”Many evolutionary biologists have commented on the forensic nature of their work. Here’s how Richard Dawkins puts it: ´I have used the metaphor of a detective, coming on the scene of the crime after it is all over and reconstructing from the surviving clues what must have happened.´´
Stephen C. Meyer. ”Darwin's Doubt.”
”In a famous chapter in On the Origin of Species titled “The Mutual Affinities of Organic Beings,” Darwin made his case not on the basis of the fossil evidence, but on the basis of similar anatomical structures in many distinct organisms. He noted, for example, that the forelimbs of frogs, horses, bats, humans, and many other vertebrates exhibited a common five-digit (“pentadactyl”) structure”
”Defenders of neo-Darwinism assert that these techniques have produced a coherent evolutionary picture of the early history of animal life. They assert that clues from the realm of genetics point unequivocally to Precambrian ancestral forms and to an evolutionary history that fossils have failed to document.”
I still follow you, so far, I do agree what you say. Keep up the good work.
”Indeed, they argue that molecular evidence establishes a long period of undetected or cryptic evolution in Precambrian times, beginning from a common ancestor some 600 million to 1.2 billion years ago, depending upon which study of the molecular genetic data they cite. If correct, the Cambrian phyla may have had many hundreds of millions of years to evolve from a common ancestor."
Weird, Stephen makes total sense... I feel that soon he starts to shoot down these logical conclusions.
”In the 1990s, evolutionary biologists Gregory A. Wray, Jeffrey S. Levinton, and Leo H. Shapiro performed a major study of Cambrian-relevant molecular sequence data. In 1996, they published their results in a paper entitled “Molecular Evidence for Deep Precambrian Divergences Among Metazoan Phyla”
”The Wray study concluded that the common ancestor of the animal forms lived 1.2 billion years ago, implying that the Cambrian animals took some 700 million years to evolve from this “deep-divergence” point before first appearing in the fossil record. Wray and his colleagues attempted to explain the absence of fossil ancestral forms during this period of time by postulating that Precambrian ancestors existed in exclusively soft-bodied forms, rendering their preservation unlikely.”
”the last common ancestor of all living animals arose nearly 800 million years ago.”
So I spent all that time finding evidence to debunk Stephen´s claims, and later in the book he does it himself... I wasted to much time. He knows his stuff, he just pretends he does not. he knows creationists do not understand his technical text, they just read his conclusion parts where he claimed to prove just the opposite of what he did...
”They conclude: “Our results cast doubt on the prevailing notion that the animal phyla diverged explosively during the Cambrian or late Vendian, and instead suggest that there was an extended period of divergence during the mid-Proterozoic, commencing about a billion years ago.”
No more questions. I can stop reading, there just is no doubt on Darwin´s theory, thank you stephen.
... Still, I do not understand why "Once forgiven now free" recommends it - he´s a creationist.
this is golden
”There is a second, more telling reason to doubt the deep-divergence hypothesis: the results of different molecular studies have generated widely divergent results”
and what have molecular biologist creationist used as evicence against darwinian evolution?? Molecular studies!!
In science you combine different methods and see where they point to. If they point like a shotgun to somewhere, then you can only say "our estimate is between 600 and 400 million years, but we are waiting for more research to give better estimation.
If you are anti-scientist, you say "Ha, they do not know, so God did it!"
I feel you stephen!
”We already know that the animal phyla evolved from a common ancestor and we also know roughly when they did; therefore, we must reject studies based on histone sequences because the conclusions of these studies would contradict that date.”
thank you! now go to sleep Ann Gauger. I would assume that she no longer speaks to stephen!
”one paper in the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution cautions, “The rate of molecular evolution can vary considerably among different organisms, challenging the concept of the ‘molecular clock”
thererore is clear that this is not the way proper scientists date common ancestry, this is the way proper creationists try to prove there is no evolution!
”Though the fossil record does not directly attest to many of the expected intermediate forms represented on Darwin’s tree, leading authorities assert that other lines of evidence, particularly from genetics, firmly establish Darwin’s tree as the correct picture of the history of life.”
WHAT?? ARE YOU REALLY SAYING, that because the fossil records are not perfect, Darwin´s tree of life is not proven without a slightest doubt? Yes you are! You really are!
Think scientifically for once in your life Stephen! If one fossil is found, and it CAN be put to the tree of life, and it does not violate predictions by Darwin´s theory -- then it is a PROOF of the theory! If there is gaps... then there is gaps, the gaps DO NOT disprove the theory, they mark the todo-list for the paleontologists.
You just love this, first you make incredibly sence, and you go on to make the sillyest claims possible. It´s like you have multiple personalities, and one is a 6 years old little boy.
p.s.
" The breeding of plants and animals, or artificial selection, has produced an incredible range of forms in just a few thousand years, such as turning wolves into chihuahuas and great danes. In the laboratory, researchers have been able to produce bacteria, plants and animals with all kinds of novel characteristics. They have even produced entirely new species ."
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti