backtop


Print 42 comment(s) - last by lco45.. on Oct 22 at 1:37 AM


A newly discovered pterosaur is a missing link in the evolution of the flying dinosaurs. The beast has sharp pointy teeth and jaws like more modern species, but a tail and hind legs like older species.  (Source: Lü Junchang/Geological Institute, Beijing)

An artist's rendition shows the aerial predator attacking an early bird.  (Source: Mark Witton/Univ. of Portsmouth)
Another great paleontological discovery hits, this time a former master of the skies

The pterosaur family of flying reptiles, often referred to as pterodactyls, used to rule the skies.  Like the eagles of today, only on a much larger scale, some pterodactyl species terrorized prey both on the ground and in the air.  Other species feasted on fish, much like today's pelicans, or subsisted on insects, like today's bats.

The past few weeks have been packed with groundbreaking announcements in the field of paleontology.  A new T-Rex ancestor was found; and in Africa, the earliest hominid species was found.  Now yet another breakthrough fossil find has been catalogued, and this time it's none other than the pterodactyl.

The newly discovered pterodactyl has been named Darwinopterus (for “Darwin’s wing”).  It was found in China earlier this year when approximately 20 skeletons were uncovered.  The skeletons revealed a creature that lived 160 million years ago, according to dating methods, and serves as a long-predicted Frankenstein-like link between more ancient pterosaur species and more modern ones.

Ancient pterosaurs had a long tail and tend to be smaller.  More recent pterosaurs, such as those found in the Cretaceous era, had short tails and some species could reach mammoth sizes. 

The recent find features a mix of these features, with a tail and hind legs like the older pterosaurs, but pointy teeth and a head/neck shape both almost identical to later species.  This indicates that at some future point along the evolutionary ladder the genes encoding tail elongation likely dropped out, but the reptile had evolved a body conducive to the change.  These conclusion lend credence to the controversial theory of modular evolution, which indicates that features evolve in chunks, due to selective forces.

Unlike pterosaurs to come, though, Darwinopterus was relatively small -- about the size of a large crow.  It's jaws suggest that it hunted like a hawk, snatching flying creatures like bugs. 

Dave Unwin of the University of Leicester in England, who coauthored a paper reporting the findings online October 14 in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, lauds the discovery as a freakish and unique find.  He states, "It’s as if someone said, ‘Let’s nail these two together and make a sort of chimera, that’ll really confuse everybody."

Lately the microbiology and genetics research fields have been getting ahead of the fossil records when it comes to evolution.  Now the roles are reversed and these fields must catch up to this discovery.  States Professor Unwin, "The great thing about Darwinopterus is that it’s an example of modular evolution. It provides hard evidence for that kind of pattern.  The challenge now is to find the genetic mechanism that would allow this to happen."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I sense a disruption in the force
By randomposter on 10/19/2009 12:06:49 PM , Rating: 2
Cue replies from the creationists in 3, 2, 1 ...




RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By Jellodyne on 10/19/2009 12:32:09 PM , Rating: 4
Hey, the more evidence that piles up, the more God's just trying to test their faith. Look how powerful God is to make SO MUCH EVIDENCE just as a test. I have no doubt they will pass.


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By MozeeToby on 10/19/2009 2:31:35 PM , Rating: 5
A man dies and reaches the Pearly Gates...

St Peter: Did you believe in dinosaurs?
Man: Obviously, with all those fossils lying around who wouldn't?
St Peter: Come on man, that's the oldest trick in the book. I can't believe you actually fell for it, God's been playing that one for 6000 years for crying out loud. Ha ha ha... well, off to hell for you then.


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By William Gaatjes on 10/19/2009 2:51:04 PM , Rating: 5
Give the man a 666.


By William Gaatjes on 10/19/2009 2:51:29 PM , Rating: 2
WOops, key got stuck :)


By inperfectdarkness on 10/21/2009 8:19:45 AM , Rating: 2
i only have one question:

what's the difference between a terradactyl and a petrodactyl?

honestly, i'd like to know. "terra" means earth, "petra" means rock and "petro" i guess for petroleum?

seriously...WTF is the difference?


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By cornelius785 on 10/19/2009 1:36:23 PM , Rating: 3
so you feel the need to provoke another thread to derail into a evolution vs. creationism? how nice of you. it'll only be probably hours before there is 100+ posts that will just be another flame war.


