Germs Found In Amber Lived With First Dinosaurs

National Geographic ^ | 12-13-2006 | Brian Henwerk

[null and void]

There are other benefits...

[SunkenCiv]

I'm laughing so hard I may pterodacytl...

[smoketree]

Just out of curiousity what "change" happened initially before there was any material creation?
What force started it all. If you say why should something change if it is working then what "change" happened when everything was fine before creation?

[Alter Kaker]

That's a philosophical question. I'm not a philosopher.

[smoketree]

So do you not believe in intelligent design?

[Alter Kaker]

So do you not believe in intelligent design?

No I do not believe in intelligent design.

[smoketree]

Do you believe that the material world has always existed?

[Chaguito]

How do the investigators date amber at 135MM years? Any ideas?

[Alter Kaker]

Do you believe that the material world has always existed?

The material world? I'm not sure what that is. The earth hasn't always existed.

[smoketree]

The material universe of which the earth is part however new or old the earth is.
Either it has always been or it was created at some point.
What I'm getting at is if evolution is change for the better then what caused the first change from nothing to the material universe?

[Alter Kaker]

How do the investigators date amber at 135MM years? Any ideas?

I don't know how they dated it. The amber was found in a "paleosol," an ancient preserved soil layer. The researchers were able to date it using a technique called biostratigraphy that identified it as approximately 220 million years old.

But I'm not sure exactly how the layer was dated --- according to the footnote in Nature, the layer had already been dated by two earlier studies:

1. Gianolla, P., Ragazzi, E. & Roghi, G. Upper Triassic amber in the Dolomites (Northern Italy). A paleoclimatic indicator? Riv. It. Paleont. Strat. 104, 381-390 (1998).

2. Roghi, G., Ragazzi, E. & Gianolla, P. Triassic amber of the Southern Alps (Italy). Palaios 21, 143-154 (2006).

[Alter Kaker]

What I'm getting at is if evolution is change for the better then what caused the first change from nothing to the material universe?

Well two things.

1. Your definition of evolution is off. Evolution isn't just generic "change for the better." In the biological context, evolution simply refers to genetic change over multiple generations. It's a pretty narrow definition that incorporates four basic linked biological processes. It is incorrect to use the term "evolution" to refer to systems that aren't biological.

2. The cosmological evidence is pretty overwhelming that the universe came into being with the Big Bang.

What caused the Big Bang? What came before the Big Bang? Why did it happen? Those are philosophical questions, not scientific questions. Science can't look beyond the Big Bang (at least not yet!), and science can't find meaning in existence.

[smoketree]

I don't believe I have defined evolution other than what you referred to as changing to improve. I always thought evolution was the science of evolving.
If it can't answer how the first change came about then it is incomplete and a part of a larger more complete "science".

[Alter Kaker]

Evolution isn't genetic change "for the better," it's just change. It doesn't have anything to do with planetary formation or the Bing Bang or even the origin of life; and it doesn't have a direction.

If it can't answer how the first change came about then it is incomplete

Evolution isn't a theory of "everything" nor does it attempt to be. Evolution explains why and how we observe speciation in the world around us. Other theories explain other systems and other observed phenomena. But no scientific theory can -- or attempts to -- make sense or meaning of what you call the material world as a grand scheme. That's something better left to philosophy or religion.

[stormer]

Wonderful picture. Have you read "A Fish Caught in Time: The Search for the Coelacanth", by Samantha Weinberg? Fascinating.

[49th]

To add to what Alter Kaler said... Evolution doesn't predict or explain how the first life came into existence, all it does is explain what's happened since.

The standard picture of evolution (think of the picture from science class of the monkey followed by a progression of successively more upright ape-men, to finally man) is somewhat inaccurate, and leads to an incomplete conception of evolution in many people. Evolution does not lead automatically to more complexity, nor does it lead inevitably towards intelligence. It merely explains how and why organisms change over time. Successful changes will be propagated, unsuccessful ones will not.

[trumandogz]

No, No, No. The Amber is only 5000 years old and it existed at the time of dinosaurs and Fred Flintstone.

[FormerRep]

Allow me to interject also. To evolve is, as stated, merely a change over time that selects for survivorship. This can be from either simple to complex or from more complex to more simple - IF - that change allows the organism higher survivorship, resource utilization, and competitive advantage within its ecological niche. I like using bacteria as models since evolution can be observed in days or weeks when their environment is altered. The best, and simplest test is to place an antibiotic in the growth media of a pure culture of antimicrobial sensitive bacteria. In which case 99.9% of all individuals will perish and the remaining colonies would consist of only those that possessed an evolutionary advantage of antibiotic resistance. This is a function of transposable elements of extrachomosomal DNA - e.g. the ability to evolve. Thus, evolution is change in response to environment that is hertiable and select for those individual possessing the advantageous characteristics. This has nothing to do with creationism (either positive or negative) nor does it discuss the origins or acretion of inorgamic matter in the universe. Those are physical occurences that have been theorized but not conclusively proven and are open to philosophic interpretation as much as anything else. Evolution does not preclude the divine, either. It is a marvelous function of biology that the living material on this planet, regardless of Kingdom or Phylum, was designed to evolve to fill all of the voids of our world. Evolution, could therefore be determined to be the ultimate achievement of God.

[SunkenCiv]

GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach	join list or digest view topics view or post blog bookmark post a topic subscribe
Note: this topic is from 12/18/2006. Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. Thanks again, blam. Blast from the Past. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.