Some help with "a lack of dinosaurs post", please

Ahh... the reward of having had a PoTM!

(Luckily I spotted the message in my usenet-spam trap
account before the usual deletion of everything coming in....
or maybe not so lucky! Note that my "mbuhler" at
mail.usyd.edu.au account needs a very good subject line
if you want to get me to read it - for example, do NOT
say "Hey mbuhler...." to start the subject off. )

This is an e-mail I received a couple of days ago. I gave the
sender something of a reply immediately but asked if I could
use the knowledge of others here in this newsgroup to address
aspects that were outside my areas of interest. (i.e. most of it)

His return reply to me (not included here) asks some questions
about the immune system and if it could have evolved before any
microbes (since I had explained my interest was immunity), along
with more questions on "how many" transitionals between species
and the blind randomness of evolution. (I'm thinking just at this
moment that "selection" does not lead to blindly random evolution
since the survival itself adds something to the equation, but will
go into this at another time.) Some of these aspects will be
answered when I get to them, but for now I will look forward to
any comments you guys have on the questions in this email.

I would like to pass some reasonable comments back to the
author of the message in a couple of days.. links to some
T.O. FAQs and outside resources would be nice, as would
some clear prose on these issues.

Many thanks... (signed) marc


*************************
Hello,

I read your post of the month and was entertained. I did have a
question regarding time and numbers. That is the lack of numbers
in the span of time. My question is simple. The fossil record
has multiple "numbers" of the same animal representative...
Hadrosaurs, T-Rex, Coelocanth, etc. Not rare individuals,
but actual representative groups of a species.

Everyone is related by the numbers of genes that have evolved
and mutated over the multitude of years.

So, if a Chimpanzee for instance, with whom we share 95-97%
of our DNA is our closest living relative, there must have been a
species with whom we shared 99.999% of our DNA considering
the vast number of genes that make us "human" and something
else "non-human". And, that creature with whom modern humans
shared 99.999% of our DNA undoubtedly was a pretty advanced
lifeform...yet left no communication, artifacts, or fossils.

Plus, in addition, there must have existed another species with
whom we shared 99.993% of our DNA.... and a species with
whom we must have shared 98.749% of our DNA, etc and etc.

Where are the missing numbers of fossils and artifacts of our
anscestors? Is every fossil such a miraculous snapshot that
leaves less than 1% clue of the amount of life on earth at that
moment in the vastness of earth's history? If so, how can such
a miraculous occurance be strong enough evidence to support
the theory of evolution, yet the much vaster lack of the occurrance
of evidence too weak to be considered grounds for questioning?

The Allosaurus and the T-Rex were undoubtedly related, yet the
Allosaur had 3 taloned front limbs, and the T-Rex 2 taloned front
limbs. Between the two creatures must have been a multitude of
species with slightly different forelimbs and claws.... yet we have
many examples of Allosaurs and T-Rex's...and none of their
intermediaries... Why? The "rarity" of fossilization again? Whole
herds of triceratops have been found fossilized. Jellyfish fossils,
footprints, plant material.

It isn't the vast numbers.... it is the lack of them. If all the life
we currently see, along with all the life that formerly existed,
NONE of which are directly linked genus to genus, is 1% of
all the life that has ever been, under the theory of evolution,
either the rate of mutation is seriously low, or perhaps the
"tree of life" should be reexamined.

Regardless.... It isn't the incalculatable odds...the vastness of
the numbers on probability... It is the numbers that are too few.

Thanks for your consideration of my opinion and feedback. Unlike
many "scientists", I can admit I may be wrong.

**********************************

.

Relevant Pages

  • SPECULATIONS ON THE BEGINNINGS OF LIFE
    ... first, life originated deep in the Earth's crust, in water ... DNA/RNA systems since DNA chains, in the double helix form, are ... Third, in time, some species of DNA/RNA systems developed or evolved ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Homo erectus, city dweller and sailor
    ... DNA structure does not prove you are kin to a particular species. ... Sort of the 'Tree of Life', but with clades instead of branches. ... We share a much more recent common ancestor with other great apes; and can be considered, as I consider us, the 'third chimpanzee'; since we share a more recent common ancestor with the other two chimp species than we do with gorillas; and a more common ancestor with gorillas than with Old Men of the Forest. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Some help with "a lack of dinosaurs post", please
    ... but actual representative groups of a species. ... species with whom we shared 99.999% of our DNA considering ... Where are the missing numbers of fossils and artifacts of our ... If all the life ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Some help with "a lack of dinosaurs post", please
    ... but actual representative groups of a species. ... species with whom we shared 99.999% of our DNA considering ... Where are the missing numbers of fossils and artifacts of our ... If all the life ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Sector General Again
    ... species couldn't bridge the gap into a separately evolved species. ... even the second planet's life uses DNA. ... But then there are other microscopic parasites. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
Loading