It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 6:29 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Creationists launch "peer reviewed" journal...
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:21 pm 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:50 pm
Posts: 364
Location: Syracuse, Ny
I think this belongs more in science than religion because my argument is against the science and not the religion.

So, you can view the journal for free and after reading just one article, ive realized its all bullshit. I dont study microbes (although im presently taking invertebrate zoology, and I have studied photosynthetic protozoa in the past) and I can still tell this is bullshit.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v1/n1/microbes-days-of-creation

Quote:
I once believed that all microbes were simply created on Day Three—with all the plants (and seed-bearing life). The Bible says,

And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good (Genesis 1:11–12).

Some Bible commentaries have implied their creation on this day because bacteria and fungi were long classified in the plant kingdom.


Its a pity it turns out bacteria are in their own kingdom and fungi are more related to animals!

Quote:
Upon further reflection on the origin of microbes, I realized that not all microbes could be classified as “seed-bearing” life, like plants, cyanobacteria, or photosynthetic bacteria.


Last I checked, photosynthetic bacteria ARE cyanobacteria. Why the redundancy?

And they are not plants OR seed bearing. WTF?

Im 100% certain their goal is to only confuse those with little or no knowledge of science because their material is so completely flawed. I find it utterly disgraceful to call this science. Someone should file a lawsuit against these assholes or something.


I cant handle any more reading, so ill leave it here.

_________________
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." -- THOMAS PAINE


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 2:28 am 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:42 am
Posts: 2046
Location: Surprise, AZ USA
Who the fuck are the peers? Other morons that think the Bible is a history and science text? NYGG you're right this is pure bullshit of the purest form. My problem with this kind of stinking garbage is there are too many (even one is too many) boards of education across the country that will buy into this crap. Parents and reasonable thinking citizens need to be ready to slap this shit down when it rears its ugly head in your local school board. Be rest assured it will—the surviving Repugs have already stated they can't believe in evolution.

_________________
I'm not a member of any organized party. I'm a Democrat.”-Will Rogers

A Proud Liberal...This Day in History...Namnesia Antidote


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:09 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Family values are proving to be without the substance to hold it together. Perhaps the creator as they are moot at calling their god, should have created Family Values with microbes and other checks to explain its formation as well.

The argument is pathetic and like you said a stretch indeed to prove. But just publishing it is enough to convince those who would be so easily duped as by the bible or politics in America. The two seem lockstepped together as they create a new course of belief for the children. Like I keep saying, what's wrong with teaching the truth so lies have no place to hide in schools. Social control goes to mind and thought control too!

Quote:
From the beginning, God made His creation fully mature, and complex forms fully formed. This would ensure continuity and stability for the times to come. Although we cannot be certain as to specifically when the Creator made microbes, it is within His character to make entire interwoven, “packaged” systems to sustain and maintain life.
How convenient- no more chicken or egg paradigm, no more looking at the creation as less than truth. Same old arguments with a scientific explanation. So much for faith being enough. Science has forced them to be more authentic and valid- when nothing one believes can be true without proof, religion has an edge - a sketchy at best description of evolution that can be interpreted to be anything they want it to be- the flavor of the week so to speak. Great that he illustrates that so well.

Quote:
Most microbes are beneficial to man and nature. Only about 5–10% of all bacteria are pathogenic. Many microbes live in a mutualistic relationship with plants, animals, humans, and other microbes. Mutualism is a type of symbiosis (Greek sym, meaning “together”, and bios, meaning “life”). The term symbiosis is used to describe an intimate association between organisms of different species. Some symbiotic relationships between microbes and plants, animals, and humans are essential for life on earth. For this reason most microbiologists maintain that bacteria, fungi, protists, and other microbes have been maligned in the news media. Without our intestinal flora, we would not digest food nor acquire vitamins and minerals very efficiently. Without fungi, bacteria, algae, and protozoans, life on earth could not last. This is because microbes provide essential “services” (e.g., nitrogen fixation, nitrification, and denitrification) in nutrient cycles.

The Days of Creation
On each day of creation, God wrought a plethora of wonders, and each day’s work perfectly complemented the other (MacArthur 2001). God created the earth with its untold living marvels out of nothing. Three days out of six, He made living (biologically speaking) things. You may recall the creation of life in three distinct days from the Genesis account (table 1).
Gee, those same microbes in the stomach, which number greater than the stars above, are the catalyist to our own breakdown after we die, so what we use for life, continues after we die to help us to continue the evolutionary cycle by breaking us down to feed the various lifeforms that inhabit the earth- that we share so much in common with. We are imitating life, as life is so much a part of us and we're so much a part of it as well, that the two are basically indistinguishable, save for small changes in our shared genomes.

Our link to this earth as our creator are indiscernible with the stuff of life found throughout the earth and so we can't prove whether he is lying or making this up, since the fact that we are inseperable from the micro world which helped form us through uncountable eons of time. Once again vague deception based on uncertainties has us guessing again; some of us anyway seem to like the guessing more than others and would rather believe our wishes than our reality. It just belies the way we treat each other if we believe we are created and not part of this biosphere, sharing our growth with each other rather than individually important in our creators eyes.

This is another stab at religion trying to bridge the gaps between belief as written and empirical evidence that contradicts. Attempt like this are no different than trying to put dinosaurs with us at creation time like Ken Ham is trying to do. When what you believe doesn't jive with reality, there are always those out there who think what they believe is more important than reality, so making it up and presenting it to ignorant people who only see and hear what they want to believe and go no further, does reach a high percentage of Americans that believe that when there is a contradiction between the bible and reality, the bible holds the day. Percentages like this may even reach 50%! :roll:

If you can be told what to see or read....then it follows that you can be told what to think or say. Most people are taught from birth this axiom and it works for the powers that be to keep it that way. Why complicate this experience when parents, teachers, priests, politicians and peers are telling you that it is alright, in fact perfectly normal and preferred to be ignorant than informed. :roll:

Is America on a collision course for total mind control that would make Russia look like a free society under Stalin? It seems extremism is the rule of dictators and the day may come when this is dictated to the masses, while the elites will own the dangerous information to spin their myths better on us.

The days of HIGH authority of our lord seems to be arriving faster than we can counter it!

Thanks for the latest on this GG and keep your science eye sharp for us. These Theo-cons must be stopped and made accountable for their lies.

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:27 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
A Proud Liberal wrote:
Who the fuck are the peers? .


That was a misspelling. It was a pier review. Otis Redding checked it out while sittin' on the dock of the bay watching the tide roll away.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:08 pm 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:50 pm
Posts: 364
Location: Syracuse, Ny
Quote:
Upon further reflection on the origin of microbes, I realized that not all microbes could be classified as “seed-bearing” life, like plants, cyanobacteria, or photosynthetic bacteria. This led me to the conclusion that the Creator probably created animal-like (nonphotosynthetic) microbes on Days Five and Six. In this model, God created individual microbes in discrete packages on several days (i.e., the plant-like microbes on Day Three, the animal-like microbes with the animals, etc., on Days Five and Six). Each bacteria, fungi, and protozoan “kind” was made individually on Days Three, Five, and Six, just like plants, animals, and humans.


Ok, fungi are much more related to animals than plants. However, the author claims plant on day 3. Now, there is a problem with this. Over 90% of plant require a mycorrhizal symbiont. Its well accepted the first plants had, and required the fungal symbiont.

But how can this be if they came AFTER the plants?

But later, he claims that the fungus came WITH the plants?

What I also dont get is why did god make plants that require these symbionts? This is another flaw with creationsim, it doesnt offer any real explanation. It is all a random, jumbled mess. Its not until we understand evolution that all of biology makes sense.

_________________
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." -- THOMAS PAINE


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:46 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Quote:
Its not until we understand evolution that all of biology makes sense.
I guess the corollary to this would be that if we don't want to understand evolution, then we will grab whatever plausible idea that makes sense to us- whether it's true or not.

Nature has made a science class out of making things work better and your description of the earliest plants having different symbionts from later ones probably is an example of this as nature learned to Keep It Simple Smart and make their improvements more efficiently symbiotic.

Never realized fungi were closer to animals than plants- should take a closer look at the tree of life again.

We're lucky to have you to explain it to us as most people wouldn't have this information or even understand what the functuion of a symbiont does. That there were earlier plants wouldn't be considered, as evolution wouldn't be considered by a creationist and a young mind would be led down the road of deception believing that all they are told is the gods
honest truth. :roll:

We'd know it was wrong but unable to locate the exact point of deviation would make us raving lunatics just like the fundies, until we sound just like them from the other side of the fence! This is what they want and what they expect us to be like. Divided and ignorant. Now I can focus on your explanation and begin to work out how plants stay alive at the different levels- and how they depend on each level for optimum growth, thus learning about the marvels of the natural world.

Seems so much simpler and time efficient if one just believes. Gives you more time to marvel at gods mysteries and whatever other things fundies discuss to pass the time. Perhaps the main part of their lives should be in doing the same kind of detailed research to their scripture that science is expected to do, to learn to read between the lines when they piece together the evolution of the history that is presented, without the phony god crap to taint the stories. Makes for so much confusion to the way the world really developed.

Tampering with reality seems to be a common trait that way though.

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 3:52 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
DO.g's wrote:
Nature has made a science class out of making things work better ...


..or not.

Seems that if nature had done it's job "of making things work better", things would be better by now.

Judging myself, I'm not that impressed by the job nature has done.

Hey nature, get your act together and fix this shit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 4:17 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
It has one thing we don't have- time- to make things just right. If you had the time, I'm sure she'd show you too. But looks like we have to suffer through this phase for a while longer- you know- :lol: our retarded leader phase. :lol:

In most symbioses between plants and fungi sex is repressed in the fungal partner. In the notable exception of ectomycorrhizal symbioses, however, both partners frequently reproduce sexually. A possible role of spores is to function as vectors of genomic purging and recombination back to existing parental or to closely related mycelium.

Did god plan the sexual habits of these species as well not to act certain ways, especially if the believers find out the degree of sexual conduct and what types of sex these symbiotes are engaging in? The lust- the shame!

It's always been about controlling sex. I guess they haven't thought of that aspect or else there would be laws about it. Sounds so AC/DC doesn't it, all this talk of repressed sexuality between certain partners.

I found this article on Interactions between Plants and Fungi: the Evolution of their Parasitic and Symbiotic Relations. Don't know if it will add to the explanation or not.

http://www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/e33/33.htm

Quote:
Fungi are no plants. They can, just like plants (Plantae) and animals (Animalia), be classified as an original kingdom, that has, like the other two, developed from eucaryotic, single-celled protists (kingdom: Protista). Plants and most fungi share no common homologous structures besides those already conserved at the level of protists. These are:

the existence of nuclei, the condensation of DNA with the help of histones, and
the presence of actin and tubuline (and thus also of amoeboid movements of cells and of flagellar movements).


Both plant and fungal cells are enclosed by a cell wall while animal cells have no such characteristic. This is true, and cell walls exist in prokaryotes (bacteria, blue-green algae), too. The walls of all three mentioned kingdoms have, nevertheless, different molecular compositions (they contain different molecular classes), their biosynthetic pathways and the way of their cellular growths are different. They are therefore not homologous.

Alterations of generations are known both in the plant and the fungal kingdom, that of fungi is similar to some that of some red algae. This is true, too, but alterations of generations occur also in the animal kingdom (with coelenterates, for example). In addition, it is known today that the phenomenon ‘alteration of generation’ has developed several times independently in the plant kingdom alone.

Plants and fungi are sessile, animals (usually) mobile. When referring to ARISTOTLE, corals and see anemones would have to be counted among plants, too.
======================<snip>====================
The neighbourhood of algae and fungi in an aquatic environment is obviously of advantage only for the fungi, but the situation in terrestrial biotopes is changed. Fungi are especially common in the two uppermost soil layers (horizons A and B). The colonization of soils may originally have occurred after the dying of organisms left a sediment at the ground of inshore waters where fungi and bacteria settled. These nutrient-rich layers reached the earth’s surface by drying up or silting up of the inshore water. They became the biotopes of the first ‘terrestrial’ fungi. Algae had at first only limited chances to survive, since they are dependent both on water and light. Light was available only in the uppermost, only a few millimetre thick layer where also the danger of drying out was greatest. In order to survive ashore, two different evolutionary strategies developed:

1) The evolution of protections against drying out: multicellularity, development of strengthening elements, upright growth, etc. In short, vascular plants developed.

2) Associations between single-celled algae and fungi formed. This strategy ( a symbiosis) led to the evolution of lichens.

Vascular plants consist usually of a shoot above ground and an underground root. The latter competes at least partially with the mycelium of fungi (the network consisting of hyphae) for nutriments. Both have nevertheless ecological niches, since plant roots absorb primarily water with dissolved minerals, while fungi absorb water with dissolved organic compounds as well as minerals. A combining and thus a co-operation of plant roots and mycelium of fungi (mycorrhiza) may therefore lead to an optimal usage of nutriment resources. Mycorrhizas are a classic textbook example of a symbiosis, i.e. of a co-existence that is of advantage for both partners. Shoots above ground profit only exceptionally directly from the presence of fungi. A relation between fungi and plant above ground is therefore usually of parasitic nature.
I think I even understand what is trying to be explained here. Development was mutual and beneficial to ensure longer life, which in turn guaranteed their survival as a new speciesby expanding their food choices and water uptsake methods and retention. Enough in this little blurb to shut this so called scientist up and question his conclusions about fungal plant symbiotes. Do you know if he was actually a botanist before he became a disciple of whatever he believes?

Gods plan explained so simply. No need for active participation, he just had to spark it up then sit there and watch it happen. But he had the time to do it. We don't, so we find it hard to fathom anything but a fast solution.... some 4-6,000 years ago......when time began....fossils and dinosaurs hadn't turned to stone yet....the Flintstones were just moving into Bedrock... :roll: :wink:

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 1:50 pm 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:50 pm
Posts: 364
Location: Syracuse, Ny
Well, as for the relationship of fungi to animals is this. Ill start with an illustration.
[img]
http://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2008 ... 112642.jpg
[/img]

Thats the most recent "Tree of life" (For eukaryotes).

Now, it looks a whole lot different than it did when we were growing up! And through the years, these relationships have fascinated me. (which is why Im going in to systematics).

Fungi were long classified AS plants that didnt photosynthesize! Like you said, they dont move, they have cell walls, etc....

You see in the new classification, it says unikont, which is a part of the larger group called Opisthokonts. Thats what we are. The uniting elements? A singular posterior flagellum. Yes, even we humans still have this feature. In our sperm.

However, thats not where the similarities with animals end. Fungus are heterotrops. They cant make their own food, they have to get carbon from biological sources. They also have a cell wall made of chitin. Know what else has this? Insects. Their exoskeletons are made of chitin and plants use cellulose.

Also, fungi are HUGE parasites. For every single insect out there, there is a fungal pathogen. THATS a lot of fungus!

_________________
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." -- THOMAS PAINE


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 10:09 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Wow the tree of life has changed considerably hasn't it. Looks like we're viewing it from above downwards and the black dot in the middle must be the stuff of life we all share. most interesting what is in our immediate family and seperate from our "cousins".

Insects, fungi and humans are all related eh? This is great- whenever you post something, I can go out and find it exactly like you described it. Thanks loads.

Here's another picture of the tree of life I found-

http://stri.discoverlife.org/mp/20m?tre ... ts&res=640

A little more descriptive than yours, but totally different from past pictures I've seen. Hows this for the definition of life-

Quote:
LIFE- The monophyletic group that includes all known living organisms. Characterized by a nucleic-acid based genetic system (DNA or RNA), metabolism, and cellular structure. Some parasitic forms, such as viruses, have secondarily lost some of these features and rely on the cellular environment of their host.
Cool the way you can go to a symbol or name and follow the story. Flagellates define us as common to each other. Those pesky little swimmers.

The creator must have had contingency plans or perhaps the old try it and see if it works did produce such things as viruses and duck billed platypus' but I think nature makes no mistakes, just things that don't adapt quick enough for changes, like dinosaurs.

Of course we do have their only living example here on earth now. Well, sometimes they're on the earth. Sometimes they're flying through the air until we catch them too! (Achoo). Pesky bugs.

Find this one-
Quote:
Choanozoa -- choanoflagellates -- Unicellular eukaryotes with a single flagellum surrounded by a collar. Most are sessile, some are colonial. The closest living relatives of the animals
Our first cousins? Very interesting and informative.

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:20 pm 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:50 pm
Posts: 364
Location: Syracuse, Ny
DO.g's wrote:

Find this one-
Quote:
Choanozoa -- choanoflagellates -- Unicellular eukaryotes with a single flagellum surrounded by a collar. Most are sessile, some are colonial. The closest living relatives of the animals
Our first cousins? Very interesting and informative.


Well, if you put a bunch of choanoflagellates together, you get the first "animal", a sponge! In the sponges, you get some minor specialization/variation among the cells. You have the pore cells that make the pores, the collar cells which create the current, the amebiod cells which digest/absorb food, mesenchyme cells which create the skeleton (SiO in deep ocean and CaCO3 in shallow waters, you know why?) and the reproductive cells.

However, some have contested the individuality of sponges and claimed they are just colonial. As for me, im still a fence sitter.

_________________
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." -- THOMAS PAINE


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 4:29 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
I found this site with the tree of life explained with writings and pictures which could keep one busy for days trying to figure it out.

http://www.tolweb.org/tree/

Quote:
The Tree of Life Web Project (ToL) is a collaborative effort of biologists from around the world. On more than 9000 World Wide Web pages, the project provides information about the diversity of organisms on Earth, their evolutionary history (phylogeny), and characteristics.

Each page contains information about a particular group of organisms (e.g., echinoderms, tyrannosaurs, phlox flowers, cephalopods, club fungi, or the salamanderfish of Western Australia). ToL pages are linked one to another hierarchically, in the form of the evolutionary tree of life. Starting with the root of all Life on Earth and moving out along diverging branches to individual species, the structure of the ToL project thus illustrates the genetic connections between all living things.

read more about the Tree of Life Web Project...


Just punch up the picture of your choice from the root to the leaves and read. Will help to comprehend the complexity of how life as we see it today went through its changes. Viruses are there but excluded as being life, for now anyway.

http://www.tolweb.org/tree/home.pages/abouttol.html
Quote:
About the Tree of Life Web Project
The Tree of Life Web Project is a collection of information about biodiversity compiled collaboratively by hundreds of expert and amateur contributors. Its goal is to contain a page with pictures, text, and other information for every species and for each group of organisms, living or extinct. Connections between Tree of Life web pages follow phylogenetic branching patterns between groups of organisms, so visitors can browse the hierarchy of life and learn about phylogeny and evolution as well as the characteristics of individual groups.

For background information about the Tree of Life Web Project, see this article in the special issue of the journal Zootaxa, Linnaeus Tercentenary: Progress in Invertebrate Taxonomy:

Maddison, D. R., K.-S. Schulz, and W. P. Maddison. 2007. The Tree of Life Web Project. Pages 19-40 in: Zhang, Z.-Q. & Shear, W.A., eds. Linnaeus Tercentenary: Progress in Invertebrate Taxonomy. Zootaxa 1668:1-766. Open Access: Abstract (PDF; 20KB) | Full article (PDF; 830KB)

Here's an overview of the Tree of Life content:


Maybe this will help us to understand the complexity that NYGG presents to us and understand better the challenge he has to inform us group of nitwits. This site will keep me searching for hours.

Sponges and Nigerans- are we related to these early forms directly? One had the first stomach and one had the first mobility. A walking stomach in the sea- all we were missing was the plumbing for watering and laying waste on the dry land. Phylogeny- what can you say about it? It just keeps progressing and branching out because it has one thing in common?

http://www.tolweb.org/tree/learn/concep ... ogeny.html
Quote:
Biologists estimate that there are about 5 to 100 million species of organisms living on Earth today. Evidence from morphological, biochemical, and gene sequence data suggests that all organisms on Earth are genetically related, and the genealogical relationships of living things can be represented by a vast evolutionary tree, the Tree of Life. The Tree of Life then represents the phylogeny of organisms, i. e., the history of organismal lineages as they change through time. It implies that different species arise from previous forms via descent, and that all organisms, from the smallest microbe to the largest plants and vertebrates, are connected by the passage of genes along the branches of the phylogenetic tree that links all of Life


I can see why Greenie tells us how difficult it is to give us the short answer to this complex issue, so I feel it is up to us to help him by doing the research on our end to help him to explain what we should be looking for to help us understand him.

Seems fair that he shouldn't do all the work, but help us to look in the right places. Once we have the best picture of this put together in the simplest form we can, we should have a sticky in religion and science highlighting the facts as we have learned them, with full acknowledgement for what NYGG has given us- a chance to understand this complex issue called life from its inception to our present environmental challenges that our progress on earth has done to our home, or how our evolution goes contrary to the way life progressed for billions of years.

Quote:
Studying the phylogeny of organisms can help us explain similarities and differences among plants, animals, and microorganisms. The Tree of Life thus provides a rigorous framework to guide research in all biological subdisciplines, and it is therefore an ideal model for the organization of biological knowledge.


Our religion devolution is not the solution to our present confusion! A return to evolution as a solution to so much pollution from human religion devolution might ease our confusion. 'Nuff said.

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:12 am 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 8:50 pm
Posts: 364
Location: Syracuse, Ny
DO.g's wrote:
I found this site with the tree of life explained with writings and pictures which could keep one busy for days trying to figure it out.

http://www.tolweb.org/tree/
A wonderful website ive visited many times!
Quote:
This site will keep me searching for hours.
Seriously!

Quote:
Sponges and Nigerans- are we related to these early forms directly?
Directly? That depends. But go back far enough an were all related. Plants, bacteria, mushrooms, republicans.

Nigerans? I think you meant Cnidarians. Spell checker i presume. lol
Quote:

One had the first stomach and one had the first mobility. A walking stomach in the sea- all we were missing was the plumbing for watering and laying waste on the dry land. Phylogeny- what can you say about it? It just keeps progressing and branching out because it has one thing in common?
Phylogeny, my specialty. I could talk all day about it! But yes, most of the branches branch with a unique morphological characteristic. Here is a sample cladogram:
Image

However, classifying my morphological characteristics alone is becoming less common, and accepted. Now we are classifying with genetics as well. Its a great big debate which is better (im for both) but if you want me to go more into systematics and such, i will.




Quote:
I can see why Greenie tells us how difficult it is to give us the short answer to this complex issue, so I feel it is up to us to help him by doing the research on our end to help him to explain what we should be looking for to help us understand him.
Even I go cross-eyed looking at that tree.

Well, im aware my answers are sub-par but im tired as heck. Please feel free to ask questions, respond, or cuss me out for sucking. :)[/img]

_________________
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." -- THOMAS PAINE


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group