Today is the birthday of Charles Darwin. Despite those intellectuals like Sarah Palin who believe that Earth is only a few thousand years old and deny evolution as a “theory,” Darwin continue to rack up proof of his work. With perfect timing for the great man’s 205th, American and European researchers have confirmed the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction during which roughly 75% of the planet’s species were killed, including almost every dinosaur, by an asteroid impact. The result was the evolution of species best suited to deal with the aftermath of the explosion 66 million years ago. Of course, for creationists, the dating of material from 66 million years ago may be rejected as simply biblically inaccurate (if not immoral), but for the rest of us it is an important new development. While Darwin did not know of the asteroid theory or the demise of the dinosaurs, he knew a lot about adaptation and survival of the fittest. Dinosaurs went from being the dominant creatures to the least competitive in the new environment.
The asteroid that hit Chicxulub, Mexico released 420 zettajoules of energy — 100 teratonnes of TNT. The resulting dust cloud blocked out the Sun and triggered the die out — further accelerated by massive global fires. The problem is that previous attempts to date material showed that the asteroid impact occurred up to 300,000 years before the extinction of the dinosaurs. However, scientists decided to return to the site and use more modern equipment. The difference was considerable. The modern equipment reduced the gap to a period of 11,000 years or between 66.03 and 66.04 million years ago. The would make it almost simultaneous with the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction.
Those that could adapt then survived. Those who could not died off. Then 205 years ago, a man named Charles Darwin came along and explained it to the rest of us.
Source: Extremetech
Origin and adaptation are so different.
For example, I can take part in my own personal adaptation, however, I can have zero to do with my own origin.
“Darwin was Infallible about Natural Selection”
“Darwin was Infallible about Evolution”
Are those statements functionally equivalent?
His was a hieriarchial descendancy hypothesis, not a horizontal descendancy hypothesis (the one currently struggling to emerge and dominate).
If only Darwin had named his book “Adaptation of Species by Natural Selection” rather than “Origin of Species by Natural Selection”.
Happy Birthday Charles.
RWL 1, February 12, 2013 at 3:25 pm
Many readers don’t know the true story or entire life of Charles Darwin, especially his last days:
============================
And neither do you.
Gene H. 1, February 12, 2013 at 3:59 pm
You saying “infallible” over and over again is cute. You got any other straw men?
========================================
So he was fallible in his hypothesis of natural selection?
Because his worry about the Cambrian Explosion panned out?
Or the earlier pre-Campbrian explosion not know about in his day?
Or the two GOE thingys?
Those current evolutionists think Darwin’s hypothesis was wrong, whether he was or was not infallible.
So, I guess the “Darwin is Infallible” phrase is a straw man to their work, but not to those who fervently believe “Darwin was Infallible” to be true.
Which is not me and evidently not you either?
infallible /ɪnˈfalɪb(ə)l/, adj.,
incapable of making mistakes or being wrong:
correct/kəˈrɛkt/, adj.,
free from error; in accordance with fact or truth:
Darwin was as fallible as any mortal, but he was correct about natural selection.
You saying “infallible” over and over again is cute. You got any other straw men?
Gene H. 1, February 12, 2013 at 3:36 pm
Darwin understood natural selection just fine. That subsequent discoveries in genetics, paleontology, paleobotany and paleoclimatology confirmed the mechanism confirms that he understood it. Then again, he wasn’t interested in science fiction to justify or “sexy up” his grant applications.
========================================
That is an argument advanced often to prove he is infallible in his understanding of natural selection.
It just doesn’t explain the scientific data some of these uppity wannabe modern evolutionists are talking about (a problem to them, as Darwin said it was a problem to him too).
Interesting assertion that real science is done without grant funding.
Darwin understood natural selection just fine. That subsequent discoveries in genetics, paleontology, paleobotany and paleoclimatology confirmed the mechanism confirms that he understood it. Then again, he wasn’t interested in science fiction to justify or “sexy up” his grant applications.
Bron 1, February 12, 2013 at 3:19 pm
… Maybe an oxygen rich environment might have been the reason for the explosion of so many different forms of life at the beginning?
========================================
What I get from the papers I have recently read is that there were GOE (great oxygen events) prior to both the Cambrian and the earlier quick-appearances of many species.
Species that obviously did not descend from one single ancestor because there was not enough time.
The oxygen hypothesis you mention fits the scenario depicted in the papers.
The only propblem there is what released the oxygen and from what?
That is, oxygen is produced in stars then released over spans of time, to make its way into interstellar dust that eventually makes planets.
What released the oxygen from the stellar dust that became Earth?
The current theory is that cyanobacteria did it … but they are photosynthesis capable prokaryotic one-celled microbes which are said to have evolved prior to viruses.
So, there are a lot of details to properly synchronize if we are to prove that Darwin was infallible.
