RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: Pollen found in the Roraima formation?, anti-evolution< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,08:34   

Right folks, this claim has been put to me several times by poohboy on Prremier's forum who claims it equates to finding a rabbit in the Cambrian i.e. it disproves millions of years and evolution:

http://www.premiercommunity.org.uk/forum....m_forum

Quote
Tell me, what do you know of pollen found in the Roraima formation?


I assume he's repeating the claim from here:

http://creation.com/pollen-paradox

which appears to be quoting/quotemining this (which he's referred me to):

http://rpasmd.org/rms/Pollen_Roraima.htm

Please, could someone who's got a better knowledge of the geology of this region and what Silvestru and Weiland's claims are not answer the wee shite ? I've googled this and can't find anything at all on the creationist claims on this study.

  
Seversky



Posts: 415
Joined: June 2010

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,11:20   

Quote (Peter Henderson @ July 09 2011,08:34)
Right folks, this claim has been put to me several times by poohboy on Prremier's forum who claims it equates to finding a rabbit in the Cambrian i.e. it disproves millions of years and evolution:

http://www.premiercommunity.org.uk/forum....m_forum

 
Quote
Tell me, what do you know of pollen found in the Roraima formation?


I assume he's repeating the claim from here:

http://creation.com/pollen-paradox

which appears to be quoting/quotemining this (which he's referred me to):

http://rpasmd.org/rms/Pollen_Roraima.htm

Please, could someone who's got a better knowledge of the geology of this region and what Silvestru and Weiland's claims are not answer the wee shite ? I've googled this and can't find anything at all on the creationist claims on this study.


I hadn't come across this before.  It's the sort of conundrum that makes science fascinating.

Quite honestly, who cares what CMI shills think?  

The only thing they have to offer is "God did it", which suggests a 'who' not a 'how" which is the question they are expecting science to answer.

And God as an explanation has a lot more fundamental problems than those facing geology and paleontology.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,12:42   

While not specifically about that particular "discovery", you may find this helpful.

tl:dr version - contamination of the samples or recent intrusion of modern pollen into the cracks of old rocks.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
celdd



Posts: 18
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,12:44   

This is only tangential to the topic, but I clicked on the last link provided above and saw that the paper referred to Georges Fournier.  I worked with Georges Fournier at Gulf Research's Houston Technical Services Center in the mid 70's to early 80's.  HTSC was Gulf Oil Company's in-house technical consultant for worldwide operations who didn't have the facilities or expertise for geologic, stratigraphic, paleontologic, or geophysical studies needed for their operations.  I knew that he was well respected in his field, which is pretty specialized and small.

Georges headed up the palynology section.  Because pollen is microscopic, it doesn't experience as much degradation as a lot of other fossil material, can be distributed by wind, and thus can be significant time-stratigraphic markers.  His group and their interpretations were highly valued to give us a framework to understand time and sediment facies relationships.

There were maybe one or two other degreed palynologists, and several technicians who sat at enormous microscopes looking a samples and picking out pollen grains all day.  One of these ladies sent her daughter to Juilliard for Cello studies with that extremely tedious job.

To prepare a rock sample for palynology studies involved dissolving the rock in hydrofluoric acid and the pollen and other keratin stuff is left behind to sort.  No one thought of the exhaust vent for the hydrofluoric acid fumes when they started renovation operations on the roof. That caused a bit of a delay!

Anyway, this reference brought back memories.  I found an obit for Georges here - scroll down about 3/4 of the way. http://www.palynology.org/content/nl/1985-V18No2.pdf

  
KCdgw



Posts: 368
Joined: Sep. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,12:53   

I'm familiar with it. There have been several supposed finds of  "precambrian" pollen: one in the Grand Canyon by a creationist named Burdick, one in the Salt Range of the Punjab, and the one discussed here, in the Roraima formation in South America.

The Burdick claim was shown to be modern contamination due to extremely sloppy technique. Contamination is the most likely explanation, since both sites are in some of the most complex geological formations in the world. It's interesting that no such finds ever occur in more normal, stable precambrian formations. Another possible explanation is misidentification. One popular creationist claim was that a paleozoic angiosperm fossil was found  in 1923 (angiosperms didn't begin showing up until the Cretaceous). It was subsequently shown to be something else, after other experts took a look at it.

Color me skeptical

Edited by KCdgw on July 09 2011,22:45

--------------
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius

  
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,16:17   

Interesting that there would be "pollen" but no flowering plants. I'm still wondering how they outran all of the ferns, (apparently to escape the Flood!;). :)

Find a whale in the Cambrian, and we'll talk...

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
KCdgw



Posts: 368
Joined: Sep. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,19:07   

Quote (Kristine @ July 09 2011,16:17)
Interesting that there would be "pollen" but no flowering plants. I'm still wondering how they outran all of the ferns, (apparently to escape the Flood!). :)

Yeah, funny how creationists simply fall silent when we point out that flowering plants were created on Day Three of Creation Week, yet only appear in the "Flood strata" so much later.

Edited by KCdgw on July 09 2011,19:08

--------------
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,19:32   

Just as a point of clarification, pollen pre-dates flowering plants.

Ever had your car covered in yellow pine spooge? It's an annual dual-event down East here. (Pine species don't all do their business at the same time, and there is a couple week gap between long-leafs and pond pines*.

Point here is that although it would still be a pretty big deal to find fossilized pollen in the pre-Cambrian geologic strata, angiosperms were not the first pollen producers.

hth

*It might actually be loblollies and pond pines or long-leafs and loblollies, or whatever. We have two major pine-pollen events here in the Spring, and that was the important part, damnit.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
KCdgw



Posts: 368
Joined: Sep. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2011,22:44   

Quote (Lou FCD @ July 09 2011,19:32)
Point here is that although it would still be a pretty big deal to find fossilized pollen in the pre-Cambrian geologic strata, angiosperms were not the first pollen producers.

That's true, Lou; however I think the pollen found was believed to be that of angiosperms. They did find spores as well.

--------------
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2011,08:46   

Quote (KCdgw @ July 09 2011,23:44)
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 09 2011,19:32)
Point here is that although it would still be a pretty big deal to find fossilized pollen in the pre-Cambrian geologic strata, angiosperms were not the first pollen producers.

That's true, Lou; however I think the pollen found was believed to be that of angiosperms. They did find spores as well.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I'd either missed or forgotten that detail in my quick buzz through the interwebs for information on it.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Seversky



Posts: 415
Joined: June 2010

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2011,09:12   

Perhaps this wasn't pollen at all but tiny little rabbit droppings.

Of course, this would raise the question of what the rabbits ate to produce the droppings.

Manna from heaven?  God likes to keep pet rabbits?

Okay, back to square one

  
KCdgw



Posts: 368
Joined: Sep. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2011,12:28   

Quote (Seversky @ July 10 2011,09:12)
Perhaps this wasn't pollen at all but tiny little rabbit droppings.

Of course, this would raise the question of what the rabbits ate to produce the droppings.

Raisins?

--------------
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2011,12:47   

Quote (KCdgw @ July 10 2011,13:28)
Quote (Seversky @ July 10 2011,09:12)
Perhaps this wasn't pollen at all but tiny little rabbit droppings.

Of course, this would raise the question of what the rabbits ate to produce the droppings.

Raisins?

or bananas.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2011,13:08   

Quote (Lou FCD @ July 10 2011,18:47)
Quote (KCdgw @ July 10 2011,13:28)
Quote (Seversky @ July 10 2011,09:12)
Perhaps this wasn't pollen at all but tiny little rabbit droppings.

Of course, this would raise the question of what the rabbits ate to produce the droppings.

Raisins?

or bananas.

Definitely bananas.

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3305
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2011,13:10   

Quote (Seversky @ July 10 2011,09:12)
Perhaps this wasn't pollen at all but tiny little rabbit droppings.

Of course, this would raise the question of what the rabbits ate to produce the droppings.

Manna from heaven?  God likes to keep pet rabbits?

Okay, back to square one

Now if you found jelly beans in the pre-cambrian, that would definitely be evidence of an intelligent designer.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 11 2011,09:44   

Quote (Peter Henderson @ July 09 2011,09:34)
Right folks, this claim has been put to me several times by poohboy on Prremier's forum who claims it equates to finding a rabbit in the Cambrian i.e. it disproves millions of years and evolution:

http://www.premiercommunity.org.uk/forum....m_forum

Quote
Tell me, what do you know of pollen found in the Roraima formation?


I assume he's repeating the claim from here:

http://creation.com/pollen-paradox

which appears to be quoting/quotemining this (which he's referred me to):

http://rpasmd.org/rms/Pollen_Roraima.htm

Please, could someone who's got a better knowledge of the geology of this region and what Silvestru and Weiland's claims are not answer the wee shite ? I've googled this and can't find anything at all on the creationist claims on this study.

The third web page that is linked to appears to be a copy of the Nature text, but I haven't tried to find an online copy of Nature from 1964 to check. Perhaps someone with access to a university library system could check that detail faster.

Of the two hypotheses at the end of the article, I'd go with the first, after the shale was formed from Pre-Cambrian mud, it was infiltrated at a later time by pollen and spores. (So this really is fossil pollen, just not Pre-Cambrian.) Then the package was overlaid by the sandstone. Silvestru and Weiland seem to me to not appreciate that the shale could have been near the surface and not under thousands of meters of sandstone at some point in its history. Part of their incredulity is that pollen could have filtered through all that sandstone.

The other possibility is that the palynology was wrong, and these are not pollen grains and spores. I'm not sure I'd want to question the identification without an article in the primary literature which has pics, sizes and an identification of possible origin.

There are other small things that have turned up from the Pre-Cambrian. For example, the phosphatized 'embryos' from Doushantuo:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyng....f_a.php

So the last possibility is that these are in fact animals or plants in the right place in the geologic column that have been mis-identified as pollen and spores.

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
k.e..



Posts: 2896
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 11 2011,10:07   

ONE SWALLOW DOES NOT A SUMMER MAKE, HOMOS.

If it were not an anomoly ......it would still be an anomoly.

Forget rabbits in the Cambrian I want to see a '57 Chev before the Carbonaceous.

Like climate deniers they will grasp at any straw...

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 11 2011,12:02   

Quote (OgreMkV @ July 10 2011,13:10)
 
Quote (Seversky @ July 10 2011,09:12)
Perhaps this wasn't pollen at all but tiny little rabbit droppings.

Of course, this would raise the question of what the rabbits ate to produce the droppings.

Manna from heaven?  God likes to keep pet rabbits?

Okay, back to square one

Now if you found jelly beans in the pre-cambrian, that would definitely be evidence of an intelligent designer.

Is it a caper? No, it's a rat turd! :)



Well, the Cambrian is a little early for street theatre, so let's call it a street caper.
Quote

–verb (used without object)
1. to leap or skip about in a sprightly manner; prance; frisk; gambol.

–noun
2. a playful leap or skip.
3. a prank or trick; harebrained escapade.
4. a frivolous, carefree episode or activity.


--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2123
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 11 2011,12:49   

Quote (Kristine @ July 11 2011,10:02)
       
Quote (OgreMkV @ July 10 2011,13:10)
           
Quote (Seversky @ July 10 2011,09:12)
Perhaps this wasn't pollen at all but tiny little rabbit droppings.

Of course, this would raise the question of what the rabbits ate to produce the droppings.

Manna from heaven?  God likes to keep pet rabbits?

Okay, back to square one

Now if you found jelly beans in the pre-cambrian, that would definitely be evidence of an intelligent designer.

Is it a caper? No, it's a rat turd! :)



Well, the Cambrian is a little early for street theatre, so let's call it a street caper.
         
Quote

–verb (used without object)
1. to leap or skip about in a sprightly manner; prance; frisk; gambol.

–noun
2. a playful leap or skip.
3. a prank or trick; harebrained escapade.
4. a frivolous, carefree episode or activity.

Reminds me of Kliban

(Hey, how come I can post a link to the image but not the url for the image directly?  All the cool kids are doin' it...)

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
  18 replies since July 09 2011,08:34 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]