-03-2006 11:32 AM

Actually, at no point has RM explained even his view of what ID means in this case (if that is what he is argueing).Here is a guess at what he is saying:God about 50 million or so years ago wiped out some mostly terrestrial animals that possessed some characteristics that, today, only the cetaceans possess. God then, a bit later, created in one fell swoop some more animals that were somewhat less terrestrial and possessed cetacean characteristics (somewhat more so than the earlier ones). God then wiped these unfortunates out too.After sometime God decided to make some more animals that were not very terrestrial at all (one suspects it was planed to keep trying this until he got it right so there would be something to swallow Jonah). These were more like the whale he needed for Jonah but after some millions of years (he takes his time on making decisions) he decided to wipe these out too.Then he created a number of different animals that were fully aquatic, very like today’s cetaceans but not exactly like today’s whales. These too, for some reason that we inadequate humans can't understand weren't quite right either. (At this point in my projects I give up and hire someone who knows what they are doing.)He wiped this guys out and sat back to think it through for a million or two years (maybe he even read the instructions at this point).Finally, just few million years ago, he had it figured out and got it right. Jonah had his ride and things have been left alone since then.Maybe that isn't the scenario RM means but he sure hasn't given much in the way of clues to try to guess. I thought I'd help out by offering one that he might like more than the evolutionary explanation. It has lots of God-did-it so maybe he will.ABE
Cleaned up some worse than usual typos, etc.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 01-05-2006 05:04 PM

What we might like to see is the affect this has on the evolution of whales.Does this view invalid the unfolding of events as I described? Or does it mean that when it was time for Jonah to be swallowed God realized he didn't have a whale handy and went back and fiddled with the past to produce whales? Fiddled several times it appears.If you have made your position known please point out the posts where you did this?Saying the past is not static and there is some non-linarity doesn't say much. The response is "So what?". What does that say about whale (excuse me, not whales) cetacean evolution?

Please describe how you come to this conclusion? What does "serpent-like" mean? What does "whale-like" mean? How is Basilo closer to one than the other.(guessing that you've looked at a few small pictures only I might remind you that is not enough to conclude anything. If you have done more then you can answer the above questions. )

This is, as we painfully learned, too big a topic to allow it to spin off in this thread. IIRC, there is a thread for it and it could be picked up again.You were referred to the study of taphonomy. It appears you have read nothing on the topic. When you do you will find that some of your questions have been answered.I don't recall that you have offered your explanation for fossil rarity anywhere.I thought I built that into the describtion of whale evolution I gave earlier. The fossils are rare because there are time periods when there were not cetaceans in existance. These are the time periods where God is thinking it over or reading the instruction manual.If you don't like that explanation perhaps you could offer one with a bit more relevance and detail than "time is not static".

Was I poking fun? Perhaps some of the side comments were a bit. But that was my best attempt to get a semi coherent picture out of what IDists and RM might be thinking. If it sounds humorous maybe that is not my doing.I was just going form the evidence available; including the "missing" or "non-existant" fossils and describing a scenario which I think fits with RMs statments todate. It may well be way off his thinking but that is because I haven't seen much to go on from him.It offers a clear statement for him to disagree with and fix. I'm sure we are all interested in the corrections.

Arch, this is off topic and a half but:RM has been reading material about physicists understanding that time does not "flow"; that our perception of that is another illusion about the universe we live in. This appears to be the correct way to view it.He, like many who grab onto something without understanding it, thinks this suggests that the past can be affected (since it is as there as the present and future are). This is, as I understand it, not supported by any physics and is contradicted by it.RM is just like the new agers who grab onto parts of popular explanations of QM and try to warp it to support their views. You are not going to get anything sensible out of him since he hasn't forumlated a coherent view of it. When he says that we don't know thae answers to things that is the best you will get. He doesn't want to know so he tries to find ways to suggest that the underlying fabric of the universe is unknowable and cause and effect aren't connected as we think. This allows him to pretend that there might be some, as yet undiscovered mechanism to make whatever he imagines to be correct. (It is, as you state, pseudo-intellectually flummery of a kind that is all too common. )If you are interested in a better view of time and space try "The Fabric of the Cosmos" by Brian Greene. Excellently written!Meanwhile, don't help RM to drag this off topic into fanciful flights of sciencefictional speculations.