Skip to comments.Scientists find evolution of life
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.
Power hungry men did many hideous things in the name of God during that time, chief among them being taking the Word of God out of the peoples hands. The Reformation of the Church was the resurgence of Biblical Literacy among the people.
I agree with our Founding Fathers that a Theocracy is not the way to go. As Christians we are called to speak the Gospel and reason with those who know not Christ. Persuasion by reasoning is the only way that lines up with the Biblical concept that God wants our love by choice. Forced conversions should always remain illegal and is under our Constitution.
Not true. Ancient Greeks wrote about freedom and democracy long before Christianity.
Without a Soverign Creator the Greeks ideas of freedom were destine to failure. Despots always arise to make new rules. An absolute standard Giver is the key to our success as a nation.
Thankfully JR must admit that my perspective on these Science threads is in line with his agenda of holding back the Elitism that is a result of power run amok.<
I did not follow you argument here.
If we allow despots in power to dictate their views of rights as the Liberals wish to do, we are all at a loss. They have no set of absolute standards, and we are at the mercy of which way the wind blows for those in power.
How does a belief in evolution shatter the concepts of our constitution? I agree with your second sentence. If you take the bible as a scientific document, it most certainly does not agree with the modern theories of the age and workings of the universe.
Those with the biggest guns make the rules, a natural outgrowth of survival of the fittest. Very Unconstitutional. Our Founding documents revolve around individual responsibility to a set of cultural standards derived primarily from the Bible. This is why the Highest office in the land takes an oath of office on the Holy Christian Bible, whatever religion they have been.
I do not claim theistic evolution.
I apologize that I wasn't clear on that point. I intentionally began the statement with the word "Those", indicating that I wasn't sure of your position. My intention was to point out how many scientists who are Christians attempt to reconcile their private lives with their work lives to avoid scoffing or percieved intellectual dishonesty.
IMHO, the Bible itself undertakes an evolution from beginning to end as the people's understanding of the world around them changed.
If you have some time to investigate the prophetic content of some of the oldest documents in the Bible and their amazing accuracy in describing modern Phenomenon in the language of their day, your opinion may change. The descriptive language has changed but the content is completely relevant today. Here are a couple examples.
22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
Fairly good description of the fabric of space-time.
12 And seven months shall the house of Israel be burying of them, that they may cleanse the land.
13 Yea, all the people of the land shall bury them; and it shall be to them a renown the day that I shall be glorified, saith the Lord GOD.
14 And they shall sever out men of continual employment, passing through the land to bury with the passengers those that remain upon the face of the earth, to cleanse it: after the end of seven months shall they search.
15 And the passengers that pass through the land, when any seeth a mans bone, then shall he set up a sign by it, till the buriers have buried it in the valley of Hamongog.
The remnants of a nuclear battle, marking contaminated bones for the hired professionals to clean up. Waiting seven months before beginning the process. Amazing use of an ancient language.
Of course, I won't ask these questions because it would be bound to offend someone on either side.
I just don't get it. One who is new to this can't participate, he'll get shouted down by one side or the other or the thread will get pulled.
In the end it just turns one off to both arguments.
Why is it that important?
I'm talking to myself here. Seriously. This is the way I prefer it. I will not hit the abuse button on myself. I cannot complain about what I say. I cannot upset anyone if I am only talking to me.
Please don't bother replying. It's not welcome...
I like this person's screen name! Not talking to anyone, just myself. No need for response.
From post 381: "You may not think so, but it does. In the scientific circles in which I travel, the presence of creationists among the conservative movement is the single most effective intellectual bludgeon against conservatism. "
Now, since Republican party is supposed to be conservative, then this statement clearly says that Christians (who hold to the truth of Gen 1), are bringing down the republican party, or are a "bludgeon against conservatism".
The terms "creationist" and "Christians" are not mutually exclusive.
Not all who call themselves "Christian" are truly Christian. .Just as there are RINO's, likewise there are Christians in name only. Those who deny much of scripture are questionable Christians.
Many people believe that God created the Universe billions of years ago, and all life in the Universe is both created and evolved.
I agree, many do believe evolution pseudo-science. Some are Christians who buy into the lie, and others are not really Christians.
So, it's not all black or all white. We don't need to be at each others' throats all the time.
True....why not explain that to those on the evo side who consistently mock and belittle Christians who don't buy into the lie?
So, I guess you are saying those who hold to Gen 1 are not Christians, but "anti-evos"? Well, we certainly disagree on that one. And, I have no problem with real biology, geology, etc. Where many Christians have a problem is when the evolutionary subset of these disciplines are assumed fact without real evidence.
[Ich]I haven't seen any, perhaps we're reading them differently. Could you point out one that you think is an example of what you describe?
See posts 338, and 448....those posts clearly make that claim(for Christians who hold to Gen 1)
What about evolution do you consider a "lie"?
You don't see these as attacks on Freepers who accept evolution?
Yes...i have seen such attacks....but the vast majority have been from the evo side of the debate. Until the management FAIRLY enforces the rules, then this will never change. In fact, after this post i probably will stop posting....who needs this "debate"? the management has been successful in driving off some good people. Before long all that will be left are soft conservatives and wacko's.
Meanwhile, one of the few posters who wanted to talk science gets banned. -Me
I disagree that he "wanted to talk science". Instead, he wanted to denigrate science, most often by posting unsupported (and unsupportable) claims which were easily refuted, then avoiding attempts to get him to either support or retract them.
We disagree....Gore3000 was continually attacked when his arguments could NOT be refuted. A prime example is in genetics...a huge problem for the idea of macro-evolution. Ignoring the problem will not make it go away. But, as has recently been seen, banning the Christian will make it easier to "win" the argument.
These threads won't last long when you are debating among yourselves.
If I were to be buried (which I will not be), you can write on my tombstone "Wasn't Impressed". I'm not. I wasn't as a child. I don't look to suddenly be in the future.
This world could easily be so much better. That it is not is an indictment. On who? On what? Why does it matter? It's not. That's what matters to me. We can't even get people to not talk in the movie theaters. And you know what? That one thing is what I use to judge all humanity. Forget the wars, the suffering, the human triumphs. We can put a man on the moon but we can't get everybody to shut up when the movie is playing the cinema even though everybody knows it's rude to chat during the film.
If people cannot extend the simple courtesy to their fellow man to keep their trap shut during the 2 hours of a film, why should I expect more from them outside the cinema? Well, the simple answer is- I don't.
I don't believe man is a rational being. There is no evidence for such. There is ample evidence to believe I am a member of a species that is inherently irrational but given to brief moments of sanity. This is worse than being 100% irrational all the time. It is like being sighted for 10 minutes per day and blind the rest of the time.
It is difficult to have a discussion with anyone. Within two minutes, factions form, infighting ensues and people become more interested in being victorious than with the truth itself. I am just as guilty of this as anyone and because of this I am even less impressed with the world than I would be if I were on a "holier than thou" trip. My own guilt damns the world further in my eyes.
At any rate, I wouldn't try to read to much into my screen name. It describes me, but not in the way some would at first think.
I would just like to know what the point of these threads are but will not ask because I will not get an honest answer- from anyone. To simply ask the question is to get stereotyped. To simply ask any number of questions is to get placed into a ghetto of thought. I won't bother.
Well, banned ARIC2000...consider this my last post to you. I do this in honor of another banned poster (gore3000) who I know will not sneak back onto FR after being banned. You may have fooled the management, but not those of us who have put up with your rants for a year or so.
Now to your post: First, please provide your source that %95 of Christians believe evolution.
Second, show me where i said " only true christians believe Genesis". good luck.
"...evolution pseudo-science. Some are Christians who buy into the lie, and others are not really Christians...explain that to those on the evo side who consistently mock and belittle Christians who don't buy into the lie?
Your claims don't stand the test of logic. The only Christians being mocked and belittled are those that acknowledge the fact that God is logical and is truthful. The science is sound and it does not contradict what was written. The only things science contradicts is what you claim is the meaning of what was written.
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.