+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 33 to 48 of 90

Thread: Paradise lost

  1. #33
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    No, no dude, you want to meet the Tooth fairy!

    Does she come with amnesia dust for the Mrs?
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  2. #34
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    You don't get it. I never offered such a meeting. That's between you and Him.
    Pretty sure you did... Let's check...
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Would you relent and accept God if you had a face to face encounter with Him?
    Why do you offer if it's not within your power to provide?
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  3. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Stow, OH SOL III
    Posts
    3,231

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    You don't get it. I never offered such a meeting. That's between you and Him.
    Pretty sure you did... Let's check...
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Would you relent and accept God if you had a face to face encounter with Him?
    Why do you offer if it's not within your power to provide?
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I began college about your age and earned two advance degrees by the age of forty. In the meantime, I held middle management positions in the financial community and supported a family of four.
    I'm guessing 'banking'.
    Would explain the lack of understanding with logic and basic scientific concepts. Not to mention the complete loss of remorse when quote-mining and repeating/compounding other logical fallacies.

    Would most diffidently fit with this comment,
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    Why do you offer if it's not within your power to provide?
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  4. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    I'm guessing 'banking'.
    Would explain the lack of understanding with logic and basic scientific concepts. Not to mention the complete loss of remorse when quote-mining and repeating/compounding other logical fallacies.

    Would most diffidently fit with this comment,
    This is ridiculous. Why would I offer an interview with God? I said would you? That doesn't mean I can do it.

    Furthermore, where have I indicated a complete misunderstanding of scientific concepts. I have been careful not to intrude into areas of scientific expertise where I lack understanding. I think the problem is that I've stirred up a hornets nest because I've questioned sacred beliefs of atheist.

    Before you accuse me, show where I overstepped?

    The big issues are scientific explanations of the universe and life. For those explanations, I have found no conclusive arguments. All I get are hostile and acrimonious comments fit for the trash can.

    You selected one quote from a Harvard professor that upset you, but you completely ignored all of the other references. Whose being selective?
    Last edited by Cnance; 10-04-2010 at 07:36 PM.

  5. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    Pretty sure you did... Let's check...


    Why do you offer if it's not within your power to provide?
    Apparently, you can't read. I posted, "Would you relent and accept God if you had a face to face encounter with Him?"

    That does not mean that I can do it!

    Thank God for a posting record, otherwise prejudices would become fact.

    Why are you bothered by the question?

  6. #38
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Apparently, you can't read. I posted, "Would you relent and accept God if you had a face to face encounter with Him?"

    That does not mean that I can do it!

    Thank God for a posting record, otherwise prejudices would become fact.

    Why are you bothered by the question?
    That's right! I saw your offer. You quoted it, I quoted it... We agree on that...

    Why are you offering a face to face meeting and asking how I will react if you can't deliver?

    If you weren't offering... then it's horribly off topic and evangelical.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  7. #39
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    This is ridiculous. Why would I offer an interview with God? I said would you? That doesn't mean I can do it.

    Furthermore, where have I indicated a complete misunderstanding of scientific concepts. I have been careful not to intrude into areas of scientific expertise where I lack understanding. I think the problem is that I've stirred up a hornets nest because I've questioned sacred beliefs of atheist.
    No... Atheists beliefs are fine for criticism. If that criticism is based in fact. But your criticisms are not based in fact.

    Furthermore you use your criticisms of what you THINK Atheism is about to somehow justify your own religion. As if God is a default.

    Once again which God/Set of Gods is default and why are your the authority in that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Before you accuse me, show where I overstepped?

    The big issues are scientific explanations of the universe and life. For those explanations, I have found no conclusive arguments. All I get are hostile and acrimonious comments fit for the trash can.

    You selected one quote from a Harvard professor that upset you, but you completely ignored all of the other references. Whose being selective?
    Garbage in garbage out?
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  8. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    No... Atheists beliefs are fine for criticism. If that criticism is based in fact. But your criticisms are not based in fact.

    Furthermore you use your criticisms of what you THINK Atheism is about to somehow justify your own religion. As if God is a default.

    Once again which God/Set of Gods is default and why are your the authority in that.

    Garbage in garbage out?
    We' are in the same boat. Atheism isn't based on fact either. If you could explain how something came from nothing, or provide scientific proof for the universe coming from natural processes, then you'd have a sound basis for criticizing religion.

    Again, I don't have the problem, you do. I've never claimed there's material proof for a non-material beings.

    Have you noticed that most believers do not insult nonbelievers, but most atheist delight in attacking believers, Logically Yours being the prime example.

    That's a ridiculous statement that my God is a default god. Why shouldn't that be the case. Either you believe or you don't. If I believed in polytheism, my default god would be many gods, but I don't. I believe in the Lord of the Old Testament and in Jesus, both being the same God. For me, all other gods are false. According to the Ten Commandments, "I am the Lord your God . . . You shall have no other gods before me."

  9. #41
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    We' are in the same boat. Atheism isn't based on fact either. If you could explain how something came from nothing, or provide scientific proof for the universe coming from natural processes, then you'd have a sound basis for criticizing religion.
    Atheism as based on the fact that there is zero proof of a diety. A simple logical conclusion. Atheism doesn't depend on proving origins through natural causes. It depends on the proof for a supernatural being...and there is none, zero, zip, nada.....ZILCH.

    Again, I don't have the problem, you do. I've never claimed there's material proof for a non-material beings.
    Yes, you do. First you assume because we have not fully solved the riddle of origins, that there is no proof for it to have been the result of natural causes. Second, you assume that if science is wrong...wrong about everything that, a deity is the default answer. An answer that cannot stand on it's own merits from an evidence/proof standpoint.

    Have you noticed that most believers do not insult nonbelievers, but most atheist delight in attacking believers, Logically Yours being the prime example.
    I think you read with a selective filter. I can find plenty of examples of "believers" throwing about the ad homs. You don't wish to be ridiculed?...Done come to the table with bullshit statements and not be expected to back them up.

    The idea of equating an unfounded belief to a scientific theory is absurd...and only goes to making YOU look absurd.

    That's a ridiculous statement that my God is a default god. Why shouldn't that be the case. Either you believe or you don't. If I believed in polytheism, my default god would be many gods, but I don't. I believe in the Lord of the Old Testament and in Jesus, both being the same God. For me, all other gods are false. According to the Ten Commandments, "I am the Lord your God . . . You shall have no other gods before me."
    Really?...so, you know for a fact "your" god is the only god?...you know for a fact that aliens didn't have anything to do with it?

    What you have is blind faith based on emotion. Nothing more.
    Last edited by LogicallyYours; 10-05-2010 at 01:44 PM.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  10. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    Atheism as based on the fact that there is zero proof of a diety. A simple logical conclusion. Atheism doesn't depend on proving origins through natural causes. It depends on the proof for a supernatural being...and there is none, zero, zip, nada.....ZILCH.



    Yes, you do. First you assume because we have not fully solved the riddle of origins, that there is no proof for it to have been the result of natural causes. Second, you assume that if science is wrong...wrong about everything that, a deity is the default answer. An answer that cannot stand on it's own merits from an evidence/proof standpoint.



    I think you read with a selective filter. I can find plenty of examples of "believers" throwing about the ad homs. You don't wish to be ridiculed?...Done come to the table with bullshit statements and be expected to back them up.



    Really?...so, you know for a fact "your" god is the only god?...you know for a fact that aliens didn't have anything to do with it?

    What you have is blind faith based on emotion. Nothing more.
    I don't think you accomplished anything in your above comments. you have, as before, exaggerated your case.

    Just because one believes in God doesn't mean they're anti-science. As you know there are scientist who are believers. Furthermore, I have never said that science is of no value. As a matter of fact, I trust science every time I go to the doctor, etc. Incidentally, my doctor is a believer and he's doesn't appear to be stupid. As a matter of fact he is one of the most brilliant physicians in the region.

    Why don't you give believers some slack. They're not all morons dedicated to superstition and false beliefs.

    Like others who post on scam.com, I will continue to post what I please. Whether or not you like what I post is of no consequence.

    Back to my favorite criticism about atheist. Until you have conclusive proof that the universe came from natural causes, you can't expect me or other believers to run to your cause.

    What are my B.S. statements? I challenge you to find one posting where I said there is material proof for a non-material being. Instead of setting up a straw man, why don't you find someone who really says all of those terribly offensive things.

    I'm confident that science will never find proof for the universe came from natural causes, nor will they find proof that life came from natural causes.

    Why don't we discuss the Cambrian Explosion? Seems to me that the event defies scientific explanation. I suppose if something contracts your bias you just ignore it. Right?

  11. #43
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Paradise lost

    [QUOTE=Cnance;973802]I don't think you accomplished anything in your above comments. you have, as before, exaggerated your case.[/qoute]

    "blah....blah....blah...."

