Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scientists find evolution of life
EurekAlert ^ | 10/30/03

Posted on 10/30/2003 5:04:39 PM PST by Dales

LIVERMORE, Calif. -- A trio of scientists including a researcher from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has found that humans may owe the relatively mild climate in which their ancestors evolved to tiny marine organisms with shells and skeletons made out of calcium carbonate.

In a paper titled "Carbonate Deposition, Climate Stability and Neoproterozoic Ice Ages" in the Oct. 31 edition of Science, UC Riverside researchers Andy Ridgwell and Martin Kennedy along with LLNL climate scientist Ken Caldeira, discovered that the increased stability in modern climate may be due in part to the evolution of marine plankton living in the open ocean with shells and skeletal material made out of calcium carbonate. They conclude that these marine organisms helped prevent the ice ages of the past few hundred thousand years from turning into a severe global deep freeze.

"The most recent ice ages were mild enough to allow and possibly even promote the evolution of modern humans," Caldeira said. "Without these tiny marine organisms, the ice sheets may have grown to cover the earth, like in the snowball glaciations of the ancient past, and our ancestors might not have survived."

The researchers used a computer model describing the ocean, atmosphere and land surface to look at how atmospheric carbon dioxide would change as a result of glacier growth. They found that, in the distant past, as glaciers started to grow, the oceans would suck the greenhouse gas -- carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere -- making the Earth colder, promoting an even deeper ice age. When marine plankton with carbonate shells and skeletons are added to the model, ocean chemistry is buffered and glacial growth does not cause the ocean to absorb large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

But in Precambrian times (which lasted up until 544 million years ago), marine organisms in the open ocean did not produce carbonate skeletons -- and ancient rocks from the end of the Precambrian geological age indicate that huge glaciers deposited layers of crushed rock debris thousands of meters thick near the equator. If the land was frozen near the equator, then most of the surface of the planet was likely covered in ice, making Earth look like a giant snowball, the researchers said.

Around 200 million years ago, calcium carbonate organisms became critical to helping prevent the earth from freezing over. When the organisms die, their carbonate shells and skeletons settle to the ocean floor, where some dissolve and some are buried in sediments. These deposits help regulate the chemistry of the ocean and the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. However, in a related study published in Nature on Sept. 25, 2003, Caldeira and LLNL physicist Michael Wickett found that unrestrained release of fossil-fuel carbon dioxide to the atmosphere could threaten extinction for these climate-stabilizing marine organisms.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420421-440441-460 ... 621-639 next last
To: Dales
I got told by gore3000 that he could tell I was biased by which articles I posted (even though they pretty much were chosen not by me, but by Google). When the complaints started again, I looked, saw what was going on, found some blame on both sides and popped in. One side took the advice in stride. One side didn't.

There is much spin in the above which needs to be rectified. You told longshadow 'bad boy' for inciting a flamewar and you threatened me for asking you to stop it. I don't call that fair treatement. In a site (and a thread!) which is trying to stop abusive behavior for you to tell me that I should allow abuse to 'roll off my back' and attacking me for not doing so shows extreme bias and extreme unfairness in someone that claims to be an impartial observer.

In addition, your bias towards evolution itself is shown in your very words on this post:

I think that the points you raise about the (for lack of a better word) snobbery amongst certain scientific circles against certain aspects of the conservative movement have merit. I am sure that there is some reticence from some of your scientific peers that they say is for that reason.

I also think that the religious people have a point, that some use science as just another tool to try to drive religion from the public realm.

You add to the above with the following later on:

If your goal is to try to run the scientific conservatives out of Free Republic, you may as well hit 'log off' right now and go somewhere else and bitch about how things are here. Save us a step or two. And if your goal is to try to run off those who look at life more through faith, the same applies.

Now on the above you are clearly saying that evolution is science and those opposed to evolution are against science. I call that bias. Further:

Moreover, I think that the discussions between different mindsets within conservatism are important to be had, on this topic and other topics.

to say as you do above that atheists, evolutionists, materialists which are allied with the NEA, the liberals, the Communists and were allied with the Nazis in destroying Christianity and civilized society are conservatives shows extreme bias on your part since that is one of the important points being made against evolution by the opponents of it.

As to solving the problem on these threads:

So the options are, do away with these discussions, or fix the problem.

The solution was given to you by Half Full in post# 376:

It is easy....the initiator of insults on any particular thread gets banned for two weeks, then a month, and third offense permanent. Would clear up personal attacks in record time.

Which is what I was trying to have you do when it became obvious that a flame war was being initiated and called you in to fix it. Instead of punishing the initiator you threatened me (and continue to do so). So yes, you are biased, and that Vade and Patrick were able to 'predict' your unfair threats against me before you made them shows that you are not only biased but of the same mindset with one side.

So therefore, your post only adds to the evidence of your bias and your mishandling of these threads. As I said before and you continue to give evidence supporting my position - you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

421 posted on 11/01/2003 6:32:41 PM PST by gore3000 ("To say dogs, mice, and humans are all products of slime plus time is a mystery religion.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
That isn't the way I define it.

Neither do I, but a similar attitude is expressed towards Creationists. Try Intelligent Design, whoops, it is Creationism in other clothes. Creationist, oh, you participated in the persecution of Galileo. Creationist, you are a flat earther. Creationist, you believe pi is 3. Creationist, .....

I am a Creationist. I believe God created the heaven and the Earth as stated here.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

That makes me an embarassment to Conservatism?

422 posted on 11/01/2003 6:36:14 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: JethroHathAWay
I don't think that's fair, given that we all use aliases, and that some people - who aren't supposed to - use more than one.

I've lurked the DesignedUniverse website, and I know that people there talk about the evolutionists on Free Republic - there were some unkind things said about me there.
423 posted on 11/01/2003 6:37:50 PM PST by CobaltBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 420 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
"And what deception is that?"

That the Earth is ~6000 years old for one. That evolution did not occur for another.

"Ad Hominem"

Nonsense, I simply stated the truth. You posed the question as a deliberate attempt to drag me into a futile Q/A session so you could make your claims. Claims that you have no intention of abandoning when they are shown to be illogical and defy reality. I've been there before and others confronted the nonsence to no avail.

God created the universe, man and gave us a Free will. I've exercised the gifts of observation, reason and Free will and have come to the conclusion that the Universe and Earth are billions of years old and man evolved from simpler forms. If you want to "debate" the validity of what is known scientifically, please do it with someone more tolerant of illogic and story telling.

424 posted on 11/01/2003 6:37:59 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
OK then. If you think I am biased, then so be it. We'll do with one fewer problem.

Thanks.

425 posted on 11/01/2003 6:38:08 PM PST by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
A theory, like evolution, which claims that biological change occurs randomly is perforce anti-science.

See, this is just one tiny example of the kind of thing we go over and over with you. You are saying something false about evolution. You have it wrong at a very fundamental level.

Evolution says that different species arise from common ancestry via variation and natural selection. The variation is the only random part. Natural selection--the word "selection" should give you a clue--is non-random. Evolution, the joint operation of variation and natural selection--is non-random. Over time, it produces a convergence upon adaptation to current conditions.

426 posted on 11/01/2003 6:38:41 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: Dales
[ Scientists find evolution of life ]

Humans love a good story, or a bad one....
Blow in some humans ears, and they will follow you anywhere..

427 posted on 11/01/2003 6:39:15 PM PST by hosepipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
That the Earth is ~6000 years old for one.

Please point to where I have ever said that the earth is only 6000 yeats old.

428 posted on 11/01/2003 6:40:08 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 424 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
yeats=years (no poets allowed)
429 posted on 11/01/2003 6:40:39 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 428 | View Replies]

To: Nakatu X
I am simply repeating what some others think and believe of the Republican party, and I believe that showing that FR has a diversity of opinions where the crevo issue is concerned will go a long way in defeating stereotypes.

As long as there is a liberal media who hates everything Christian, then Republicans will be branded as "naro-minded, etc.

That Christians are bringing down the republican party is a myth. Our fight is against liberals and liars of the left.

430 posted on 11/01/2003 6:41:42 PM PST by HalfFull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 401 | View Replies]

To: Dales
OK then. If you think I am biased, then so be it.

I do too.

431 posted on 11/01/2003 6:43:19 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 425 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
Let us be clear. The problem is Jesus Christ, not Christians. Jesus is very intolerant about the truth of our reality, and who has the hope of eternal life with the Creator.

Really? Jesus, who brought forgiveness to us all, is intolerant? Perhaps, it is only you that is intolerant, no?

You've been around long enough to know that there are Christians on both sides of this debate, so are the other Christians simply deluded? Or is it that you are blessed to see the absolute truth every time?

Or perhaps, you would care to rephrase your argument?

432 posted on 11/01/2003 6:44:24 PM PST by balrog666 (Humor is a universal language.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
You are a trueblue lady and thats' not what I am talking about; their are people who are in charge and they lurk and then jump out at you. They are bad people; using lies and tricks to see what is up. They are bad people and when you complain they tell your freinds even more lies about you. I said, Okay I give up, I will jist leave, but Mr So and so, and the other Mr So and so, said "Don't go Jethro, we like you". And before, the other Mr. So and so, said' People should not yell and be mean to you Jetrho". I was trying to make some freinds and learn about Science that;s all. The bad people here should leave.
433 posted on 11/01/2003 6:45:56 PM PST by JethroHathAWay (If all you got to do is follow me around you need to chingate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 423 | View Replies]

To: Nakatu X
There are many scientific endeavors that bleed over into the ethical realm. As our technology gets more advanced we are seeing a host of "scary" pathways being chosen by men and women who have relativistic morals.

Think of the drugs that can kill a child in the womb. The issues surrounding embryonic manipulations relating to the life of humans in the early stage of development. The cloning of persons for harvesting purposes. The ability to alter genetic material to custom design a persons intelligence and appearance.

If our scientific community does not regard a Creator, because their professor's have called Him a Myth, we can be certain that the decisions they will make will be perverted from the guidelines set by God.

We must inject conservative morals into all debates, in order to maintain an ethical perspective on where our future will take us. Liberals have chosen to fight this till the end, and as evidenced by many responses here, there is a desire to evict those bounds from debate on this forum.
434 posted on 11/01/2003 6:47:07 PM PST by bondserv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
That makes me an embarassment to Conservatism?

I don't think so, but I think it's an oversimplification, as well.

If you've read what I've been posting, I think there are ways to respectfully accommodate differing points of view without pandering. Several of the posters on these threads are interested in reaching some kind of middle ground, without compromising what any of us believes is true, and we've been talking about it, but it's frustrating, because the threads keep getting pulled, because some people don't play well with others.

Believe me, I can get very chagrined by hostile, intolerance evolutionists, and sometimes take exception to what has been said, but keeping intellectuals (I think we all, including you and me, qualify for that term, more or less) in line is worse than herding cats, and it's not my job, anyway.

435 posted on 11/01/2003 6:47:07 PM PST by CobaltBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
if you are a Christian

Are you presuming to judge who is a Christian and who is not?

Evolution perverts everything!

Why is that? If existence is eternal as Christ taught, why is the concept of infinite progress so difficult to accept?

Why is it not possible to have evolution as part of intelligent design? (Random selection is just an ignorant assumption based upon incomplete information.)

436 posted on 11/01/2003 6:49:20 PM PST by Semper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
You could easily replace the word CREATIONIST with the word CHRISTIAN and your statement would have been just as accurate.

No, you couldn't. Not remotely. I know plenty of scientists who are Christians. My boss is one. Pardon my frankness, but those scientist Christians view creationism with contempt and ridicule.

I am outspoken in my conservative views, even in a field that, admittedly, is rife with liberals, and even in a university that, notoriously, is among the most radically leftist in the world. Regularly in the course of political discussions with other scientists, the issue of creationism (unfairly) gets thrown in my face. It's the low SAT score on the transcript of conservatism. The best answer I can give is something like, "well, not all conservatives are creationists..."

Actually, what I say is, "very, very few conservatives are actually creationists," but I know from places like FR that there are many more of them than I am willing to admit to my colleagues.

437 posted on 11/01/2003 6:50:58 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
If you've read what I've been posting, I think there are ways to respectfully accommodate differing points of view without pandering. Several of the posters on these threads are interested in reaching some kind of middle ground, without compromising what any of us believes is true, and we've been talking about it, but it's frustrating, because the threads keep getting pulled, because some people don't play well with others.

Then how do posts 311 and 343 on this thread further that middle ground?

438 posted on 11/01/2003 6:51:01 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 435 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
Evolution is a theory promoted by atheists, for atheists and to spread and undermine the moral and Christian fabric of the country.

You know that's not true! How many time do you have to be told that *most* US biologists are both Christian and evolutionist?! (and I suppose most Indian biologists are both Hindu and evo, and most Paki ones are Muslim and evo, etc. Get it?)

And even if your slander were true, it has no impact on the theory. It lives or dies on the evidence, and it's flourishing today as never before.

Science is about cause and effect, about predictable and repeatable occurrences.

Found that Cambrian bryozoan yet?

or the Cambrian rabbit?

or the pseudogene... (you know it by heart now)...

or the fossil intermediate between a bird and a mammal?

Why aren't these predictable and repeated?

It is used by the atheists in this country, that is why they join hands with evolutionists in the school battles

As you know, most evos are Christians of one sort or another.

As to evolution being scientifically true, the use of insults and character assassination by evolutionists

But calling people militant anti-christian atheists, communists, nazis, nea partisans, frauds, charlatans, liars, underminers of the morals of the country (that's what they got Socrates on), etc. isn't "insults and character assassination"?

439 posted on 11/01/2003 6:56:15 PM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
but I know from places like FR that there are many more of them than I am willing to admit to my colleagues.

Zogby America Report

Among the people who are more likely to believe that God or some intelligent design did play a role in the creation of life and the universe are four-fifths or more of born-again Protestants (86%), Republicans (81%), and those with household incomes of $25,000-$34,999 (79%). Also sharing this belief are an average 75% of 30-49 year-olds, residents of small cities and rural areas. More women (74%, including 62% who strongly disagree) than men (63%) agree with the majority.

440 posted on 11/01/2003 6:57:00 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 437 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420421-440441-460 ... 621-639 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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