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By callmeroy on 10/19/2009 2:28:09 PM , Rating: 2
Hey I'll bite at this...

From a Christian and firm believer in God......

Anyone who doesn't think science is worth a damn, doesn't think evolution is real, doesn't think facts proven by math is real.......they aren't rational beings and are totally illogical in all regards ---- no matter if they "believe" or do not believe.

This has been my point from day one years ago when I first was ask the creationist v. evolution question.

Though I suppose there are "different kinds" of a creationist view points.

Mine isn't a challenge to prove God had a hand in creating things.......

its proving that he didn't start it. :)


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By RandallMoore on 10/19/09, Rating: -1
RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By FaaR on 10/19/2009 6:02:55 PM , Rating: 5
Why all the hostility, mate?

The guy hasn't done anything to deserve being called hypocrite in such a rude and abusive manner.

What's a much more interesting ponderance than the one you proffer is when a person admits to accepting the merits of science, mathematics and whatnot...well..what need for a god is there then? :P

Gods were originally created by man to explain the otherwise unexplainable, such as rain, lightning and thunder, the warmth of the sun and the stars in the sky, storms, rainbows, earthquakes, accidents, disease, birth and death and a host of other things.

Now we have a pretty good grasp of the reasons for all of the above. We are even starting to understand how life itself works, how a strand of DNA can create a new living organism simply out of a sequence of much simpler building blocks.

I fail to see the need for any gods at all in today's world, at least in a rational person's life. The only possible function they can serve is as a comfort blanket for the insecure, or as a bludgeon to be swung by the intolerant and narrow-minded...


By heffeque on 10/19/2009 6:11:57 PM , Rating: 2
"I fail to see the need for any gods at all in today's world, at least in a rational person's life. The only possible function they can serve is as a comfort blanket for the insecure, or as a bludgeon to be swung by the intolerant and narrow-minded..."

I think that you summed it up pretty nicely all by yourself ;-)


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By RandallMoore on 10/20/2009 5:05:13 PM , Rating: 2
I love how I can be accused of being hostile, rude, and most of all abusive for calling someone a hypocrite. You are a grade A idiot on more than one level.


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By FaaR on 10/21/2009 6:06:09 PM , Rating: 2
I think you just proved my point there, matey...

Maybe you tried to be funny or sarcastic, in which case you still proved my point. :P

Do you often communicate with your surroundings in such an stupendously uncivilized manner, or do you save it only for when you're online?


By heffeque on 10/19/2009 6:09:55 PM , Rating: 1
Actually yes... he IS a bit of a hypocrite, but at least he knows that science is the way to go, not some lame ass fictional novel about a Jewish zombie guy.
Everyone knows that Gandalf would kick Jesus Christ's ass.
Just go to the holy Tolkien book and check out the part were Gandalf fights a Balrog!
Does Jesus Christ fight any Balrogs? No.
That means that Gandalf pisses all over Jesus Christ, Mahoma, the Invisible Pink Unicorn and even the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

Go Gandalf, go!


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By lco45 on 10/19/2009 6:48:15 PM , Rating: 2
The big bang is utterly inexplicable, the cause will probably prove to be unknowable, so it is perfectly possible it was made by an all-powerful being.

The bible, however, has plenty of obvious mistakes, and looks like it was written by Hebrew tribal elders, not by an all-powerful being.

In other words, it is logical to believe in a God, but it is not logical to believe in the God of the bible.

Even if the universe was created by a God, it is not the Christian God, or Zeus or Ra or the Rainbow Serpent, or the God of any other man-made mythology.

Cheers all!

Luke


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By JS on 10/20/2009 6:26:30 AM , Rating: 2
"In other words, it is logical to believe in a God"

Why is it logical to assume that an all-powerful being created the universe just because we don't know how it happened?

500 years ago the causes of contagious disease were utterly inexplicable. That does not mean it was logical to assume God (or the Devil) was the cause (even though many did).

Read up on "God of the gaps".


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By lco45 on 10/20/2009 8:40:57 PM , Rating: 2
What I mean is that because the cause of the big bang may be unknowable it may be impossible to rule out creation as a possibility.

The creator may not be a "God", our whole universe might be a desktop experiment that runs for an hour during a lecture on "How to create universes", with our time accelerated to 25 billion year per hour so the class can see the whole thing unfold.

