The Official Perfection KOs Creationism Thread Part Four: The Genesis of Ire!

[Ali Zaybak]

But how many people who aren't already scientifically inclined read Gould or Hawking?

On the other hand, how many people who aren't already evangelicals listen to Hovind or Behe?

 

[El_Machinae]

It's amazing how charismatic many of these Creationists are. I've seen Behe in person, and though his ideas disgust me, you can't help but like the guy.

Charisma is a commonly important stat for cleric. And with prayers not actually working, they can dump wisdom.

I guess you can see why this stuff isn't my expertise

I wonder why turtles have such good vision...?

They don't have to stop to appreciate the roses. They can slowly mosey by the roses and get all the benefits we do.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Charisma is a commonly important stat for cleric. And with prayers not actually working, they can dump wisdom.

That's why I never put less than 10 in any stat - I don't want to play as an idiot, regardless of class.

 

[ironduck]

On the other hand, how many people who aren't already evangelicals listen to Hovind or Behe?

I don't think only evangelicals oppose the parts of science that don't fit them, that seems to be valid for other religious groups as well.. but anyway, if those who don't want to learn really don't want to learn it's difficult to do much. Cue every single creationist I've seen in these threads, none of them seem to have a wish to learn even though some of them state they do.

It's not limited to religion either, people oppose learning for all sorts of reasons and stick their fingers in their ears going la-la-la.

Changes in attitude usually happen on a personal or inter-personal level, I don't think many creationists are going to have their eyes opened listening to charismatic scientists simply because they have already decided not to listen in the first place.

Anyway, to answer your question, they speak to a select audience that desire their message, although people who are looking for something to believe in are always candidates to be converted.. converted into the belief that Adam and Eve snuggled up next to the harmless Tyrannosaurus Rex when they went to sleep at night

 

[ironduck]

That's why I never put less than 10 in any stat - I don't want to play as an idiot, regardless of class.

Um, eh?

 

[Perfection]

A little bit of RPG humor here

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I was answering El_Mac when he said,

Charisma is a commonly important stat for cleric. And with prayers not actually working, they can dump wisdom.

Dungeons and Dragons reference. terribly OT, I know.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Pah! Real D&Ders roll their stats.

And now I got this impluse to to put Hovind into a CoC campaign ...

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I only play computer games that just give you a lump sum to assign.

But yeah, this thread would make a great campaign.

 

[BasketCase]

The study of the evolutionary development of the human eye is really fascinating! I was reading a while ago that the reason that we developed such a great sense of colour had to do with the fact that we were voracious fruit-eaters.

The big problem with evolution is that it never keeps research notes.

Mother Nature tries out a whole lot of different variations, and most of the ones that work out well, are retained. We see what was retained--but we can pretty much only guess at the reasons why. We only get to see the results, not the process by which evolution arrived at them.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Charisma is a commonly important stat for cleric. And with prayers not actually working, they can dump wisdom.

Hey, I don't know about that; I have Miracle at will, the GM is just annoyingly strict with the "request" bit.

Back on topic...
*drags out SciAm*

Linky to article on color vision.

 

[carlosMM]

I am interested in knowing from you guys how fossils are formed. I am not interested in fossil placement yet. Although that could be my next question, I don't know yet. Right now I want to know how they are formed. Again, please do not point me to some link. Explain it to me in your own words.

also, you do not want to read a book. Well, I am sorry, but there is NO WAY anyone is going to explain how fossils are formed here in a post to any satisfying degree. Taphonomy, the part of paleontology that addresses that question, is a large area, including lots of chemistry, sedimentology, biology and so on. So you really should read a proper book.


But, you are lucky, you happen to have available here someone who gives courses in taphonomy. Someone willing to give you a quick fly-by of the most important aspects. Here is what I can do for you:



How fossils are formed

First, we need to get one thing clear: there are a huge number of different kinds of fossils. Not different plants and animals fossilized, but rather different way of how they became fossils. In this huge diversity, certin groups can be differentatied, for the ease of addressing. Note please that any classification will not be perfect - there will always be exceptions, fossils that do not quite fit the groups etc. That's the normal story when one tries to group things into easy-to-understnad groups.

The main groups we should distinguish are:

Body fossils
These are fossils where the actual material of the animal or plant is either still preserved, or has been dissolved and the space taken up by new material (usually either clastic sediments or crystals growing into the cavity, the latter then form a so-called pseudomorphosis into the form of the fossil).

Infills
In which the original material is gone and has not been replaced. Only the cavities within the e.g. shell are filled, usually with clastic sediment.

Un-filled cavities or impressions or natural casts are somewhat of a variant of the last group - essentially they are what's in the rock around an infill. For plant leaves, impressions are rule, except for rare circumstances. Wood is often preserved as a body fossil, though.

There are other ways to group fossils, e.g. on whether orignial chemical material is still present or not, what kind of chemcial reactions have taken place (very similar to 'what sediment are they in) etc.
But I prefer to regard fossils based on the fossilization processes as a whole. Basically, each fossil tells a story - a story of how it got into that lump of rock. It starts with the death of the animal or plant and then goes all then way through deposition, sedimentation, checmical alteration, erosion, preparation.


