Skwim
Veteran Member
In Genesis 1:1 and 1:11 "earth" (small "e")is a translation of the Hebrew אֶרֶץ
And in Genesis 1:10 "Earth" (capital "E")is also a translation of the Hebrew אֶרֶץ
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Major transitions in evolution
- Thread starter painted wolf
- Start date
And in Genesis 1:10 "Earth" (capital "E")is also a translation of the Hebrew אֶרֶץ
Of course, the line is expected to be blurry. At least according to the ToE...
RedOne77
Active Member
Thanks for the info. I wonder if the word has more than one meaning, like some English words, and the context makes it clear. Again, without knowing much of any Hebrew I can only speculate.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Yeah, like you are a mosaic of features between your parents. And yes, there are a lot of fossils that show an ancestor/decedent relationship. From complete Foram records to smooth transitions in Trilobites, early horses and so on.
for example:
Parallel gradualistic evolution of Ordovician trilobites
wa:do
evolved yet?
A Young Evolutionist
Is there any full text version of this?
newhope101
Active Member
Parallel gradualistic evolution of Ordovician trilobites... I can't believe I just looked up an article from 1987.
Apparently the trilobite fossil records shows within species variation then the record drops off.
Fossils Older Than Dinosaurs Reveal Pattern Of Early Animal Evolution On Earth
ScienceDaily (July 26, 2007) The abundant diversity of characteristics within species likely helped fuel the proliferation and evolution of an odd-looking creature that emerged from an unprecedented explosion of life on Earth more than 500 million years ago. University of Chicago paleontologist Mark Webster reports this finding in the July 27 issue of the journal Science.
"From an evolutionary perspective, the more variable a species is, the more raw material natural selection has to operate on," said Webster, an Assistant Professor in Geophysical Sciences at Chicago.
Paleontologists for decades have suspected that highly variable species evolved more rapidly than others, said Nigel Hughes, Professor of Earth Sciences at the University of California, Riverside. "Various studies have approached questions pertaining to it--but this is the first to convincingly document it in any group," Hughes said.
Most studies have focused on variability between species rather than within them, but in his Science paper, Webster analyzed 982 species of trilobites, ancient relatives of spiders and horseshoe crabs. "They're segmented little creatures, very beautiful to look at," Webster said. "They catch the eye of a lot of amateur collectors, and professionals like myself tend to get hooked on them very easily."
Extinct for 250 million years, trilobites once were the most common creatures in the world's oceans. Trilobites ranged in size from nearly microscopic to more than a foot long, though most of the 17,000 known species measured from one to four inches. "They were very diverse. That, in combination with their abundance as fossils, means they're ripe for studying evolutionary patterns in very old rocks," Webster said.
Trilobites were among the creatures that emerged 500 million years ago, during what paleontologists call "the Cambrian explosion," or "the Cambrian radiation." Before this time, life on Earth was limited mostly to bacteria, algae, single-celled organisms and only the simplest animal groups. But during the Cambrian Period, more complex creatures with skeletons, eyes and limbs emerged with amazing suddenness.
"The paper is relevant to the big question of what fueled the Cambrian radiation, and why that event was so singular," said UC-Riverside's Hughes of Webster's study. It appears that organisms displayed "rampant" within-species variation "in the 'warm afterglow' of the Cambrian explosion," Hughes said, but not later. "No one has shown this convincingly before, and that's why this is so important."
Webster has hunted trilobites from the northwest highlands of Scotland to the deserts of the American Southwest. He specializes in the olenellids, the oldest, most primitive trilobite group ever to evolve. The olenellids also show a great deal of variation within species.
"That led me into thinking there's something weird about these very primitive Cambrian trilobites that you don't see in other ones," he said.
The only way to verify his hunch was to conduct an analysis that combined the data compiled in previously published reports. "It's too much for one person to look at a thousand trilobite species," Webster said.
So for his Science study, Webster combed through 68 previously published studies of trilobites, searching for descriptions of evolving characteristics that could be incorporated into his analysis. After eliminating studies that were inappropriate for inclusion, 49 still remained.
He focused on actively evolving characteristics. The trilobite head alone, for example, displays many such characteristics. These include differences in ornamentation, number and placement of spines, and the shape of head segments. His findings: Overall, approximately 35 percent of the 982 trilobite species exhibited some variation in some aspect of their appearance that was evolving. But more than 70 percent of early and middle Cambrian species exhibited variation, while only 13 percent of later trilobite species did so.
"There's hardly any variation in the post-Cambrian," he said. "Even the presence or absence or the kind of ornamentation on the head shield varies within these Cambrian trilobites and doesn't vary in the post-Cambrian trilobites."
Paleontologists have proposed two ideas to account for why variation within species declined through time. One is ecological. In the very early Cambrian seas, fewer organisms existed than today, which meant that they faced less competition for food. "You didn't really have to be tightly specialized to make a living in the Cambrian," Webster said.
But as evolution gave rise to more varieties of organisms, ecological communities became more diverse. "You had to be very fine-tuned to your particular niche to make a living and to beat out competitors for a limited resource."
The genomic hypothesis offers a second explanation for the decline of within-species variation over time. According to this idea, internal processes in the organism were the key factors. Various developmental processes interact with one another to control the growth and formation of body parts as any organism progresses from egg to adult.
"It's been suggested that early on in evolutionary history, in the Cambrian Period, the degree to which these different developmental processes interacted with each other within the organism was a lot less," Webster said. "As a result, the constraints on what the final organism looked like were relatively low."
Both hypotheses are equally viable in light of Webster's latest findings. "We need to tease apart what's controlling this pattern of high within-species variation. There's a lot more work to do," he said.
Apparently the trilobite fossil records shows within species variation then the record drops off.
Fossils Older Than Dinosaurs Reveal Pattern Of Early Animal Evolution On Earth
ScienceDaily (July 26, 2007) The abundant diversity of characteristics within species likely helped fuel the proliferation and evolution of an odd-looking creature that emerged from an unprecedented explosion of life on Earth more than 500 million years ago. University of Chicago paleontologist Mark Webster reports this finding in the July 27 issue of the journal Science.
"From an evolutionary perspective, the more variable a species is, the more raw material natural selection has to operate on," said Webster, an Assistant Professor in Geophysical Sciences at Chicago.
Paleontologists for decades have suspected that highly variable species evolved more rapidly than others, said Nigel Hughes, Professor of Earth Sciences at the University of California, Riverside. "Various studies have approached questions pertaining to it--but this is the first to convincingly document it in any group," Hughes said.
Most studies have focused on variability between species rather than within them, but in his Science paper, Webster analyzed 982 species of trilobites, ancient relatives of spiders and horseshoe crabs. "They're segmented little creatures, very beautiful to look at," Webster said. "They catch the eye of a lot of amateur collectors, and professionals like myself tend to get hooked on them very easily."
Extinct for 250 million years, trilobites once were the most common creatures in the world's oceans. Trilobites ranged in size from nearly microscopic to more than a foot long, though most of the 17,000 known species measured from one to four inches. "They were very diverse. That, in combination with their abundance as fossils, means they're ripe for studying evolutionary patterns in very old rocks," Webster said.
Trilobites were among the creatures that emerged 500 million years ago, during what paleontologists call "the Cambrian explosion," or "the Cambrian radiation." Before this time, life on Earth was limited mostly to bacteria, algae, single-celled organisms and only the simplest animal groups. But during the Cambrian Period, more complex creatures with skeletons, eyes and limbs emerged with amazing suddenness.
"The paper is relevant to the big question of what fueled the Cambrian radiation, and why that event was so singular," said UC-Riverside's Hughes of Webster's study. It appears that organisms displayed "rampant" within-species variation "in the 'warm afterglow' of the Cambrian explosion," Hughes said, but not later. "No one has shown this convincingly before, and that's why this is so important."