This lecturer, and the students, might even be humans of the future who create bubble universes for research to work out the best way to run their own, and our universe is just one of those bubbles.

My point is that the bible has obvious flaws and errors, so I don't believe the God described in the bible exists, however from a scientific standpoint it is perfectly reasonable that the universe has a creator, although that creator is not necessarily "all-powerful".

Luke


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By RandallMoore on 10/21/2009 12:37:24 AM , Rating: 2
What errors and flaws? All the supposed errors I have ever seen are people trying to interpret them as errors.

Show me one...


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By FaaR on 10/21/2009 6:26:41 PM , Rating: 2
Flaw:
The rainbow is supposedly a sign from the hebrew god he won't commit any more mass genocides by drowning all of mankind save for one family (as well as all land mammals - inexplicably - save for one pair).

However, rainbows are created by refraction of light in water droplets suspended in the air.

Our eyes also depend on refraction in order to focus properly.

Refraction is what colors the sky blue during clear days.

So if refraction as a concept did not exist until after the flood, not only was the sky black as midnight up until that point - which ought to have been worthy of a mention as well along with the rainbow methinks - but also the vision of every human and animal would have been a total blur... And THAT I think would have been somewhat more worthy of a mentioning rather than a silly rainbow.

Of course, the ancient hebrews knew nothing about refraction, or the mechanics behind it, which is why they did not understand the consequences had refraction not been around basically forever, and thus concocted their myth in more or less the form it is now.

The story of the flood follow countless other similar moral tales; it proposes that man did not obey the god(s), the gods dealt out punishment to dissuade further wickedness - not seldom ludicrous in its severity and form - and then offered a boon of some sort as a show of good faith. A parallel exist in for example when Prometheus stole fire from the Greek gods and gave to man, only to be punished by having an eagle eat his liver, repeatedly until rescued by Heracles...

Then we might mention the sheer unfeasibility of the earth's population being restored from just a few human beings - whom would have had to resort to incest I might add - especially when we KNOW there existed continuous and unbroken lines of civilization during this time period in other parts of the globe.

There's plenty of bogus stuff in the bible if you just use your brain. It simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny if interpreted literally. See it as a guideline if you want, not an accurate historical record, because it isn't an accurate historical record.


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By lco45 on 10/22/2009 1:37:20 AM , Rating: 2
Mate, I'll show you dozens:

Kangaroos.

The bible says all living things perished in the flood.

How did the kangaroos get from the landing place of the ark to Australia? Then die out everywhere else? Leaving no bones?

Now do the same for the other tens of thousands of Australia native species.
Even Hawaii has 8,800 species only found in Hawaii.
Tasmanian devils? Polar bears?

All races of humanity descended from Noah? Pygmies, Masai, Chinese, Australian aboriginal, Mayans, Inuits, Polynesians, Bangladeshi, Aztecs, Cossacks, the natives of Sumartra?

Noah's descendants became both Jews and Gentiles?

All the freshwater fish survived the flood?

The koalas on the ark had a supply of eucalyptus leaves to eat?

The delicate little poison dart frogs of the Amazon hopped from Ararat to South America?

The penguins trod water for 150 days?

The hummingbirds got nectar every three hours on the ark? There are hundreds of species, none native to the middle east.

Noah and his family carried every strain of disease now present in the human population? All the STDs? If not, where did they come from?

How come the ice cores don't show flood evidence? They have 120,000 layers, one for each year. You can use these layers to see when nuclear testing started, and even when the Romans first worked out how to smelt lead (the 2000 and somthing'th layer).

What happened to all the water? I calculated that the volume of water needed to cover Mt Everest from sea level would be sphere 1900km across (about 1200 miles).

Why do humans and apes share so much genetic material? There is a sequence of DNA dogs use to make their own Vitamin C. We have the same sequence but ours is damaged, so we need to eat Vitamin C. The same damage is present in the same sequence in us and the great apes, but is undamaged in other mammals.

What about the fossil record?

What about all the dating methods? Can they all be wrong? Are all the scientists participating in a giant conspiracy?

What about the observable age of the universe (13.7 billion years)? The age of the sun (5 billion years)?

Any one of these points highlights the fallibility of the bible, and its all-too-human authorship.