    Just because one believes in God doesn't mean they're anti-science. As you know there are scientist who are believers. Furthermore, I have never said that science is of no value. As a matter of fact, I trust science every time I go to the doctor, etc. Incidentally, my doctor is a believer and he's doesn't appear to be stupid. As a matter of fact he is one of the most brilliant physicians in the region.
    No, you selectively wish to cherry-pick what science you choose to believe....that is, when is make your case...or more importantly, when it does not discredit something you believe in.

    Why don't you give believers some slack. They're not all morons dedicated to superstition and false beliefs.
    I have no problems with people of faith when they keep their beliefs to themselves. When they want to introduce their beliefs and psuedo-science in the public schools as an equal to real scientific theory, then I have issues....OR....when someone makes an absured claim like, the laws of probability negate origins by natural means.

    Like others who post on scam.com, I will continue to post what I please. Whether or not you like what I post is of no consequence.
    Please do!....it's easy and fun to refute your positions...AND it proves you're really not interested in learning anything but really just want to have you views validated.

    Back to my favorite criticism about atheist. Until you have conclusive proof that the universe came from natural causes, you can't expect me or other believers to run to your cause.
    Don't you find it hypocritical that you demand everything be explained and proved from A to Z...but yet, you believe something has hasn't even gotten to A?

    Currently all the proof for origins is via natural causes...none if it points for a supernatural being...none. Or that a deity created all living things.....Something that we know is not factually correct...and can be proved.



    What are my B.S. statements? I challenge you to find one posting where I said there is material proof for a non-material being. Instead of setting up a straw man, why don't you find someone who really says all of those terribly offensive things.
    Your statement claiming that the laws of probability don't allow for, or debunk origins via natural causes. Old, tired debunked Creationist claim. Been there, debunked that.


    I'm confident that science will never find proof for the universe came from natural causes, nor will they find proof that life came from natural causes.
    Really....is your thinking that limited?...Good thing we don't rely on people like you do solve mysteries or cure disease.

    Well dispite your wishes it will be solved. Just as Evolution or man sending people to the moon...it's inevitable....You just don't want to believe it will happen.

    Why don't we discuss the Cambrian Explosion? Seems to me that the event defies scientific explanation. I suppose if something contracts your bias you just ignore it. Right?
    What part of it?....what do you think the atmosphere was like before the Cambrian.....what was it like during the Cambrian. Hint: Cambrian...C02....Temp....
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  12. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    I don't think you accomplished anything in your above comments. you have, as before, exaggerated your case.[/qoute]

    "blah....blah....blah...."



    No, you selectively wish to cherry-pick what science you choose to believe....that is, when is make your case...or more importantly, when it does not discredit something you believe in.



    I have no problems with people of faith when they keep their beliefs to themselves. When they want to introduce their beliefs and psuedo-science in the public schools as an equal to real scientific theory, then I have issues....OR....when someone makes an absured claim like, the laws of probability negate origins by natural means.



    Please do!....it's easy and fun to refute your positions...AND it proves you're really not interested in learning anything but really just want to have you views validated.



    Don't you find it hypocritical that you demand everything be explained and proved from A to Z...but yet, you believe something has hasn't even gotten to A?

    Currently all the proof for origins is via natural causes...none if it points for a supernatural being...none. Or that a deity created all living things.....Something that we know is not factually correct...and can be proved.





    Your statement claiming that the laws of probability don't allow for, or debunk origins via natural causes. Old, tired debunked Creationist claim. Been there, debunked that.




    Really....is your thinking that limited?...Good thing we don't rely on people like you do solve mysteries or cure disease.

    Well dispite your wishes it will be solved. Just as Evolution or man sending people to the moon...it's inevitable....You just don't want to believe it will happen.



    What part of it?....what do you think the atmosphere was like before the Cambrian.....what was it like during the Cambrian. Hint: Cambrian...C02....Temp....
    There you go stereotyping me again. When did I say any thing about public school teaching? In high school, I completed all science courses (physics, chemistry, two years of algebra, trigonometry, geometry, solid geometry) and all with high grades. So why should I dislike science. You certainly go off on tangents.

    Again, when have I ever said disparaging things about science? Lets stay on the record, I've said repeatedly that I do not believe science can negate God by proving the universe and life came from natural processes. Where are those studies negating those assertions?

    Back to the Cambrian Explosion. Where are those fossil records validating species prior to the Cambrian period? They don't exist. That's the issue. If they don't exist, how did those species pop into existence without prior development? Remember, in science you need evidence.

  13. #45
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    There you go stereotyping me again. When did I say any thing about public school teaching? In high school, I completed all science courses (physics, chemistry, two years of algebra, trigonometry, geometry, solid geometry) and all with high grades. So why should I dislike science. You certainly go off on tangents.
    Funny how your tone changes when you are exposed to the light of truth.

    Again, when have I ever said disparaging things about science? Lets stay on the record, I've said repeatedly that I do not believe science can negate God by proving the universe and life came from natural processes. Where are those studies negating those assertions?
    Really? So, as biblical myths long held as fact are debunked one by one, you will continue retreating to the next gap. Those "studies" as you disengenuously or ignorantly dismiss are the complete body of science that has debunked those biblical myths.

    Science isn't about "negating" god...but, unfortuneatly, the bible or the men who authored it overreached in their claims extending to how the world and universe came about and now that we learn more everyday about the world and the universe...those claims are debunked.

    Back to the Cambrian Explosion. Where are those fossil records validating species prior to the Cambrian period? They don't exist. That's the issue. If they don't exist, how did those species pop into existence without prior development? Remember, in science you need evidence.
    I don't know where you're getting you information from (I have an idea but) or exactly what your bitch is but, there are plenty of fossils from the Pre-Cambrian...most are stromatolites. While the Pre-Cambrian fossils are not a many as later periods, biologists do have fossils to work from.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  14. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    Funny how your tone changes when you are exposed to the light of truth.



    Really? So, as biblical myths long held as fact are debunked one by one, you will continue retreating to the next gap. Those "studies" as you disengenuously or ignorantly dismiss are the complete body of science that has debunked those biblical myths.

    Science isn't about "negating" god...but, unfortuneatly, the bible or the men who authored it overreached in their claims extending to how the world and universe came about and now that we learn more everyday about the world and the universe...those claims are debunked.



    I don't know where you're getting you information from (I have an idea but) or exactly what your bitch is but, there are plenty of fossils from the Pre-Cambrian...most are stromatolites. While the Pre-Cambrian fossils are not a many as later periods, biologists do have fossils to work from.
    I will not debate with you the issue of the Bible being the absolute word of God. I have never posted that position. What I've posted is that the Bible is a book about God written by men. Because of that, the Bible is full of errors. There are however, things in the Bible that reveal who God is and what His purpose is about. However, in that you reject the entire Bible, there is no use discussing it.

    My discussion with you has been about evidence for the most crucial questions of science, origin of the universe and of life.

    Here is the content of my original argument that no one addressed, except to find one quote that apparently I "mined." A ridiculous rebuttal.

    For that period, the fossil record appears to be just about what Darwin claimed when he proposed the Cambrian period as a problem for his theory. See Darwin Chapter ten in The Origin of Species. What I've found is that the fossil records say what Darwin said. Prior to the Cambrian period we have no fossil record of species. The claim by scientists is that those species that existed prior to the Cambrian period had no skeletal structure and therefore were not fossilized. That's a hypothesis that can't be proven.


    "The Precambrian record is now sufficiently good that the old rationale about undiscovered sequences of smoothly transitional forms will no longer wash.” (Stephen Jay Gould, “An Asteroid to Die For,” Discover, October 1989, p. 65)"

    http://www.learnthebible.org/cambria...evolution.html

    http://www.darwinsdilemma.org/pdf/faq.pdf

    Again, it is the fossil record that we are examining. Evidence of stromatolites, or sediments of microorganisms, do not qualify as evidence of species, whereas Cambrian species had skeletal structures. I'm repeating what other scientist have maintained about the lack of evidence for skeletal remains prior to the Cambrian Explosion.

  15. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Paradise lost

    Cnance said:
    I will not debate with you the issue of the Bible being the absolute word of God. I have never posted that position. What I've posted is that the Bible is a book about God written by men. Because of that, the Bible is full of errors.
    If as you say that the bible is written by men and is full of errors, even though they are supposedly "inspired" by God, perhaps it is in error whenever it states anything that has to do with a God....
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  16. #48
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Paradise lost

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I will not debate with you the issue of the Bible being the absolute word of God. I have never posted that position. What I've posted is that the Bible is a book about God written by men. Because of that, the Bible is full of errors. There are however, things in the Bible that reveal who God is and what His purpose is about. However, in that you reject the entire Bible, there is no use discussing it.

    My discussion with you has been about evidence for the most crucial questions of science, origin of the universe and of life.

    Here is the content of my original argument that no one addressed, except to find one quote that apparently I "mined." A ridiculous rebuttal.

    For that period, the fossil record appears to be just about what Darwin claimed when he proposed the Cambrian period as a problem for his theory. See Darwin Chapter ten in The Origin of Species. What I've found is that the fossil records say what Darwin said. Prior to the Cambrian period we have no fossil record of species. The claim by scientists is that those species that existed prior to the Cambrian period had no skeletal structure and therefore were not fossilized. That's a hypothesis that can't be proven.


    "The Precambrian record is now sufficiently good that the old rationale about undiscovered sequences of smoothly transitional forms will no longer wash.” (Stephen Jay Gould, “An Asteroid to Die For,” Discover, October 1989, p. 65)"

    http://www.learnthebible.org/cambria...evolution.html

    http://www.darwinsdilemma.org/pdf/faq.pdf

    Again, it is the fossil record that we are examining. Evidence of stromatolites, or sediments of microorganisms, do not qualify as evidence of species, whereas Cambrian species had skeletal structures. I'm repeating what other scientist have maintained about the lack of evidence for skeletal remains prior to the Cambrian Explosion.
    yeah...blah...blah....blah.

    When will you ever learn? "learn the bible", Johnathan Wells?....the Disco Institute? These are you sources for "facts". You're funny.....and sad.

    But what's really sad is...you won't spend the time to do research from real sources....

    So, in honor of your "not really interested in facts, I just want to have my beliefs validated" attitude.... I give you:

    Why do people laugh at creationist? (part 15)
    The segments addresses your misinformation.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sui4CadfhDM

    Someone like yourself should watch the entire series.

    Oh, and another article for your reading pleasure.

    Solution To Darwin's Dilemma Of 1859
    ScienceDaily (Jan. 9, 2009) — A solution to the puzzle which has come to be known as ‘Darwin’s Dilemma’ has been uncovered by scientists at the University of Oxford, in a paper to be published in the Journal of the Geological Society.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ‘To the question of why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these…periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer’.

    These words, written by Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species in 1859, summarise what has come to be known as ‘Darwin’s Dilemma’ – the lack of fossils in sediment from the Precambrian (c. 4500 – 542 Mya). If Darwin’s theory of natural selection was right, life *****ed gradually over millions of years. However, the Cambrian period, which began around 542 million years ago, seemed to herald a sudden rapid increase in species diversity, an event which has come to be known as the ‘Cambrian explosion’.

    Darwin could find no evidence for fossils prior to the Cambrian, and the mystery has continued to perplex palaeontologists. The study, carried out by Richard H. T. Ballow and Martin D. Brasier at the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Oxford, focused on a rock formation from Shropshire, England, known as the Longmyndian Supergroup. These rocks had been examined in Darwin’s time by the geologist J. W. Salter, who suspected them of containing records of Precambrian life, but he was unable to identify anything beyond ‘trace fossils’: unusual markings which may have been left behind by organisms.

    The study used Salter’s collection as well as fresh samples from the Longmyndian Supergroup, and identified microscopic fossils of exceptional preservation. The fossils represent a wide array of microbial life from the Ediacaran period, the period immediately preceding the Cambrian (630 – 542 Mya). They were preserved in a number of ways. Some had been compressed under layers of sediment until they formed a thin film of carbon residue on the surface of the rock. Others were preserved in three dimensions and are thought to have undergone permineralisation, a process where water containing minerals seeps into the spaces within an organism and evaporates, leaving behind mineral deposits which build up into a hard fossil. Some had also been preserved as impressions and moulds within layers of sediment, appearing as sharp ridges on bedding planes, or as their equivalent negative impressions.

    It is not clear how the microbes kept themselves alive. As they lived in shallow marine environments, they may have survived either by converting light into ****** in a similar way to plants, or by converting organic substances into ****** as animals and humans do. Suggestions as to what organisms they might be related to include algae, fungi or a wide variety of other filamentous bacteria.

    Darwin himself was confident that fossils from the Precambrian would eventually be found, believing it to be a time when ‘the world swarmed with living creatures’. Although the importance of the Longmyndian supergroup in solving the dilemma has been recognised since Darwin first identified the puzzle, it is only now, with more sophisticated techniques for examining specimens, that the secrets of the Longmyndian rocks and their exceptionally preserved fossils can be uncovered.
    Last edited by LogicallyYours; 10-06-2010 at 12:57 PM.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

Similar Threads

  1. Dinosaurs in Paradise!
    By Cnance in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 107
    Last Post: 08-01-2018, 11:31 PM
  2. who want to live forever in paradise????
    By galaxy in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 10-10-2007, 11:27 PM
  3. “If we’ve lost O’Reilly, we’ve lost the country”
    By Batarang Force - Apostate in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-22-2007, 05:02 PM
  4. 'Trouble In Paradise'.
    By coontie in forum General Chat
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-22-2006, 02:36 AM
  5. Paradise-the true definition
    By heatwaveo8 in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-04-2006, 09:46 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •