Brown algae fossils have been dated to between 150 million and 200 million B.C. No evolution since then.
Science Daily: Brown Algal Genome Opens New Door to Understanding Multicellularity and Photosynthesis.
Brown algae were assumed to have arisen from the fusion of photosynthetically inactive colourless cells with a unicellular red alga. However, as discovered in a previous research project on single-celled diatoms, AWI researchers showed that brown algae also arose from the fusion of a green alga with a red alga and thus refuted a widespread theory among experts.
That's incredible there hasn't been evolution since there is this concept of a molecular clock that is accurate enough that we can date things pretty well with it. You would think there would be a steady rate of mutation in the algae's genes but I guess I am wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe rate of mutation is in the DNA itself, some of which has no known effect as a "gene"? It is as most things are, based on assumptions about uniform conditions, positing that present conditions can be extended backwards in time.
ReplyDeleteOil is strident about evolution and has skipped steps in his explanations, but then so has "science". The idea that it is a firm clock should be challenged as those in the field may become lazy enough to be trapped into pushing it, gaining allies in the publication war.
What do we make of viral insertion into DNA? Is that not a method that is impossible to quantify by years etc, yet it has the greater chance of successful chnage if it comes from a successful organism itself? Sexual reproduction is not the only way to add variety to our genetic make up, though it beats suffering from a virus hands down!
Perhaps thre is something special about brown algae, that they cannot alter? Unlikely. More unlikely, is that the stretch of time is in fact far shorter? The clock concept helps buttress too many Lyellian ideas. Knitting with speculation and calling it hypothesis and then science fact, appears to be a way of life in scientific circles. It may turn out to be accurate, but the risks to science are obvious and can result in rigid dogma that strangles progress. So using the bio clock to check on geo time, simply is circular and false as it is all based on the one thing, no corroboration at all.
ReplyDeleteSound bite science is also used to create that impression.
http://www.grazian-archive.net/quantavolution/vol_04/lately_tortured_earth_26.htm
ReplyDelete"it would seem that the uniformitarians have received their chief input to the reconstruction of ancient species from the catastrophes that they would deny"
"An item from Chemical and Engineering News comes to mind [7] . Workers "found the fossil skeleton of a baleen whale some 10-12 million years old in... diatomaceous earth quarries in Lompoc, Calif. .... The whale is standing on end in the quarry and is being exposed as the diatomite is mined... The fossil may be close to 80 feet long." A sarcastic reader wrote in (March 21, 1977) that "Everybody knows that diatomaceous earthbeds are built up slowly over millions of years as diatom skeletons slowly settle out on the ocean floor. The baleen whale simply stood on its tail for I00,000 years, its skeleton decomposing, while the diatomaceous snow covered its frame millimeter by millimeter.""
Oils is the Jim Carrey of Evolution. Some life leaps forward, responding to changes in the environment, new gaps in the physiological landscape.
ReplyDeleteThere is a finite amount of change that can occur in a species. Limited "room to grow." Some species show this very well, Oils likes to pick on archaea and extremophile bacteria, but a good many examples can be found.
You cannot claim the same statis of form for whales (tetrapods in general really, we are among the most physically diverse creatures known for having such a similar body plan), fish and the many hundreds of beetle species.
When Oils says "Life Hasn't Evolved in 200 Million Years" he is lying. Period.
He wants to assert that there is some kind of Designer out there. Fine. Look at an anglerfish and tell me that isnt some kinda half-assed undirected change in gene frequency happening in that family of critters.
Hey Fungus, do some science.
ReplyDeleteThe strata containing the whale consists of diatomites that accumulated within deep bays and basins that lay along the Pacific coastline during Miocene times. As a result of folding and tectonics associated with the formation of the Transverse Ranges, the strata containing the enclosed skeleton has been tilted into a less-than vertical position. These sediments lack any sedimentary structures that would indicate catastrophic deposition. Rather, the strata exhibit laminations indicative of slow accumulation on an anoxic bay bottom. Within the adjacent strata, several hardgrounds occurs. A hardground is a distinctive cemented layer of sedimentary rock that forms when the lack of sediments being deposited over a very long period of time on the sea bottom allows the surface sediments to become cemented (Isaac 1981, Garrison and Foellmi 1988). In fact, identical sediments are currently accumulating without the involvement of a Noachian-like flood within parts of the Gulf of California (Curray et al. 1992; Schrader et al. 1982).
Nice post.
ReplyDeleteinprnt.com