Many readers don’t know the true story or entire life of Charles Darwin, especially his last days:
http://carm.org/secular-movements/evolution/did-darwin-become-christian-his-deathbed
Or is it when we are breating our last breaths that we finally come to know Christ? Here is a brief statement from the link (this story has been discussed and debated for decades):
He (Charles Darwin) seemed greatly distressed, his fingers twitched nervously, and a look of agony came over his face as he said: “I was a young man with unformed ideas (speaking about his theory of evolution). I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything, and to my astonishment, the ideas took like wildfire. People mad a religion of them.”
Then he paused, and after a few more sentences on “the holiness of God” and the “grandeur of this book,” looking at the Bible which he was holding tenderly all the time, he suddenly said: “I have a summer house in the garden which holds about thirty people. It is over there,” pointing through the open window. “I want you very much to speak there. I know you read the Bible in the villages. To-morrow afternoon I should like the servants on the place, some tenants and a few of the neighbours; to gather there. Will you speak to them?”
“What shall I speak about?” I asked.
“Christ Jesus!” he replied in a clear, emphatic voice, adding in a lower tone, “and his salvation. Is not that the best theme? And then I want you to sing some hymns with them. You lead on your small instrument, do you not?” The wonderful look of brightness and animation on his face as he said this I shall never forget, for he added: “If you take the meeting at three o’clock this window will be open, and you will know that I am joining in with the singing.”
Gene H. 1, February 12, 2013 at 2:35 pm
There’s a lot of people out there that don’t understand natural selection out there still.
======================================
No doubt.
I think the tug and pull now is about whether or not Darwin understood it properly.
He was aware enough of his version of natural selection to offer at least one paleontology-based evidence-issue that he considered to be a real problem that challenged his understanding of natural selection.
Living organisms dont necessarily evolve based on environmental stress. Some are already adapted through genetic mutation which is why they survive.
Cases in point are the people who survived the black plague and people who have cystic fibrosis. In the case of cystic fibrosis individuals who carried the gene for CF [of which there are many mutations] survived out-breaks of cholera and dysentery and so survived to pass on their genes and CF since it is an autosomal recessive disease.
In my mind the only way to change a wolf-like creature into a whale is through manipulation of DNA which could be caused by environmental toxins. In fact oxygen can mimic certain parts of our DNA and cause mutations.
Maybe an oxygen rich environment might have been the reason for the explosion of so many different forms of life at the beginning?
Gene H.
1, February 12, 2013 at 2:35 pm
There’s a lot of people out there that don’t understand natural selection out there still.
————————————————————–
“In Science the credit goes to the man who convinces the world, not to the man to whom the idea first occurs.” (Sir Francis Darwin {son})
The search for perfection takes some strange detours.
Whether the search be in legal circles “the king can do no wrong”, religious circles “the Pope is infallible”, or in Darwinism “Darwin is infallible”.
This even though Darwin himself was intellectually honest enough to mention scientific realities that could damage all or part of his hypothesis:
(Weekend Rebel Science Excursion – 14). As it turns out the problem not only has not been solved, it has become more damaging because Darwin was not aware of several related challenging scientific realities:
(ibid). There is a new hypothesis that has been floating around since 2005 which is called “The Viruses First” hypothesis.
The current theory that predominates in establishment science circles is that cells developed before viruses evolved.
The virus first hypothesis says that there was a primordial gene pool within which viruses traveled to and fro freely doing Impressionist Art types of things.
That is, they did not mix genetic material, mainly RNA, in a structured format, rather, they were free wheeling and thereby made a really broad based pool of genetic material throughout a hypothesized primordial gene pool.
This is the way these evolutionary biologists are preparing to extrapolate from that pool into a broader dynamic explaining how so many utterly different species “very quickly” appeared in what is called “the Cambrian Explosion.”
One problem they have, but have not yet raised in any of the many papers I have read, is that the “primordial soup” entity constantly talked about by evolutionists for years, has now been dissed by the bigger than them brothers of evolution:
(Soupy Sales & Evolutionary Tales). Thus, I have to say that I sense a food for thought fight coming.
rafflaw – They won’t be gnashing teeth, they’ll be going into contortions of denial. Every time an indermediate fossil is found, the idiots claim “There are more gaps and no intermediate fossils!” They’ll do the same thing with this one.
There’s a lot of people out there that don’t understand natural selection out there still.
Happy Darwin Day!
rafflaw 1, February 12, 2013 at 12:25 pm
OMG. The bible thumpers will be gnashing their teeth on this latest scientific discovery.
=============================================
True dat, but it was quite a scientific peer-reviewed paper thumping episode as well:
(State Crimes Against Democracy). After de Grazia did that the scientists began to back off, but it took them 50 years even to consider the issue.
Then a distinguished panel of scientists concluded that the asteroid impact theory met the data better than the established volcano theories did.
There is a lot of “Darwin is infallible” dogma out there still.
“Dinosaurs went from being the dominant creatures to the least competitive in the new environment…”
The therapod dinosaurs did ok, judging from the robins in my front yard and the droppings on my windshield.
OMG. The bible thumpers will be gnashing their teeth on this latest scientific discovery.