Rabbits in the Precambrian

[catzrfluffy]

no, just trying to inject something into the other side of the debate again. I didn't think they were that out of context. but thanks for taking the time to reply.

____________________________________________________________​

EDIT: (rest of too long previous post continued...)
Some more about this controversy here: (hooray a webpage.)
http://www.palynology.org/history/ghoshak.html

------------------​

More evidence of Cambrian plants? (abstracts again )

Possible Land Plants from the Middle Cambrian, Queensland
P. J. G. FLEMING & J. F. RIGBY
Nature 238:266
"DURING study of phosphorites from the Georgina Basin of north-west Queensland, two fossil fragments, possibly stems of land plants, were discovered in insoluble residues from lime-phosphate rocks. The discovery is significant in being one of the very few of possible land plant remains in the early Palaeozoic."
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v238/n5362/pdf/238266a0.pdf

Occurrence of Pollen and Spores in the Roraima Formation of Venezuela and British Guina
R. M. STAINFORTH
"THE discovery of pollen and spores in beds considered Precambrian (Proterozoic) has received brief notice in geological journals and the press1–3. Individual authors will doubtless publish detailed stratigraphic and palynologic accounts of the occurrence in due course. Meanwhile it is considered desirable to give an outline of the facts of the case before distorted interpretations develop from inadequate data. The following summary statement has been prepared jointly by several members of the Asociación Venezolana de Geología, Minería y Petróleo. A single author is nominated to simplify bibliographic references."
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v210/n5033/pdf/210292a0.pdf

------------------
So... pollen in the Cambrian? ​

 

[laconicstudent]

no, just trying to inject something into the other side of the debate again. I didn't think they were that out of context. but thanks for taking the time to reply.

meh, it probably was relevant somewhere.... but certainly not on that page lol. And I swear that sickening number of links is the reason this site keeps crashing.

 

[catzrfluffy]

meh, it probably was relevant somewhere.... but certainly not on that page lol.

Oh it was a bit earlier from here:

My Potential Falsifications List
I think I've stepped into Bizarro world because I'm getting both Creationists and science advocates telling me that evolution can explain "anything". Based on a variety of sources I've come up with a very incomplete list of potential falsifications for evolution.

- A mammal with a chitenous exoskeleton
- A rose with melanocytes
- Pollen in Cambrian strata.
- Fossil rabbit in Permian strata.
- Fossil T-Rex in Ordovician strata.
- Fossil chicken in Jurassic strata.
- Starfish with a brain.
- Viviparous snakes with placentas.
- Orthologous ERVS in orangs and chimps but not in humans or gorillas.
- An orthologous ERV in humans and gorillas but not in chimps
- No explanation for difference in Chromosome numbers between humans and chimps.

Any of these findings would crumble evolution like a stale cookie.

And I swear that sickening number of links is the reason this site keeps crashing.

I was worrying that.:o

 

[USincognito]

meh, it probably was relevant somewhere.... but certainly not on that page lol. And I swear that sickening number of links is the reason this site keeps crashing.

No, it's not. And perhaps you could be more helpful.

Catzr, I'll look at your links later, but here's a little tip on how to turn a URL into a smaller hyperlink.
[url=http://www.linkgoeshereaftertheequalsign.com]News article about X[/url]

 

[catzrfluffy]

Cheers, I'll go back and edit.

EDIT: LaconicStudent, can you edit your quotation of my post on the last page so that the previous page shortens itself a bit? Thankyou.

 

[laconicstudent]

No, it's not. And perhaps you could be more helpful.

Catzr, I'll look at your links later, but here's a little tip on how to turn a URL into a smaller hyperlink.
[url=http://www.linkgoeshereaftertheequalsign.com]News article about X[/url]

Wow.... you actually thought I was serious?

 

[Assyrian]

'Mankind' didn't evolve --- 'Homo sapiens' allegedly did.

Why do you think we're called mankind?

If mankind means the human race didn't evolve, why is mankind made up of different kindreds? Psalms 22:27 All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the LORD: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.

Then you have another problem... the first reference to mankind in the AV Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. To echo an old argument of yours, if mankind and womankind are different kinds, isn't marriage bestiality? Lev 19:19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

 

[catzrfluffy]

I think what he meant was that human beings were created as a kind in and of themselves, they didn't evolve from a different species. How many types of fossils are included in mankind or are types of apes is open to debate.

where that big gap is might be the dividing line.

 

[Thistlethorn]

I think what he meant was that human beings were created as a kind in and of themselves, they didn't evolve from a different species. How many types of fossils are included in mankind or are types of apes is open to debate.

where that big gap is might be the dividing line.

But human beings did evolve, and we have the evidence to back that statement up.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think what he meant was that human beings were created as a kind in and of themselves, they didn't evolve from a different species.

Yup --- that's why I refuse to accept the moniker, 'Homo sapiens'.

 

[laconicstudent]

I think what he meant was that human beings were created as a kind in and of themselves, they didn't evolve from a different species. How many types of fossils are included in mankind or are types of apes is open to debate.

where that big gap is might be the dividing line.

It will be interesting to see what fits in there. We are finding new fossils all the time. The Ardipithecus study was finally concluded recently, for example.

 

[Gracchus]

Yup --- that's why I refuse to accept the moniker, 'Homo sapiens'.

So you are Homo ... What? Perhap you are not even the same genus?

Then I would suggest that you are "Humpty dumpty".

After all, you insist on the authority to redefine words at pleasure, and your mind appears broken beyond repair.

 

[catzrfluffy]

It will be interesting to see what fits in there. We are finding new fossils all the time. The Ardipithecus study was finally concluded recently, for example.

Ah, that was way way back in the tree though. Wasn't it already a member of known species, first discovered in 1992, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/humans/humankind/b.html?
Does 'finally concluded' mean the study of the most recent fossil - the one in the newpapers, - or the Ardipithecus Ramidus species as a whole?

But back to that list...

- a shrimp with a backbone.
- A crow with wings and arms.

Does Archaeopteryx count?

-A mammal with a chitinous exoskeleton

Not just mammals with exoskeletons. Any living thing that's not an arthropod with an exoskeleton would suffice.

As previously mentioned,
Fungi do, Fungi
Onychophora (velvet worms)
ONYCHOPHORA

- An iguana with mammary glands
- A fish with fur
- A bat with feathers
- A rose with melanocytes
- A starfish with a notochord
- Starfish with a brain.
- An axolotl with radial symmetry (sic)
- Pollen in Cambrian strata.

Mentioned a few posts back.

- Fossil rabbit in Permian strata.
- Fossil T-Rex in Ordovician strata.
- Fossil chicken in Jurassic strata.

Does Confuciusornis count?
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/paleontology/36448

- Humans with chitinous exoskeletons
- Clams with legs*
- Whales with gills.
- Viviparous snakes with placentas.

Already known to exist.

- Blind cave fish that can see in the infrared and evolved an organ on their head to paint their dark environment.
- Orthologous ERVS in orang-utans and chimps but not in humans or gorillas.
- An orthologous ERV in humans and gorillas but not in chimps.
- No explanation for difference in Chromosome numbers between humans and chimps.

There are some ERVs that don't seem to fit this pattern. For example, the K family of ERVs (HERV-K provirus) is present in chimps and gorillas, but not in humans.]Current Biology 2001 May 15; 11:779-783 Also, portions of ERVs known as CERV 2 and CERV 1 elements are present in chimpanzee, bonobo and gorilla (non-orthologous) but are absent in human, orangutan, old world monkeys, new world monkeys. http://genomebiology.com/2006/7/6/R51

And some ERVs are shown to be functionally beneficial, not junk DNA,
The ERV known as enJSRV has been shown to "regulate trophectoderm growth and differentiation in the peri-implantation ovine conceptus” http://www.pnas.org/content/103/39/14390.abstract.
“some avian and murine ERVs can block infection of related exogenous retroviruses at entry by receptor interference; mouse Fv-1 blocks infection at a preintegration step, also can be viewed as an ERV.” http://www.pnas.org/content/101/30/11117.full
“the HERV-K sequence of the human teratocarcinoma derived virus type (HTDV), is reported to be able to make retrovirus like particle and can express gag, pol and env genes via vectors. Also, ERV 3 can express env gene in embryonic placental tissues. Such reports may now explain the numerous early observations of being able to find viral particles in human tissues. Although some HERV's are expressed in mammary tumors, the feline RD114, ERV-3, and HERV K10+ are all expressed in placental tissues. What then is the significance of nondefective ERVs and why is expression so common in embryos? . . . I and Venables et al. in the Boyd group have proposed that some of these HERV's may function during embryo implantation to help prevent immune recognition by the mother's immune system. . .
In addition, the ERV gag gene product may also be immuno-modulatory. The p70 (gag) of mouse IAP has been cloned and expressed and shown to be identical to IgE binding factor (IgE-BF) which is a regulator of B-cell ability to produce IgH. More recently, it has been reported that endogenous gag is Fv-1, an-Herv.L like endogenous virus which confers resistance to MLV tumors. Although some researchers disagree with the immunomodulatory role of p15E, an immune suppressing activity in culture assays has been clearly established. These supporting results seem sufficiently clear to warrant a serious investigation that both the env and gag gene products of ERV's may modulate immunity." http://darwin.bio.uci.edu/~faculty/villarreal/new1/erv-placental.html
"These results raise new questions about the role of so-called 'junk DNA,' the vast regions of the genome that don't code for proteins. ERVs fall into that category. Many scientists once believed that such DNA served no purpose, but new data from the Haussler lab and other labs are challenging that view." http://www.physorg.com/news114266805.html
“In humans, endogenous retroviruses occupy about 1% of the genome, in total constituting ~30,000 different retroviruses embedded in each person's genomic DNA” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10655035?dopt=Abstract
And out of 30,000 ERVs only 7 of them are known to have inserted at the same site in humans and chimps. http://interrogatingnature.blogspot.com/2007/03/endogenous-retroviruses-and-human.html

On a lighter note,
We share 60% of our DNA with a banana, http://www.makingthemodernworld.org.uk/stories/defiant_modernism/01.ST.02/?scene=6&tv=true

​

 

[laconicstudent]

Ah, that was way way back in the tree though.

Uh, yeah. So? It was a recent find, I was just mentioning it.

Wasn't it already a member of known species, first discovered in 1992, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/humans/humankind/b.html?
Does 'finally concluded' mean the study of the most recent fossil - the one in the newpapers, - or the Ardipithecus Ramidus species as a whole?

They just finished some huge study on the fossils. I have no idea why it took them so long. Science released a special issue back in the beginning of the month just to release the Ardipithecus studies and released all the papers online for free.

 

[Mike Elphick]

...the K family of ERVs (HERV-K provirus) is present in chimps and gorillas, but not in humans.(sciencedirect.com).

That's not what the paper says:-

We identified a human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) provirus that is present at the orthologous position in the gorilla and chimpanzee genomes, but not in the human genome. Humans contain an intact preintegration site at this locus.

It seems you've been duped by detectingdesign.com. There are in fact plenty of HERV-K proviruses in the human genome (that's what the letter 'H' stands for). For example:-

HERV-K provirus formation occurred at multiple times in the genomes of primates in the lineage leading to modern umans. Many HERV-K genomes entered the human germline after the divergence of humans and chimpanzees. At least eight of these proviruses persisted as full-length, HERV-K genomes until the present. All the viral ORFs and cis-acting sequences necessary for HERV-K replication must have been intact during the recent time when these proviruses formed. Multiple, fulllength ORFs for HERV-K proteins are present in the human genome today.
[....info.med.yale.edu/genetics/kkidd/377.pdf]

Also, portions of ERVs known as CERV 2 and CERV 1 elements are present in chimpanzee, bonobo and gorilla (non-orthologous) but are absent in human, orangutan, old world monkeys, new world monkeys.

Yes, just TWO out of at least 42 families of chimpanzee endogenous retroviruses that have been found to have orthologs in humans. [....ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1779541]

And some ERVs are shown to be functionally beneficial, not junk DNA

Oh dear, WHEN will creationists get it into their heads that vestigial does not mean without function? Evolution works by remoulding existing material and ERVs are no exception (and indeed a nice demonstration of how 'new information' gets into a genome).

Here is a lovely example of how ERVs have been co-opted into protecting the foetus (an immunologically foreign body) from attack from the mother's own immune system.

It's generally accepted that HIV suppresses the immune system that eventually leads to AIDS. Here we see how similar, but modified HEVRs become activated:-

During pregnancy in viviparous mammals (all mammals except Monotremes), ERVs are activated and produced in high quantities during the implantation of the embryo. They are currently known to possess immunosuppressive properties, suggesting a role in protecting the embryo from its mother's immune system. Also viral fusion proteins apparently cause the formation of the placental syncytium in order to limit the exchange of migratory cells between the developing embryo and the body of the mother (something an epithelium will not do sufficiently, as certain blood cells are specialized to be able to insert themselves between adjacent epithelial cells). The immunodepressive action was the initial normal behavior of the virus, similar to HIV, the fusion proteins were a way to spread the infection to other cells by simply merging them with the infected one (HIV does this too). It is believed that the ancestors of modern viviparous mammals evolved after an infection by this virus, enabling the fetus to survive the immune system of the mother.
wikipedia - Endogenous_retrovirus

 

[MarkT]

Do you realize that those articles refer to discoveries which require adjusting evolutionary theory, or require us to change something like our theories on how birds evolved? They actually do not disprove evolution itself.

Next time, please actually read stuff before you link it.



Yes. If it was opinion piece, they actually publish the opinions of Intelligent Design advocates now and again, I know I've seen a few in Nature

But to get actual articles in you need to have actually done a study, with controlled conditions, defined variables, data, results. It needs to be something that could be repeated for verification. None of them have ever done any of this.

Well, evolution is really like a thorn in science. It's worked it's way into science so much and you can't get it out. It thinks it's science when in fact it's closer to literature. That's right! The mountain of evidence is really a mountain of literature. Tons of articles. That's all it is.

 

[Thistlethorn]

Well, evolution is really like a thorn in science. It's worked it's way into science so much and you can't get it out. It thinks it's science when in fact it's closer to literature. That's right! The mountain of evidence is really a mountain of literature. Tons of articles. That's all it is.

Go back to school and try to pay attention.

 

[Cabal]

Well, evolution is really like a thorn in science. It's worked it's way into science so much and you can't get it out. It thinks it's science when in fact it's closer to literature. That's right! The mountain of evidence is really a mountain of literature. Tons of articles. That's all it is.

Apart from the thousands of fossils, reams of genomic sequences, etc.

Honestly, you can make up much better fabrications than this, I know you can.

 

[laconicstudent]

Well, evolution is really like a thorn in science. It's worked it's way into science so much and you can't get it out. It thinks it's science when in fact it's closer to literature. That's right! The mountain of evidence is really a mountain of literature. Tons of articles. That's all it is.

I really hope you're joking. Evolutionary theory is a broad overarching theory that ties together multiple fields such as paleontology, genetics, microbiology. Heck, Biology as a whole. If Evolution isn't true, nothing in Biology would make sense anymore.


And I would really advise you to go to your university library, go down in to the stacks, and pull the most recent issue of Nature or any other peer-reviewed journal that deals with the biological sciences, and look at all the pretty evidence.

 

[MarkT]

Apart from the thousands of fossils, reams of genomic sequences, etc.

Honestly, you can make up much better fabrications than this, I know you can.

Fossils. Right. Thousands and thousands of fossils. Fossils everywhere. What does it mean? Evolution. Great story. No. Nature did it. Of course. Nature did it. What else are you going to say? How do you know? Because they're fossils. Right. Darwin said it. Oh OK Darwin said it. And it's science and scientists say it. Oh OK Scientists say it. Must be true then. Are you going to argue with science? No. Of course not. Can't do that. You believe in gravity don't you? Well, I know if I step off a clliff I'm going to fall so yes. You believe in germ theory? Yeah. I've seen pictures. So what's the problem? Evolution is like science like gravity and germ theory. Yeah scientists say it's science. Must be true then. I guess so if scientists say so. Germ theory, gravity, evolution. Ahhaa now I get it. It's science so it's true. No. Wait. Who said it's science? Scientists. Oh Right. I nearly forgot. Do you have any objective way of proving it? What do you mean objective? Something I can see. Fossils man. Thousands and thousands of fossils. Oh Right. Why didn't you say so in the first place? I did. Oh Right. But what does it mean?