How would we know if a species was newly evolved?

[metis]

So according to what I read, many believe homo sapiens or humanoids (?) had a common denominator among those they call apes. Yet nothing has been ascertained in that respect.

It's more likely that along the ape line around 6 or 7 million years ago there was a divergence of what eventually became what we call "Homo" and the rest of the ape line, and this is also supported by the genome evidence. However, this is not "proof" but are indications of let's say a "good possibility".

 

[YoursTrue]

Okay. Let's say that everything there is correct, and there is some mechanism that is throwing off all the carbon dating results.

How far are the results off?

I mean, is it off by a huge amount? Or is it off by only a little bit? Are the scientists telling us that the sample they thought was from 10,000 years ago is actually from 25,000 years ago? Or is it from 10,001 years ago?

I'd have to look at it again but from my impression, because of dates concerning that part of the world, it sounds rather important, either way, whether for the science or for historical placement.

 

[YoursTrue]

It's more likely that along the ape line around 6 or 7 million years ago there was a divergence of what eventually became what we call "Homo" and the rest of the ape line, and this is also supported by the genome evidence. However, this is not "proof" but are indications of let's say a "good possibility".

I understand what you mean by good possibility yet, I'm wondering if there is any recognizable evolution discernible from something (one organism) into the distinct categories of chimpanzees, gorillas and bonobos. The more I ponder over it, the more wondrous it becomes insofar as the gaps, but importantly to me, the rather distinctive characteristics of manind vs. what might be man's earlier closest considered biological relative.

 

[metis]

I understand what you mean by good possibility yet, I'm wondering if there is any recognizable evolution discernible from something (one organism) into the distinct categories of chimpanzees, gorillas and bonobos.

There is a find in Chad that dates back to roughly 6 million years ago, and it has so many shared ape/early human characteristics that researchers had a difficult time classifying it. I haven't read up on it recently but will do so tomorrow when I get back on-line

 

[YoursTrue]

It's more likely that along the ape line around 6 or 7 million years ago there was a divergence of what eventually became what we call "Homo" and the rest of the ape line, and this is also supported by the genome evidence. However, this is not "proof" but are indications of let's say a "good possibility".

Just again i was thinking...I do think, you know... And we're also talking about species. Darwin wrote about species and didn't he seem to classify organisms according to lookalikes?

 

[YoursTrue]

I did not use the scientifically correct terms, as I recalled from the article it was first talking about the atmosphere affecting the carbon14. I said sunlight. So I will go back and work on it, thank you.

@Tiberius -- AND -- as a sidenote, but important -- the atmosphere (including sunlight or lack of it) had to be 'right' to allow these initial molecules to grow or evolve into further molecules, right?

 

[Bird123]

Your claim, your burden of proof. I am betting that you misunderstood what was said.

Burden of proof will always rest on the one who seeks the knowledge. Is it really knowledge that you are seeking?

I am not a gambling man. As I read you, you will see what you want to see regardless.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[YoursTrue]

@Tiberius So here is a distinct definition of how evolution occurred, and I wonder if and how you agree:
"How Do We Know That Evolution Has Occurred?
The evidence for evolution has primarily come from four sources:
1. the fossil record of change in earlier species
2. the chemical and anatomical similarities of related life forms
3. the geographic distribution of related species
4. the recorded genetic changes in living organisms over many generations"

Early Theories of Evolution: Evidence of Evolution

OK, so for those who agree with this, let's see -- the first point made there -- "the fossil record of change in earlier species..."
Again, for those who agree with the above -- (1) how is evolution evidenced by the fossil record of change in earlier species? Of interest is the seeming fact that fossils have been discovered from various estimated time periods that either do or do not have a connection with current organisms. (Right?)

 

[shunyadragon]

I

Not every reference I gave has a religious agenda. I purposely tried to avoid a reference in, as the saying goes, God forbid, a "religious" agenda. But I am striving to put only secular reports, certainly not religiously based insofar as I can tell. I didn't realize one which virtually said the same as the nonreligious bases was a religiously oriented site. So in the future, I hope you will explain things I am not understanding from the sources you apparently like. Thank you.

Your citations are selective and biased is based on a religious agenda, and layman;s articles and not from scientific journals that estimate the reliability of radiometric dating when correlated with other dating methods..

Please respond to the scientific article that describes how C14 dating is correlated with other dating methods to make the dating as accurate, which standard procedure.

Still waiting for the author of the New York Tomes article.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Burden of proof will always rest on the one who seeks the knowledge. Is it really knowledge that you are seeking?

I am not a gambling man. As I read you, you will see what you want to see regardless.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Then it is time to go to an eye doctor. The burden of proof is always upon the person making the positive claim.

 

[shunyadragon]

OK, so for those who agree with this, let's see -- the first point made there -- "the fossil record of change in earlier species..."
Again, for those who agree with the above -- (1) how is evolution evidenced by the fossil record of change in earlier species? Of interest is the seeming fact that fossils have been discovered from various estimated time periods that either do or do not have a connection with current organisms. (Right?)

The connection between the change and diversity ovrt time of species all throughout the history of life is overwhelmingly supported by the evidence In more recent research comparative genetics called.. Genomics, confirms the evolutionary relationship over time.

 

[shunyadragon]

You know more than I do but I hope you or someone else can answer the following question about the above--what does it mean when it says "yielded more than half of the radiocarbon determinations for the time span of the Middle Bronze II to the Iron I in the southern Levant." Can you explain? More than half, etc.

It means exactly what it says. The dominate dating of the human habitation in the Levant dated to the 'Iron Age.

Your missing the main point here reflected in the article is that C14 dating methodes never stands alone, but used in combination of several or more dating methods to attain the result.

 

[Tiberius]

So please do say where you get your opinions from when you challenge what i say. Names, not categories like *scientists.* Perhaps next time a subject comes up like that.

I'm sorry, I don't have a bibliography of every source I've ever read.

If you have a particular claim I've made that you would like support for, show me the claim and I'll provide support for it.

Until then, it's starting to seem like you're just playing games rather than addressing the meat of the issue.

 

[Tiberius]

Frankly, my questions with that relate to the type of substance that was analyzed. But that's to be in future conversations, many in-betweens since you guys are putting up with me more peaceably.

There are many different types of radiometric dating. Carbon dating is only one of them.

And the good thing is that there's a degree of overlap, so we can test a sample with one method and then test the same sample using a different method and see if the two different tests agree.

 

[Tiberius]

I'd have to look at it again but from my impression, because of dates concerning that part of the world, it sounds rather important, either way, whether for the science or for historical placement.

This does not actually answer my question.

 

[Tiberius]

@Tiberius -- AND -- as a sidenote, but important -- the atmosphere (including sunlight or lack of it) had to be 'right' to allow these initial molecules to grow or evolve into further molecules, right?

I have no idea.

Why don't you provide a scientific source that says that the atmosphere (including sunlight) needs to meet a certain initial condition in order for carbon dating to work?

I mean, you're the one making the claim, after all, it's up to you to support it.

 

[Tiberius]

Burden of proof will always rest on the one who seeks the knowledge.

No, the burden of proof always rests on the one making the claim.

 

[Tiberius]

OK, so for those who agree with this, let's see -- the first point made there -- "the fossil record of change in earlier species..."
Again, for those who agree with the above -- (1) how is evolution evidenced by the fossil record of change in earlier species? Of interest is the seeming fact that fossils have been discovered from various estimated time periods that either do or do not have a connection with current organisms. (Right?)

It strikes me that if you were serious about learning the answers to these questions, you'd take the initiative and do a bit of research by yourself.

Nonetheless...

Evidence of evolution - rock fossils - Evolution - AQA - GCSE Biology (Single Science) Revision - AQA - BBC Bitesize.

 

[YoursTrue]

Your citations are selective and biased is based on a religious agenda, and layman;s articles and not from scientific journals that estimate the reliability of radiometric dating when correlated with other dating methods..

Please respond to the scientific article that describes how C14 dating is correlated with other dating methods to make the dating as accurate, which standard procedure.

Still waiting for the author of the New York Tomes article.

I have read that carbon-14 dating is used along with carbon-12 dating as well. Not that I understand the process, perhaps you do. I'll look for the NY Times article.

 

[YoursTrue]

It strikes me that if you were serious about learning the answers to these questions, you'd take the initiative and do a bit of research by yourself.

Nonetheless...

Evidence of evolution - rock fossils - Evolution - AQA - GCSE Biology (Single Science) Revision - AQA - BBC Bitesize.

Frankly since you espouse the theory and I have questions about it, and there are things I don't understand but statements about it are made, I would think you would be happy to explain. In possibly simple terms. But if not -- ok...