Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Berosus; 75thOVI; AndrewC; Avoiding_Sulla; BenLurkin; CGVet58; chilepepper; ckilmer; demlosers; ...
Thanks Berosus, good idea. Raup authored a book ("The Nemesis Affair: a Story of the Death of Dinosaurs and the Ways of Science",1986, 0393023427) which claimed the periodic mass extinctions were due to a dark companion of the Sun kicking loose Oort Cloud objects. No such dark companion has been found, and I think the world is coming around to the (correct, IMHO) view that the mass extinction impact events have been caused by NEOs.
Catastrophism

81 posted on 07/22/2006 7:28:47 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Wednesday, June 21, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


David Raup is a firm believer in evolution and a respected paleontologist (scientist who studies fossils) at the University of Chicago and the Field Museum. However, he admits that the fossil record has been misinterpreted if not outright mischaracterized. He writes: "A large number of well-trained scientists outside of evolutionary biology and paleontology have unfortunately gotten the idea that the fossil record is far more Darwinian than it is. This probably comes from the oversimplification inevitable in secondary sources: low-level textbooks, semi-popular articles, and so on. Also, there is probably some wishful thinking involved. In the years after Darwin, his advocates hoped to find predictable progressions. In general, these have not been found-yet the optimism has died hard, and some pure fantasy has crept into textbooks" (Science, Vol. 213, p. 289, emphasis added)...

Professor Raup elaborates on the problem paleontologists face in trying to demonstrate evolution from the fossil record: ". . . We are now about 120 years after Darwin, and knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time.

"By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information-what appeared to be a nice simple progression when relatively few data were available now appears to be much more complex and much less gradualistic [evolutionary]" ("Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology," Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin 50, January 1979, pp. 22-25, emphasis added).

83 posted on 07/22/2006 7:31:18 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Wednesday, June 21, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson