- #1
end3r7
- 168
- 0
Just curious on the most recent theories to explain Biology's Big Bang (and the evolution-haters weapon of choice).
Explanations to Cambrian Explosion.
- Thread starter end3r7
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Explosion
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion centers around various theories and ideas attempting to explain the Cambrian Explosion, a significant event in biological history characterized by a rapid increase in the diversity of life forms. Participants explore different perspectives on the causes and implications of this phenomenon, including evolutionary pressures, environmental factors, and the role of consciousness.
Discussion Character
- Exploratory
- Debate/contested
- Conceptual clarification
Main Points Raised
- Some participants reference various sources, including scientific papers and debates, to provide context and background on the Cambrian Explosion.
- One participant argues against the analogy of the Cambrian formation of phyla being similar to the big bang, suggesting that the event spanned a longer timeframe than often portrayed, indicating a rapid but not explosive evolutionary tempo.
- Another participant proposes a synergy effect, where new species created new niches and food chains in a less competitive environment, facilitating further species development.
- A different viewpoint highlights the evolutionary significance of the development of eyes in early Cambrian animals, suggesting that this led to increased predation and evolutionary pressures.
- Some participants discuss the implications of competition among species, noting that earlier eras had less competition compared to later periods, which may have influenced evolutionary dynamics.
- There is a mention of the Red Queen's Race, where the emergence of new threats, such as viruses, also spurs evolution.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express a range of views on the causes of the Cambrian Explosion, with no clear consensus reached. Some ideas are supported by multiple participants, while others remain contested or speculative.
Contextual Notes
Limitations include varying interpretations of the timeframe of the Cambrian Explosion and the definitions of competition and environmental factors influencing evolution. The discussion also reflects differing opinions on the significance of specific evolutionary developments, such as the evolution of eyes.
Who May Find This Useful
This discussion may be of interest to those studying evolutionary biology, paleontology, or the history of life on Earth, as well as individuals curious about the Cambrian Explosion and its implications for understanding biodiversity.
- #2
Rade
See this link:http://palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/Palaeofiles/Cambrian/Index.html
Also classic Gould and Morris debate: http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookReviewTypeDetail/assetid/15570;jsessionid=aaa_EIrwpsMpCN
Then we have Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion
This site has many up to date scientific papers--as of April 2006:http://www.peripatus.gen.nz/paleontology/CamExp.html
Then we have the out of box ideas--such as the suggestion that consciousness is the cause:http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/penrose-hameroff/Cambrian.html
But I must disagree with analogy that Cambrian formation of phyla is similar to big bang formation of isotopes. Even ID folks agree that cambrian explosion spans 5-10 million years (but of course scientists suggest cambrian to be more like 40 million, more than enough time for strong selective pressure in a rapidly changing environment. Thus, nothing explosive, just fast tempo, like running instead of walking through your life journey.
Also classic Gould and Morris debate: http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookReviewTypeDetail/assetid/15570;jsessionid=aaa_EIrwpsMpCN
Then we have Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion
This site has many up to date scientific papers--as of April 2006:http://www.peripatus.gen.nz/paleontology/CamExp.html
Then we have the out of box ideas--such as the suggestion that consciousness is the cause:http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/penrose-hameroff/Cambrian.html
But I must disagree with analogy that Cambrian formation of phyla is similar to big bang formation of isotopes. Even ID folks agree that cambrian explosion spans 5-10 million years (but of course scientists suggest cambrian to be more like 40 million, more than enough time for strong selective pressure in a rapidly changing environment. Thus, nothing explosive, just fast tempo, like running instead of walking through your life journey.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #3
MRC_Hans
- 1
- 0
Personally, I think a sort of synergy effect might have been at play. New species were appearing in the relative biotopical vacuum of early Earth. New species made for new niches and food-chains, which offered yet new opportunities for more species, etc, etc. All in an environment where the competition was limited, compared to later eras.
In later eras, most new species needed to wedge their way into an already crowded and fiercely competitive "marketplace".
You might compare it with the .com rage a decade or so ago: Anybody that could make a computer do something, or could put anything vaguely useful on the internet could do business.
Hans
In later eras, most new species needed to wedge their way into an already crowded and fiercely competitive "marketplace".
You might compare it with the .com rage a decade or so ago: Anybody that could make a computer do something, or could put anything vaguely useful on the internet could do business.
Hans
- #4
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
- 6,839
- 11
Yes, I believe evolutionists would agree with this picture. Note that the competition level tend to descend from between kingdoms, phyla, and genera, to between species. And in addition to providing new niches, other organisms provide new threats (e.g. virus), which are a further spur to evolution, and a further synergy (Red Queen's Race).MRC_Hans said:
- #5
chance
- 8
- 0
Not sure how recent, but “in the blink of an eye” by Andrew Parker, poses an intriguing idea:
at the start of the Cambrian 543 MYA, animals only possessed light sensors not eyes. By 538 MYA the eye evolved and everything changed.
i.e. You could no longer hide as light penetrates the entire medium, and evolution goes into high gear as new and efficient predators evolve.
Just floating around in the ocean unprotected is a thing of the past.
at the start of the Cambrian 543 MYA, animals only possessed light sensors not eyes. By 538 MYA the eye evolved and everything changed.
i.e. You could no longer hide as light penetrates the entire medium, and evolution goes into high gear as new and efficient predators evolve.
Just floating around in the ocean unprotected is a thing of the past.
- #6
Phobos
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 1,956
- 7
chance said:
just try telling that to phytoplankton
- #7
chance
- 8
- 0
There’s always an environment for the very small (too small to be seen). But I should point out the author is describing larger life in the Cambrian that gave rise to all the forms we see today, and intriguing range of evidences is presented. Was just wondering if this idea was given any merit.