Webster has hunted trilobites from the northwest highlands of Scotland to the deserts of the American Southwest. He specializes in the olenellids, the oldest, most primitive trilobite group ever to evolve. The olenellids also show a great deal of variation within species.
"That led me into thinking there's something weird about these very primitive Cambrian trilobites that you don't see in other ones," he said.
The only way to verify his hunch was to conduct an analysis that combined the data compiled in previously published reports. "It's too much for one person to look at a thousand trilobite species," Webster said.
So for his Science study, Webster combed through 68 previously published studies of trilobites, searching for descriptions of evolving characteristics that could be incorporated into his analysis. After eliminating studies that were inappropriate for inclusion, 49 still remained.
He focused on actively evolving characteristics. The trilobite head alone, for example, displays many such characteristics. These include differences in ornamentation, number and placement of spines, and the shape of head segments. His findings: Overall, approximately 35 percent of the 982 trilobite species exhibited some variation in some aspect of their appearance that was evolving. But more than 70 percent of early and middle Cambrian species exhibited variation, while only 13 percent of later trilobite species did so.
"There's hardly any variation in the post-Cambrian," he said. "Even the presence or absence or the kind of ornamentation on the head shield varies within these Cambrian trilobites and doesn't vary in the post-Cambrian trilobites."
Paleontologists have proposed two ideas to account for why variation within species declined through time. One is ecological. In the very early Cambrian seas, fewer organisms existed than today, which meant that they faced less competition for food. "You didn't really have to be tightly specialized to make a living in the Cambrian," Webster said.
But as evolution gave rise to more varieties of organisms, ecological communities became more diverse. "You had to be very fine-tuned to your particular niche to make a living and to beat out competitors for a limited resource."
The genomic hypothesis offers a second explanation for the decline of within-species variation over time. According to this idea, internal processes in the organism were the key factors. Various developmental processes interact with one another to control the growth and formation of body parts as any organism progresses from egg to adult.
"It's been suggested that early on in evolutionary history, in the Cambrian Period, the degree to which these different developmental processes interacted with each other within the organism was a lot less," Webster said. "As a result, the constraints on what the final organism looked like were relatively low."
Both hypotheses are equally viable in light of Webster's latest findings. "We need to tease apart what's controlling this pattern of high within-species variation. There's a lot more work to do," he said.
newhope101
Active Member
It's finds like this that show how easy it is to arrive at incorrect hypothesis re lineage.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Both hypotheses are equally viable, in light of Websters latest findings. We need to tease apart whats controlling this pattern of high within-species variation. Theres a lot more work to do, he said.
Trilobites rich in evolutionary data
It's finds like this that show continuous evidence for the Theory of Evolution and our expanding knowledge of mechanism behind Evolution.
evolved yet?
A Young Evolutionist
wa:do
newhope101
Active Member
Thanks Evolved yet? That link is a good read on the subject. If I have interpreted it correctly, it's saying there are too many separate species, some of which are very similar and perhaps should be classed as the same taxon.
I think Wiki may be reflecting the research you quoted.
Origins
Early trilobites show all of the features of the trilobite group as a whole; there do not seem to be any transitional or ancestral forms showing or combining the features of trilobites with other groups (e.g. early arthropods).[16] Morphological similarities between trilobites and early arthropod-like creatures such as Spriggina, Parvancorina, and other trilobitomorphs of the Ediacaran period of the Precambrian are ambiguous enough to make detailed analysis of their ancestry far from compelling.[47][39] Morphological similarities between early trilobites and other Cambrian arthropods (e.g. the Burgess Shale fauna and the Maotianshan shales fauna) make analysis of ancestral relationships difficult.[48] However, it is still reasonable to assume that the trilobites share a common ancestor with other arthropods prior to the Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary. Evidence suggests significant diversification had already occurred prior to the preservation of trilobites in the fossil record, easily allowing for the "sudden" appearance of diverse trilobite groups with complex, derived characteristics (e.g. eyes).[23][42]
I think Wiki may be reflecting the research you quoted.
Origins
Early trilobites show all of the features of the trilobite group as a whole; there do not seem to be any transitional or ancestral forms showing or combining the features of trilobites with other groups (e.g. early arthropods).[16] Morphological similarities between trilobites and early arthropod-like creatures such as Spriggina, Parvancorina, and other trilobitomorphs of the Ediacaran period of the Precambrian are ambiguous enough to make detailed analysis of their ancestry far from compelling.[47][39] Morphological similarities between early trilobites and other Cambrian arthropods (e.g. the Burgess Shale fauna and the Maotianshan shales fauna) make analysis of ancestral relationships difficult.[48] However, it is still reasonable to assume that the trilobites share a common ancestor with other arthropods prior to the Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary. Evidence suggests significant diversification had already occurred prior to the preservation of trilobites in the fossil record, easily allowing for the "sudden" appearance of diverse trilobite groups with complex, derived characteristics (e.g. eyes).[23][42]
Last edited:
evolved yet?
A Young Evolutionist
May I ask what type of old-earth creationist are you?
Gap Creationist
Day-Age Creationism
Progressive Creationism
Intelligent Design
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Finds like this show why we don't construct lineages based on single features but on dozens or hundreds.
wa:do
Daily Devoted
Member
The only thing about all of this is that it is all art. I don't see any actual evidence here, just an artist's impression.
outhouse
Atheistically
These are very imaginative drawings, but there is no evidence for macroevolution. The Bible is the only true source of knowledge.
No, seriously, nice post. Frubals!
There is no such thing as macro evolution
uneducated creationist invented that
Daily Devoted
Member
First of all, where does the Bible say that the sun revolves around the earth, and second, I would like to discuss each of these points by having you present your arguments and then I can do my best to answer them. Is this plausible?
outhouse
Atheistically
wiki under galileo Galileo Galilei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Biblical references Psalm 93:1, 96:10, and 1 Chronicles 16:30 include text (depending on the translation) stating that "the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved." In the same manner, Psalm 104:5 says, "the Lord set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." Further, Ecclesiastes 1:5 states that "And the sun rises and sets and returns to its place" etc
By 1616 the attacks on the ideas of Copernicus had reached a head, and Galileo went to Rome to try to persuade the Catholic Church authorities not to ban Copernicus' ideas. In the end, Cardinal Bellarmine, acting on directives from the Inquisition, delivered him an order not to "hold or defend" the idea that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still at the centre
why not pick one and give a answer.
First I think you need to read genesis a little closer. Its pretty much jacked up and contradictory.
sun on the fourth day ??? but yet he states "let light be made" on the first day
this little example goes in to show how the bible is a man made myth, WRITTEN by man for man.
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
With regard to the age of the earth:
A young Earth (less than a a few hundred million years old) is childsplay. Depending on where you live, most of the undisturbed earth and rocks have formed over hundreds of millions of years.
With my job, i need to know regional geology in order to be able to make informed decisions about the type of soils we may encounter in a number of different situations. It has also been experimentally demonstrated that 6inches of soil or there abouts takes approximately 9000 years to develop through sedimentation. Given that my house is currently sitting on 3.4m of soil and then bedrock (another story), well im sure you can do the maths there.
Where i am there are lot of inorganic clay deposits which is weathered bassalt. This process takes upwards of 100 million years.
Do i need to keep going or do you get the picture?
In regards to Noahs Flood:
Lets start with the basics. Where did the water come from and where did it go?
To be sciencish, the infiltration of water into soil under the weight of the water caused by such a high magnitude flood would have destroyed the soil horizons leaving (most likely) a sign for geologists to see.