Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Youre so fuckin stupid you dont even know what to look up on google. Like you will never learn a topic unless someone like me tells you the name.
Why not get some sleep, you are riding shotgun on the garbage truck tomorrow.(Since Youre not much good for anything that requires brains or skill , they have you serve as ballast on the truck).

HAd a chance , as a result of a field trip this week, to view a possible Ediacaran (type) fossil assemblage that is correlated to a similar formation from early Ediacaran age (near the base of the EDiacara) from the HAywood Fm of western Canada. This lies as an allochthanous ("Slid over the top of") block of precambrian sedimentary material from the Appalachians.
The argument is that this ancient allocthanous block, and its early "Hard shell" life , is important from two standpoints.
1. It shows a growing worldwide assemblage of more complex life forms that predate the "Cambrian Explosion" that occured 45 MY later. ( It Makes the CAmbrian "Explosion" appear to be more of a post Cryogenian continuation of life already becoming more complex due more to chemical-environmental reasons and not some unknown basal oddity that heretofore had defined the Paleozoic basal rocks).Ie, the "Cambrian Explosion" now seems to have been a worldwide environmental adjsutment that lasted more than 60 million years from the top of the "Cryogenian" to the base of the Cambrian, and these terms have been officially added to the world stratigraphic column)

2 More important to geologists is the fact that this allocthanous block, is showing us major extensional features(like big cracks in the rocks that were infilled with quartz and calcite) that correlate well with an opening ocean basin that later became the Iapetan Sea. The environmental issues from this post Cryogenian ("Snowball earth age") show that several environmental things were happening
A. The proto Appalachia forelands (continents) were breaking up thus allowing free exchange of seaways and gradual warming due to "gulf stream" like streams.

B Sea loevels were rising, giving birth to shallow warm seas and seaways that are now becoming better understood as "birth placese of several unique assemblages of index type fossils"

C. "Contaminants" in the sea chemistry , such as the rise of "contaminants" like CO2 and free O2, as well as the declining acidity of the seas,gave rise to the new "Biodepositinal life forms" that could deposit free calcium carbonate as shell material .These life forms were subsequent colonizers that arose after the stromatolites and blue green algaes filled the oceans with lovely oxygen)
(The life forms of the EDiacaran were, where hard parts did exist, were mostly chitenous and not CaCO3 shells.

Im sure we are gonna see even more locations of Worldwide Ediacaran age life as more complex forms become recognized as common. We now have sites from at least 7 newer (Ediacaran) locations worldwide where PreCambrian complex life is being noted.(Not just the Type section of the Ediacara from Flinders Hills in Australia).

The puzzle of the rise of life and the shape of the earth is being filled in with new pieces , and many of these pieces are just the result of re-examination of previously "settled" geology from the Appalachians or the CAnadian Shield (as well as several other peri-Shield areas from around the world).

Thought Id let ya in on what I was doing this past weekend. It was a lotta fun, almost as much fun as a recent sailing trip to Nova SCotia

How do you know that? Are you a paratelepathist?

Although I do know Dylan's You Ain't Goin' Nowhere but that applies to everybody.

So, you agree with the "snowball earth" idea?

And why not. I owe you. As do those few of the folks who are intelligent enough to see the substance behind my genius and the vacuity behind your genius. Philosophers say that genius occurs when intellect overpowers will. As your position is based on your subjective desires such a definition disqualifies you from a claim to genius. My position goes contrary to my subjective desires. I can drop it when the occasion arises but when I do I am not offering an educational policy for 50,000,000 kids based upon that. Perish the thought.



The reason you get that feeling is that it inspires you to blurt out tired old repetitive cliches of no meaning, such as that one, as the only species of answer you are capable of. I'm a timber merchant. I'm not retired. I've never been a bureaucrat. And I have no use for fame.



I'm not bothered what period of time you have allotted me. My point is simple. Keep the atheist ass kissers of the NCSE out of education in schools and that coalition of lickspittles and lackeys which has a deeply felt personal interest in justifying pre-marital sex, artificial birth control, secular weddings, adultery, divorce, homosexuality and abortion and which does not even know what sex means outside of male orgasm.

When suchlike pop up to pretend they are on the side of science, about which they know nothing worth bothering with, in order to justify their lifestyles and communicate them to the kids, I will be here to take them on.

I am well aware that they would dearly love to allot a short time to their opponents because I know that free speech and open discourse is not on their agenda as it never is with socialist totalitarians who have managed to create from nothing the ridiculous Tea Party. They seem oblivious that if they push somebody will push back. So much so that they are indignant when somebody does.

I don't say that wande. And I'm the only ID proponent on here.

So why do you seek to suggest, without responsibility I know, that what some ID proponents somebody has searched out applies to me.

I don't make posts about what some proponents of atheism say and suggest that all proponents of atheism would say those things. What La Mettrie or the Marquis de Sade said only applies to those two persons. I know that most atheists don't have the courage of their convictions to follow out the logic of atheism to the extent those two did. Most proponents of atheism merely seek to justify certain behaviour patterns in their personal lives.

Atheism can't be disproved just as ID can't. Thus neither are science. To select ID for that test and not atheism as well is devious. Do we want devious people teaching the kids?

You're posting Orwellian style propaganda wande and that does not belong in science classes either. Nor on science threads.

The science relating to ID is in the consequences. The evidence of Christianity's great success is overwhelming. There is no evidence that the success could have been acheived by atheism. There is also no evidence that atheism will enhance that success and there is plenty of informed speculation that it will put it at risk. And your devious Orwellian propaganda post is another piece of evidence that that is the case. We cannot afford to be deciding education policy on the basis of what Nan Austin of the Modesto Bee thinks fit to shove at us. It's a paper under the absolute control of the McClatchy family and a part of a conglomerate which can be assumed to be sucking up to the reader's incontinent hedonism just as all your other quoted sources can. And justifying the incontinent hedonism going on in its own offices.

The self discipline of religious teaching does not sell newspapers. Whether the gratuitous incontinent hedonism being promoted by media will be our ruination is not a matter for the promoters. Profit is their concern.

Not much to disagree with. There is very strong evidence of almost every shield rock body being coverd with a contemporaneous ice sheet that left scrathces tht could be dated by actuall stratigraphic means.
Whether the entire globe was covered or only 75% was covered is still a area that can only be seen by evidence. Weve actually and officially recognized this period and given it an official Time stratigraphic age . So now, instead of the VENDEAN , weve got the PreCambraian broken down into the Archean (NO LIFE)and Proterozoic(EARLY LIFE) eons. The Proterozoic, which goes from about 2.5 By to the base of the Cambrian, is broken down into Early,Middle and the Neo proterozoic (from about 1BY to the base of the Cambrian). This time used to be called the "Grenvillean" but has been broken down based upon life and ice into the TONIAN (1 BY to 850MY), then the CRYOGENIAN ("snowball earth period") (850 to630 MY) ns finally the EDIACARAN (from the Ediacara of AUstralia) (from 630MY to 542MY)

This is after LAnding,E.(1998) and later Palmer A.(1998) from the Canadian Journal of EArth SCiences, where these terms were first proposed and later (2004) adapted for all us rocknockers to use in our polite conversation. AN aside, we may be able to define whether the ARCHEAN does contain actual fossils of life as weve seen possibly from the ARchean of B=Newfoundland and Greenland, so that, instead of merely specific dextro Carbons of the ISHUA Formation, they are looking for microfssil evidence. If Found, we may then be asked to extend the PROTEROZOIC back another Billion Years. Theres probably a thousand grad students working for their advisors doing such work, in hopes of sticking their names onto a new geologic age name.

{N.B.: comment addressed to Farmerman, edited by me for brevity; italics mine, added for clarity.}

As I've not followed this thread I hope you'll be kind enough to name the "few..folks" to whom you're referring.
Once again must ask for your indulgence for my ignorance - who are the philosophers saying this? Thank you.

Like I said spendi -
A train with no destination.

Is the "snowball earth" conjecture in any way contingent on the Lagrange point (60 degrees orbit) hypothesis for the creation of our Moon?

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/earth.html

Wait a minute, wait a minute . . . did anyone mention Velikovsky?

Not a contemporaneous event. The Cryogenian is evidenced strongly that a worldwide ice covering that , was mob=ving and also deposited sufficient blocks of earlier rock matter atop Shield rock surfaces so that a contemporaneous age deposit of sediment corresponding to an ice sheet is evidenced.

The moon formation period occured (according to what Ive seen but I offer no evidence other than Rodgers and Santosh, ) had occured sometime in the ""NEOARCHEAN"

Thanks - was just wondering if the sequence of events (as you say moon creation not contemporaneous with "snowball earth" phase) was max prob from what we do know of the geological record. (Note to Setanta, the Lagrange point for orbits isn't in doubt - viz. link under picture I posted):

How would I know? Evidently not yourself. If you're not following the thread what caused you to interject yourself into it?



The sensible ones. Not Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, La Mettrie, de Sade, Pavlov, Skinner, Armstrong, Ryle etc (or their followers) who think will has priority and the intellect merely its servant as with animals from which they take their cue. In fact animality is the only source they can draw on. So--not found in the ascendent in zoos.

Anywhere else. The Vatican. Laurence Sterne. Anywhere askesis is present. Probably you do some askesis yourself HS from time to time.

The atheist has only the animal as an exemplar. That is why no inner gyroscope of self discipline requires totalitarian repression to avoid anarchy.

You're out of your depth.

I expressed no such doubt. You need to be more careful.

Armytage and others had done lots of analyses of lunar and earth Bytownites and Anorthosites (Fedspathic minerals) and looked at various basalts from all over the erath and the moon rocks and found that , when you added up the types of silicon isotopes and analyzed then as functions of the total silica , the availability of Si 30 was unique for the earth and lunar feldpathoids. These rocks , from the earths upper mantle and those from the moon, are identical. No other silica isotopes from any other planet or bolide appears as identical as the earth/moon potential couple.
That, plus Rodgers map of the type of Basalts seen on the circumpacific side of the earth helps evidence that the earth and moon were once part of a cosmic taffy pull.

Oh no!! Not Velikovsky. Things are really getting desperate for these anti-IDers. Still--it's a posh name and has that brilliance in some countries that Smith might have in others which can cause some phonies to think themselves intellectual simply by repeating it in company which is easily stupified by such things.

What does snowball earth, fanciful computer images of moon formation, catastrophe theory, best selling pop-science books and fm's crazy bullshit have to do with teaching kids how to be happy and lead fulfilling and useful lives?

LOL - you're hardly an ἄσκησις exemplar yourself, if your drinking and eating habits are as described! So therefore, when you write "Philosophers say...." you really mean those you just mentioned? Hardly representative of philosophers as a group - askesis and the Vatican involve theology.

Good for them. I hope they get it

I always thought the snowball earth idea sounded plausible, but haven't kept up on the details of recent evidence for it.

How many "snowball earth" events are supported by decent evidence at this point? I seem to remember at least a couple of these "snowball" periods being theorized.