What about all the different religions? Only one of them can be right? Which is it? Why does every culture think it's theirs? Are you arguing that Ganesh is God? Why not?

The entire fields of paleontology, geology, cosmology, biology with hundreds of years of research, consolidation, corrections, scrutiny.

How can it be denied? To answer that I think the field of psychology might help. People seem able to deny anything that makes them uncomfortable or contradicts deeply held beliefs. People are able to deny the holocaust, the moon landings, anything they like. We are an interesting species all right...

Luke


RE: I sense a disruption in the force
By Flunk on 10/19/2009 10:30:56 PM , Rating: 2
It's hard to have a good argument when there aren't very many creationists around here. Considering the overall educated bent of this web site it's not really that unexpected.


Flying Reptile
By Jjoshua2 on 10/19/2009 10:59:11 AM , Rating: 1
Anyone else think its kind of weird to talk about a modern species of an extinct animal? I wish they gave more details about how they were found in China.

It sounds pretty similar to the old species. How different can sharp teeth and a more pointed jaw be?




RE: Flying Reptile
By Machinegear on 10/19/2009 11:05:56 AM , Rating: 2
RE: Flying Reptile
By Motamid on 10/19/2009 11:31:17 AM , Rating: 3
Interesting read, however keep in mind the timescale. This fossil is much older than those found of the larger pterosaurs and more recent than the smaller long-tailed ancestors. It would be very coincidental that the same species was found in a different state of growth for each time period. Different states of evolution is more likely, I would expect.


RE: Flying Reptile
By Reclaimer77 on 10/19/2009 1:52:18 PM , Rating: 2
My only problem with these "missing link" discoveries, like the one about humans a few weeks ago and this one, is why is there only one ?

If this were truly a Paradacktyle missing link, shouldn't there be a LOT more of them around ? Surely to cause a genetic change in the entire species there would have to be more than one or two mutated examples fossilized right ?

Honestly, how do we know these super rare, uncommon discoveries aren't just an isolated mutation ?


RE: Flying Reptile
By MozeeToby on 10/19/2009 2:26:56 PM , Rating: 3
Because the rate of fossilization is not 100% and of the remains that are fossilized not 100% survive to the preset. In fact, it's not even .001% at the kinds of ages we are talking about here.

Also, the hominid recently described is an exception. The research was done by looking at over a hundred fossilized examples of the homonid.


RE: Flying Reptile
By Reclaimer77 on 10/19/2009 2:51:25 PM , Rating: 2
We've found hundreds, maybe thousands, of intact dinosaurs though. So why is it that this "Arty" missing link, which roamed the early millions of years AFTER the dinosaurs, is the only fossil of it's kind ever found ?

It just doesn't make any sense. A "missing link" would have to be present in large numbers to effect a macroevolutionary change of an entire species. And yet we find one example and proclaim it to be fact. It's far more likely these are simply isolated mutations.

This is like digging up the elephant man, someone with Giganticism, and proclaiming it to be a missing link millions of years from now.


RE: Flying Reptile
By FaaR on 10/19/2009 6:10:48 PM , Rating: 1
If the chance of a fossilised specimen surviving to present day from more than 60M years ago is less than 0.001%, then it would be an astronomically tiny chance that a one-off mutation would be the specimen that survives and gets found. It just isn't a believable scenario you suggest.

It's much more likely that these things existed in large numbers, most of them did not die in a way that would lead to fossilization; this one did and we found it.

Also, do note that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. ;) Just because we only found one specimen (so far at least) doesn't mean there aren't any more to be found.

Remember, we've only found 11 or so T-rex skeletons; I assume you're not believing roughly a dozen of the beasties is all that ever existed! ;)


RE: Flying Reptile
By JediJeb on 10/19/2009 6:13:27 PM , Rating: 2
I can agree there. If some oddity of a species happens to be the lucky one that gets fossilized, then the whole study of that species would be driven far off track.

I see all these "missing links" found within species, but where are the cross species "missing links"? Where is the Reptamammal, or the Reptavian, or the Mamavian, ect? It is like the Reptiles disappeared and wham, the Mammals are on the scene.

The hardest part for me to grasp is the change from a one celled organisms to multi celled organisms. Did a bunch of cells just happen to come together and a few decide to become liver cells, some skin cells, some brain cells ect? How does such a thing become organized enough to stop reproducing asexually and start reproducing sexually? Is there any current evidence of multi celled creatures that reproduce by division instead of sexually? These are the questions that block my full acceptance of evolution. Evolution within a species I can see ( wolves into dogs of all breeds, different types of cats, Mammoths into Elephants, ect), but much harder to see the cross species evolution.


RE: Flying Reptile
By MozeeToby on 10/19/2009 7:35:54 PM , Rating: 2
Most of the 'missing links' you describe never existed, the ones that did exist have already been found, reptile and avian links are present all over the fossil record; feathered dinosaurs, large flightless birds, etc. Reptiles and mammals shared a common ancestor that looked like neither of them. The same goes for mammals and birds. Take it to the extreme and you'll see the fallacy more clearly: "Why isn't there a plant/human 'missing link'?" Because plants and humans diverged so long ago that the common ancestor is unrecognizable.

As for 'wham, the mammals are on the scene', they existed already alongside the dinosaurs in the form of small, shrew-like rodents. When the dinosaurs died out, there were a million ecological niches to be filled and being faster breeding than most of the other survivors, mammals filled a lot of them, with birds filling much of the rest.

Most likely, the original multi-celled creatures were the product of a failed fissioning (asexual reproduction) where the two offspring failed to fully seperate. If the failure was caused by a mutation of its DNA and the two joined bacteria were better able to survive than a single one alone it would quickly spread. Cell differentiation is just cells expressing different parts of their DNA based on environement, which would be slightly different for each cell in the now multi-cellular organism.

As for multicellular creatures that can reproduce asexually, there are millions. Every banana you've ever eaten comes from a tree that was produced asexually (normal bananas aren't very tasty, the banana we enjoy is actually a mutation that occured very recently). The same goes with seedless grapes and watermelon and countless other plants. As for animals, there are many species who can reproduce without a sexual partner, just recently, for example, it was discovered that some sharks can do so when they lack a mate. Not to mention many species that can literally 'fission' such as flatworms.

Finally, cross species evolution is nothing but evolution within species over a longer period of time. This is because a 'species' is really an artifical construct that we have come up with in order to explain the world, nature doesn't particularly respect it. Look at it this way, in a few thousand years, humans have, through artificial selection, turned a timber wolf that endurance hunts as a pack and turned it into a Chihuahua. That's a lot of change and it's in the blink of an eye in geological terms.


RE: Flying Reptile
By Flunk on 10/19/2009 10:34:22 PM , Rating: 2
Wait a sec there, the idea of macro/microevolution has been discredited for a long time. Evolution is a series of tiny little steps. Please do some research.


Exploitation...
By ThePooBurner on 10/19/2009 11:08:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The challenge now is to find the genetic mechanism that would allow this to happen.

So we can trigger it in ourselves and become X-Men. I personally look forward to gaining my new mutant powers. I promise to use them wisely and be a just and kind mutant overlord.




RE: Exploitation...
By William Gaatjes on 10/19/2009 12:59:20 PM , Rating: 2
How far are you willing to go ?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4558-pighuma...

quote:
Pigs grown from fetuses into which human stem cells were injected have surprised scientists by having cells in which the DNA from the two species is mixed at the most intimate level. It is the first time such fused cells have been seen in living creatures. The discovery could have serious implications for xenotransplantation - the use of animal tissue and organs in humans - and even the origin of diseases such as HIV. The adult pigs that had received human stem cells as fetuses were found to have pig cells, human cells and the hybrid cells in their blood and organs. "What we found was completely unexpected. We found that the human and pig cells had totally fused in the animals' bodies," said Jeffrey Platt, director of the Mayo Clinic Transplantation Biology Program. Nuclear mix The hybrid cells had both human and pig surface markers. But, most surprisingly, the hybrid cell nuclei were found to have chromosomal DNA that contained both human and pig genes. The researchers found that about 60 per cent of the animals' non-pig cells were hybrids, with the remainder being fully human. Importantly, the team also found that porcine endogenous retrovirus (PERV), which is present in almost all pigs, was also present in the hybrid cells. Previous laboratory work has shown that while PERVs in pig cells cannot infect human cells, those in hybrid cells can. The discovery therefore suggests a serious potential problem for xenotransplantation. The work also suggests a possible route of infection for other viruses that have crossed from animals to humans .


quote:
In Platt's experiments, the human stem cells were injected into the pig fetuses about a third of the way through gestation. In Zanjani's work, the cells were injected about halfway through. The injections must be given after the body plan of the fetus has developed, but before the immune system is active. The former ensures the animals look like normal pigs and sheep. The latter prevents the human stem cells being rejected.