I'll give you two examples that show how complex and gripping a tale it can be. let us regard what has happen to a ammonites of the genus Dactylioceras in two places in southern Germany - two places that are less than 100km apart and are in the same time horizon (actually, the layer of rock is continuous between the two outcrops where they were found, and the character of the roch changes slowly when you follow it from one outcrop to the other).

Now, as you can see, the two look decidedly different.

OK, time now to finish this:


What ARE ammonites?
They are, simply speaking, squids with a shell around them. Closely related to Nautilius, which still exists today. Here are a few pics:

The living animal:

The shell:

A medial cut through the shell:

You can see that the shell consists of a large outer chamber (the animal lives in this chamber) and a number of smaller chambers in the middle, connected by a thin tube (the siphon). As gthe animal grows, it adds material to the edge of the shell, then adds a new sectioning wall, cutting off part of the living chamber. Rinse and repeat. So you get this row of chambers in the middle (together called the phragmokon). The shell itself consists of inner layers made from calcium carbonate (as calcite or aragonite), mixed with a low amount of protein tht dictates how the crystals grow, and a thin outer membrane called the periostracum, which is organic and can be coloured (the calcit/aragonite layers are white or mother of pearl).

What is this arrangement good for? The phragmokon chambers are filled with gas and some (little) water. Depnding on how much gas / water is pumped in through the siphon, the animal can control the lift created by it. And thus steer up and down in the water.

When the animal dies, the shell will drift a while and slowly fill with water after the naimal's body has decomposed. Then, it sinks to the ground and may get covered by sediment. If it doesn't get covered quickly, chances are it will be utterly dissolved. but let us assume it gets covered in time.

Now, usually, the shell is tight - it has only one opening (the siphon) into the inner part and thus cannot get filled with sediment. But as soon as the tiniest hole in the middle part develops, water can stream through and sediment is carried in. A bit like a house in a desert: as soon as you have a keyhole in one door and one in another, wind can go through and bring in sand and dust. If you have only one tiny opening, nothing gets blown in.

The one hsown here at the top got filled well. Then the sediment got somewhat hardened by cementation with calcium carbonate, and later the shell got dissolved. now, the rock was compressed and the shape of the external surface, with the ribs and all, was stamped onto the infill.



Contrast with with the second pic. This same ammonite got preserved a totally different way:

 

[carlosMM]

OK, here come a few nice pics.
Each is a thumbnail, clicking the link below it leads to the full size pic (warning, some are HUGE).

Ludwigia bradfordensis (Sauriermuseum Aathal, CH)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/31681/Ludwigia_bradfordensis.jpg

 

[Xanikk999]

That's why I never put less than 10 in any stat - I don't want to play as an idiot, regardless of class.

I agree! In neverwinter nights if your char has a INT score of 8 or lower he sounds like a ******.

Clerics need at least 14 or 15 starting wisdom IMO.

 

[brennan]

I agree! In neverwinter nights if your char has a INT score of 8 or lower he sounds like a ******.

Sooo stupid. On the 4-18 scale 8 is barely below average.

 

[ironduck]

Nice post Carlos

 

[peter grimes]

In the early '90s I read a book that really changed my view on 'The State of Science'. It looked at the proposition "Human Beings Are Special" from several different angles. The author laid out arguments For and Against in several different chapters.

For example, one chapter looked at the issue "Is life unique to earth?" Another one looked at what "intelligence" is. Other chapters dealt with AI; SETI; how Homo fits into the Tree of Life; etc.

The book is "Paradigms Lost" by John Casti. It's gone through several editions, and he's written an update; the original, though dated, is still incredibly helpful for anyone trying to get their mind around the limits of science. This book is a snapshot of how science actually works, and where it's solutions are strong, and where they are weak (at least, as of 1994!)

I love giving books away to people, and I've given this book to at least a dozen people over the years. If I can help one person realize how powerful science is at helping us understand how the world works, then it's well worth the $20 cost of a paperback. Finding out about how things work is just endlessly fascinating to me, and this book is one of the tools I used (I'm just a layman, but an enthusiastic one.)

 

[carlosMM]

peter_grimes: I'll have to read this

 

[Stylesjl]

You asked that already:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=169198&page=46

Sorry, i forgot. I guess thats really embarassing to ask the same question to the same person in the same thread (same thread series at least). This time i'll remember not to ask that again!

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Bump!

I went to university today and found Jehovah's Witnesses running a kind of stand where they handed out copies of Wake Up! in which they espouse what appears to be Intelligent Design. Some extracts:

"80% of USAians believe God created the universe" (so what?) and "No Miracles" attributed to Douglas H Erwin regarding science (hint: science does not concern itself with miracles, as they are irreproducible). Then some talk on how we're copying ideas from nature such as the whatsit whale's flipper for plane wings and the gecko's feet for a new kind of tape. Then some quoting of Michael Behe, and literal acceptance of Adam&Eve and the descent of Jesus. This followed by an interview with Michael Behe, who says "Many scientists disagree with my conclusions because they realize that the concept of intelligent design has consequences outside of science - it points to a great extent towards something outside the world of humans. This conclusion makes a lot of people nervous." After that there's a large section captioned "Is the Theory of Evolution based on FACTS?". It quotes a guy named Wolf-Ekkehard L¨onnig on mutations, who concludes that mutations cannot turn a species into a new species.

I'll post more late if people are interested... anyway, it was surprising to see ID pop up at a Norwegian university.