Monday, March 14, 2011

Shrew Mole Vicariance Proves Plate Tectonics A Lie



"The mole genus Urotrichus [Urotrichini] is confined to Japan and California." -- S. Warren Carey, geologist, Earth, Universe, Cosmos, 1996

EncyclopaediaBritannica.com -- Urotrichus
Asian, Japanese, and American shrew moles (genera Uropsilus, Urotrichus, and Neurotrichus, respectively) differ from typical moles in that they resemble shrews and are much less specialized for burrowing. Their tails are nearly as long as the body.
"... 3) the Urotrichini, containing Neurotrichus." -- Terry L. Yates and Ira F. Greenbaum, zoologists, Biochemical Systematics of North American Moles (Insectivora: Talpidae), Journal of Mammology, Volume 63, Number 3, Pages 368-374, Aug 1982

Yates, T.L., and Moore, D.W., Speciation and Evolution in the Family Talpidae (Mammalia: Insectivora), Progress in Clinical and Biological Research, Volume 335, Pages 1-22, 1990

"Yates and Greenbaum (1982) suggested that the morphological similarity between Neurotrichus and Urotrichus, found on the opposite side of the Pacific, in Japan, may be the result of convergence. Subsequently, however, Yates and Moore (1990) indicated that the chromosomal data support an earlier view that the two are more closely related to one another than either is to any other living genus." -- Robert M. Nowak, zoologist, Walker's Mammals of the World, Volume 2, Insectivora: Talipidae, 1999

"The Urotrichini (Urotrichus, Dymecodon and Neurotrichus)...." -- Masaharu Motokawa, zoologist, Phylogenetic Relationships Within the Family Talpidae (Mammalia: Insectivora), Journal of Zoology, Volume 263, Pages 147-157, May 2004

"Chinese (Scaptonyx), Japanese (Urotrichus and Dymecodon) and North American (Neurotrichus) shrew moles closely resemble each other in external appearance and habits (Allen, 1938; Reed, 1951). These diminutive animals commonly excavate shallow tunnel systems in the leaf mold of soft loamy soils and appear to occupy an ecological niche between those of the shrew-like and fossorial talpids." -- Akio Shinihara, zoologist, et al., Evolution and Biogeography of Talpid Moles from Continental East Asia and the Japanese Islands Inferred from Mitochondrial and Nuclear Gene Sequences, Zoological Science, Volume 21, Number 12, Pages 1177-1185, Dec 2004

"... the Urotrichini, including the Asian Urotrichus, Dymecodon, and the North American Neurotrichus (van Valen, '67; Hutchison, '68; Yates and Moore, '90)" -- F. David Carmona, zoologist, et al., The Evolution of Female Mole Ovotestes Evidences High Plasticity of Mammalian Gonad Development, Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution, Volume 310B, Issue 3, Pages 259–266, May 2008

Citations

Van Valen, L.M., New Paleocene Insectivores and Insectivore Classification, 1967

Hutchison, J.H., Fossil Talpidae (Insectivora, Mammalia) From the Later Tertiary of Oregon, 1968

Hutchison, J.H., Notes on Type Specimens of European Miocene Talpidae and a Tentative Classification of Old World Tertiary Talpidae (Insectivora: Mammalia), Geobios, Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 211-256, 1974

14 comments:

Fungus FitzJuggler III said...

It suggests that pending DNA clarification, they were recently separated, in the last twenty thousand years?
Paul DeGrazia suggests this time scale for the creation of the Pacific, I think?

All tectonic activity is therefore declining from that time. It also explains why the Blue whale got to be so big, despite recent status, compared to the tremendous land sizes of dinosaurs yet few sea dinosaurs of any size. The oceans were all created when we got another planet's core?

Jeffery Keown said...

To quote Eddie Izzard; "Quod the fuck?"

Urotrichus is not equivalent to tribe Urotrichini. Urotrichus represents 3 separate genera. They are single-species genera.

That 1 of these 3 genera exists across an ocean does not invalidate evolution or plate tectonics.

Bering Land Bridge anyone? You presuppose knowledge of the range of the critters 200 mya on a much smaller (65% of current radius) planet that had no oceans, too thick an atmosphere and much higher gravity.

Additionally, you have no mechanism for this expansion, the rate of the expansion or where the extra mass and water went or came from.

Even more, it is highly suspect of you to claim that biological evolution is evidence against plate tectonics, as you do not subscribe to either theory. In your view gods (planets) manipulated life on earth creating (as you have stated) every species we see today. You cannot claim, therefore, that biology is evidence for or against anything, as if gods (planets) are responsible, they could doctor the evidence.

Your science is in worse shape than my bank account.

OilIsMastery said...

Fungus,

Separated yes (divergence) but the timeframe is up for debate. The Pacific was enclosed in the Cretaceous.

OilIsMastery said...

Jeffery,

"Urotrichus is not equivalent to tribe Urotrichini."

I know. I just learned that. They are similar however.

"Urotrichus represents 3 separate genera."

No it doesn't. Urotrichus is only one genera. Urotrichini representes three related genera.

"That 1 of these 3 genera exists across an ocean does not invalidate evolution or plate tectonics."

If you believe in evolution, it invalidates plate tectonics.

"Bering Land Bridge anyone?"

the Bering Land Bridge doesn't work because (a) it's a mythological figment of your imagination because you think native Americans are too stupid to construct a boat, (b) shrew moles do not exist in Alaska and Siberia.

"You presuppose knowledge of the range of the critters 200 mya on a much smaller (65% of current radius) planet that had no oceans, too thick an atmosphere and much higher gravity."

You ignore all logic and science.

"The notion of random, and sometimes two-way, 'rafting' across the wide oceans ... evinces, however, a weakening of the scientific outlook, if not a confession of doubt from the standpoint of organic evolution." -- Alexander Du Toit, geologist, 1844

"Biogeography is really where the facts are -- indeed the simplest facts of all. Wegener and du Toit faced ridicule for not accepting certain conventional geological assumptions, but no amount of authority can overcome the following elemental fact: Terrestrial vertibrates cannot cross oceans. That is why they do not appear on remote oceanic islands (>2000 km from a source). That is why we know they have not been able to cross an ocean in the last 20 million years. Their difficulty with wide marine gaps was obvious when Darwin used it as evidence for evolution; it was obvious when Wegener and du Toit used it as evidence for a closed Atlantic and Indian Oceans; and it still obvious today." -- Dennis J. McCarthy, geoscientist, 2005

"Additionally, you have no mechanism for this expansion"

For the millionth time: the mechanism is called ... are you ready? ... wait for it ... let me see if you can remember this for once in your life ... "OCEANIC SEAFLOOR SPREADING" -- the exact same mechanism as plate tectonics.

"Even more, it is highly suspect of you to claim that biological evolution is evidence against plate tectonics, as you do not subscribe to either theory. In your view gods (planets) manipulated life on earth creating (as you have stated) every species we see today. You cannot claim, therefore, that biology is evidence for or against anything, as if gods (planets) are responsible, they could doctor the evidence.

Your science is in worse shape than my bank account."

It is highly suspect for anyone to have faith in two contradictory systems simultaneously -- namely evolution and plate tectonics. If one believes in evolution they cannot logically believe in plate tectonics. The same is true of Euclidean Geomtery vs. General Relativity (they are opposites).

OilIsMastery said...

P.S. It is not logically inconsistent to believe in vicariance of related species (Urotrichus and Neurotrichus) and also believe in creation, creativity, art, and design.

Jeffery Keown said...

Here's a question.

You have sea floor spreading. We both agree that it is indeed occuring. Why does it occur in your worldview? What causes it? Material being added somewhere? What is this material? Where does it come from? Space? The core of the planet? Why only at those spots and nowhere else?

OilIsMastery said...

I thought I was going to luck out with only one question but then you gave me a swarm of questions (Socrates/Meno): doh!

Those are some of the most philosophical questions we can ask of all tectonic systems - bravo!

Indeed, we agree, all tectonic theories accept oceanic seafloor spreading.

"Why does it occur in your worldview?"

Oceanic seafloor spreading occurs because of volcanic activity. Volcanic activity pushes new basalt (pillow lava) into the surface layers of the crust (as moons and planets grow).

"What causes it?"

What causes volcanic activity in the crust? Good question.

"Material being added somewhere?"

It seems the cold mantle pushes rocks into the crust and that causes volcanic activity.

"What is this material?"

Electrons, plasma, subatomic particles, neutrinos, and atoms.

"Where does it come from? Space?"

Yes.

"The core of the planet?"

Yes.

"Why only at those spots and nowhere else?"

Gravity.

Jeffery Keown said...

Where is the evidence of the material arriving from space?

OilIsMastery said...

Photons from outerspace (energy from the sun) produce "an estimated global net primary production (NPP) of 104.9 petagrams of carbon per year" on the earth.

Field, C.B., et al., Primary Production of the Biosphere: Integrating Terrestrial and Oceanic Components, Science, Volume 281, Number 5374, Pages 237-240, Jul 1998

OilIsMastery said...

The Northern Lights/Aurorae are more evidence of materials from outerspace arriving on earth.

Meteorites are more evidence of materials from outerspace that arrive on earth.

Cosmic ray detectors in the earth detect electrically charged particles from outerspace that arrive inside the earth.

Jeffery Keown said...

Photons from outerspace (energy from the sun) produce "an estimated global net primary production (NPP) of 104.9 petagrams of carbon per year" on the earth.

We talked about photosynthesis and such over a year ago. It wasn't proof then, and its not proof now.

Net primary production is the rate at which all the plants in an ecosystem produce net useful chemical energy; it is equal to the difference between the rate at which the plants in an ecosystem produce useful chemical energy (GPP) and the rate at which they use some of that energy during respiration. Some net primary production goes toward growth and reproduction of primary producers, while some is consumed by herbivores.

That carbon you cite is already here, not arriving from space. Even if it was, it is not enough to generate the the growth you claim. Meteor and cosmic ray impacts are not sufficient to grow the Earth by 5mm over a million years, let alone one year has you have claimed before.

As someone put it, this is just your ego talking, assuming you understand science better than geologists, biologists and physicists, and that you dig theology better than priests and imams.

OilIsMastery said...

Do you claim that photons from the Sun do not reach the Earth?

Jeffery Keown said...

Do you claim that photons from the Sun do not reach the Earth?

What a stupid fucking question.

Really? How can you even posit such a thing? ...ignoring basic biology to twist the meaning of my post.

I don't believe that carbon is synthesized in the atmosphere as you suggest. Photons enable photosynthesis and are given off as wasted heat, not added as mass. The mass you refer to previously is converted by plants and animals into other chemicals.

Anyone who would buy that nonsense... well, we know they'd be a demented fuckwit, wouldn't they?

Jeffery Keown said...

No expansion.

"Meanwhile, the March 11 tremors shifted the Oshika Peninsula near the epicenter by just over 17 feet and dropped it by just over 4 feet, the Geospatial Information Authority in Tsukuba, Japan, reported Saturday."

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/19/japan.disaster/index.html?hpt=T2