Re: second time around (was: Re: [asa] (testing evolution) )

The point is that something very similar to Earth's entire evolutionary sequence took place, say, between 1.3 and .8 billion years ago and then was wiped out by an extinction event. This was followed eventually by the Cambrian as we know it (and the rest of the evolutionary sequence as we know it). In other words, both mammals and plants of all sorts emerged the first time around, but subsequent geological and geophysical activity erased almost all evidence of it.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Michael Roberts<mailto:michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
  To: Don Winterstein<mailto:dfwinterstein@msn.com> ; asa<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
  Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 1:33 AM
  Subject: Re: second time around (was: Re: [asa] (testing evolution) )

  There was no life on land so what did the rabbit eat?

  Life on land started after the Cambrian - David will give the day month and year:)
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Don Winterstein<mailto:dfwinterstein@msn.com>
    To: asa<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
    Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 9:14 AM
    Subject: second time around (was: Re: [asa] (testing evolution) )

    A major reason a theory may be hard to falsify is that theorists are flexible and inventive. Theorists who are deeply and emotionally committed to evolution (as I also am) would not allow so trivial a thing as a Precambrian rabbit to make them throw out their baby.

    A theory accounting for both Precambrian rabbit and pollen grains that I find appealing:

    Precambrian life existed for about three billion years. We can argue that two billion is all that was needed to prepare Earth for air-breathers. So we have a billion to play with. It took only about a half billion for our kind to develop. A billion would be more than adequate for similar development to have taken place and then to have been wiped out in an extinction event. So the Precambrian rabbit, instead of falsifying evolution, would actually be evidence for double the amount of higher-form evolution!

    Q: Why isn't there any other Precambrian fossil evidence for mammals? A: Only a very small fraction of Precambrian terrestrial sedimentary rock has survived the billion-plus years of tectonic and other geologic activity. What we have is not characteristic.

    Q: Why don't we find evidence in Precambrian marine sediments of vertebrate-like animals with bones? A: Only a very small fraction of Precambrian marine sedimentary rock has survived the billion-plus years of tectonic and other geologic activity. What we have is not characteristic.

    But once again, fossils appearing randomly in time would falsify evolution. Nothing could rescue the theory from such an observation.

    Don

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jon Tandy<mailto:tandyland@earthlink.net>
      To: 'asa'<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
      Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 10:38 AM
      Subject: RE: [asa] (testing evolution)

      One could just as easily say that calculating ancient ages for recently
      formed pillow lava would kill the conventional model of radiometric dating.
      But no, it didn't and hasn't, because the data-as-anomaly has been explained
      by scientists as being an unreliable method due to various factors in the
      composition of lava. YECs use this as a great example of why the science is
      not only invalid but ad hoc and biased toward an old earth, but that doesn't
      change the fact that the vast weight of evidence supports an ancient earth,
      so the standard explanation holds in spite of this anomaly.

      A rabbit in the pre-Cambrian would inevitably be explained as a geological
      discontinuity (it actually came from the proper period, but geological
      upheavals cast the fossil into pre-Cambrian strata); or as was mentioned,
      some unknown and unforeseen rapid evolutionary branch that occurred at an
      earlier date than previously believed; or the alien insertion of a rabbit
      from some alternate multiverse; or some other explanation of the anomaly.
      This is why I raised the point several months ago that in some ways,
      evolutionary theory is presently unfalsifiable, because those who are
      already committed to it will always be able to come up with some creative
      (and probably untestable) hypothesis for explaining the anomalies. The
      counter argument to this is the vast strength of consistent evidence for
      radiometric dating, evolutionary sequences, etc. in general, because they
      have passed so many potentially falsifying tests so far.

      Jon Tandy

      From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu<mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
      Behalf Of Nucacids
      Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 9:08 AM
      To: Michael Roberts; Don Winterstein; Dennis Venema
      Cc: asa
      Subject: Re: [asa] (testing evolution) (was: TE/EC Response - ideology
      according to Terry)

      Michael,

      Not for me. For what about all the evidence for evolution? Are you saying
      it is so weak that a single rabbit fossil in the pre-cambrian throws it all
      out? I think the evidence for evolution is to strong that such a fossil
      would cause us to question our understanding of geological processes.

      Mike
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Michael Roberts
      To: Don Winterstein ; Dennis Venema
      Cc: asa
      Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 3:10 AM
      Subject: Re: [asa] (testing evolution) (was: TE/EC Response - ideology
      according to Terry)

      Don

      Rabbits would kill evolution. Period.

      To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
      "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jul 24 04:48:29 2009