Re: Latest on Mars

Glenn Morton (GRMorton@gnn.com)
Tue, 13 Aug 1996 22:08:58

Jim Bell wrote:
>I wrote:
>
><<"Analysis of evolutionary changes in a 10-million-year long Late
> Neogene
>lineage of planktonic foraminifera..."
>
>...This is NOT an experiment!>>
>
>Professor Clark responds:
>
><<Depends on how you define experiment. I define it as testing an
>hypothesis>>
>
>Experiment has a specific definition. Scientists, at least those
> outside of Wisconsin, define experiment as an *observable operation*
undertaken to discover some unkown principle, or test some suggested
hypothesis. "You can look it up" (Casey Stengel, professor of baseball
sciences, Univ. of Yankee Stadium).
>
>But analysis of past events is something different altogether.
>
>You cannot observe what has already happened, can you? Your answer:
> ____ Yes
>_____ No. (Hint: The answer is No).
>
>You and Tom just are not appreciating the difference between causal
> science and historical science, IMO.
>
><<It can also be restated as "rapid continuous change." Gradual means
>continuous, and says nothing about how fast. You can have rapid and
> slow changes that occur gradually as opposed to incrementally. I don't
see the problem with the language here.>>
>
>Actually, gradual means "proceeding or changing by steps or degress
> made or effected by SLOW, easy...stages."
>
>This is from Websters New Collegiate, considered by careful writers to
> be one of the best dictionaries extant (see Zinsser, "On Writing Well.")

>
>Gradualism is slow, albeit incremental, change. That's why "relatively
> rapid gradual morphologic change" makes no sense.
>
>You know, words have meanings for a purpose. You can't go around
> changing them or people will not know what you're talking about.
>"Experiment" can't mean whatever you want it to mean. "Gradual" cannot
>be absconded with in order to support your peculiar wants. Your students
>will get out in the real world and be confused, or end up as talk show
>hosts. Either scenario is bad.

No Jim, you need to look at the evolution of P. coniform to
P.christineladdae in the article:Ross H. Nehm and Dana H. Geary, "A
Gradual Morphologic Transition During a Rapid Speciation Event in
Marginellid Gastropods," Journal of Paleontology, 68(4), 1994, p. 787-795.

Punc eq predicts that change occurred rapidly in a small population and
then stasis occurrs. This prediction can be tested by observing the
species specific shape in a vertical sequence of geologic strata and
OBJECTIVELY, NUMERICALLY measuring the shell sizes and widths of the
gastropods found in the sequence. The prediction has been made prior to
the collection of the data, so the prediction is temporally prior to the
observation. In physics, Dirac's prediction of a positron was temporally
prior to the observation. Same thing.

Now what was observed was that the mathematical relationships of shell
height to width was stable in the lower strata, fitting a narrow gaussian
distribution.. Then the gaussian distribution widened in the middle
strata. The snails found in the middle strata were more variable in their
dimensions. But the variation was not the same signature as if two
species were thrown together. Above the region where variable dimensions
occur, the distribution splits into 2 narrow gausian curves. The first is
identical to that of the parent species and the second represents the new
species. This is considered a confirmational instance for punc eq.

Historical science does make predictions and then one goes out and finds
data that either supports the prediction or refutes it.

This example is also one of smoothly varying rapid morphological change.

glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm

Only 6 more days till I get this ^%$#&*@ cast off my arm