I am willing to bet that nature does this all the time with viruses and bacteria and complex cells like eukaryotes sharing DNA. Although the eukaryotes not really share their dna willingly and voluntary. Now if this happened at the right time with the right DNA ?
The cells With the new dna would not be rejected.
To much and you get an outcast. To little and it makes no difference. From 1 cell or bacteria thousands of new viruses emerge. Some with a different set of genes.
In effect, nature is 1 big hippy festival. Share the love (DNA) everybody....

But this is all my opinion.



RE: Exploitation...
By puckalicious on 10/19/2009 1:37:01 PM , Rating: 2
"All I've ever wanted was to genetically engineer something useful. But I've failed. Perhaps we shouldn't be toying with God's creations. Perhaps we should just leave nature alone to it's simple one assed schematics."

- Mr. Mephisto


RE: Exploitation...
By William Gaatjes on 10/19/2009 1:55:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Perhaps we shouldn't be toying with God's creations.


Yes we do. Just not for profit or power. Bad karma... Because of greed, things will be forgotten and neglected.

quote:
Perhaps we should just leave nature alone to it's simple one assed schematics.


No we don't.


RE: Exploitation...
By Spookster on 10/19/2009 1:45:35 PM , Rating: 2
I find it interesting that the PERV is present in all pigs. I would just have assumed only male pigs were PERVs.


RE: Exploitation...
By William Gaatjes on 10/19/2009 1:56:37 PM , Rating: 2
You are such a Chauvinist. :)


Monsters
By snikt on 10/19/2009 12:27:28 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, Rodan!




RE: Monsters
By rippleyaliens on 10/19/2009 5:47:18 PM , Rating: 1
Actually with it all, it makes logical sense. When God said let their be light.. BOOM, hence the big boom.... The creation of starts, etc.. Created animals, BOOM the dinosaurs,, etc.. NOTICE the last thing created was MAN, hence the Humans are yet the youngest on the planet. Looking at it from a BIG scope, it actually all makes sense. Looking at it from a narrow time line, causes many discrepancies. 7 days to us is 168 hrs.. 7 days for God may be indeed BILLIONS of years.. it is not hard to phantom..

Even within the last 2000 years, humans have evolved ALOT considering what has happened in 2000 years.. LET alone 100Million years.. Our lives are but a snapshot in time compaired to the big picture.


RE: Monsters
By FaaR on 10/19/2009 6:21:54 PM , Rating: 2
The bible isn't logical, and the judeo-christian myth(s; there's actually two somewhat different versions in the bible) cannot be directly translated into a scientific timeline.

For example, there was a firmament (sky) before there was a sun and moon etc according to the bible. This is not the case according to science. :)

The bible myth is just that, and should not be interpreted literally because it isn't going to be able to mesh with reality. You must either twist and distort reality to fit the myth, or invent new reality in an attempt to make it encompass the myth. :)


RE: Monsters
By drmo on 10/20/2009 9:45:07 AM , Rating: 2
Some people say that the scientific evidence fits if you don't assume that a day=24 hours.

"For example, there was a firmament (sky) before there was a sun and moon etc according to the bible. This is not the case according to science. :)"

Basically Gen 1:1 says these were all created, and on the 4th day they were visible as lights in the sky, which does fit with what we know about planetary formation.

Read this:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/day-age.h...

All in all, considering that the creation part is a tiny fraction of the Bible, many people would not consider understanding it as being a major part.


RE: Monsters
By FaaR on 10/21/2009 6:35:41 PM , Rating: 2
...And some people say they've been kidnapped by aliens, or seen Elvis recently.

The bible creation myths don't fit scientific evidence even if you assume that a 'bible day' is longer than 24 hours. How could they? They were written millennia before science existed; the modern principles of understanding how the solar system formed hasn't been around even a century yet...

Basically, the sun and planets would not have first formed, and then not become visible until several "days" later. Also, at the time of creation, the Earth did not have any water on it, nor actually any surface at all (it was a ball of molten lava...) I believe most of the water did not arrive until later, in the form of comet impacts.


"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki