Darwin's Discovery: Design without a Designer

[Graybeard]

From Thread Opener

• The third proposition is that teleological explanations are necessary in order to give a full account of the attributes of living organisms, whereas they are neither necessary nor appropriate in the explanation of natural inanimate phenomena.
• .
• I give a definition of teleology and clarify the matter by distinguishing between internal and external teleology, and between bounded and unbounded teleology. The human eye, so obviously constituted for seeing but resulting from a natural process, is an example of internal (or natural) teleology. A knife has external (or artificial) teleology, because it has been purposefully designed by an external agent. The development of an egg into a chicken is an example of bounded (or necessary) teleology, whereas the evolutionary origin of the mammals is a case of unbounded (or contingent) teleology, because there was nothing in the make up of the first living cells that necessitated the eventual appearance of mammals.

Lloyd ...... if you notice in the explanation above:

'bounded teleology' is 'necessary' or conditional on previous events

'unbounded teleology' is chance occurring ... not conditional

It was chance that mammals appeared, but necessity that they're offspring were mammals also ........ all future siblings are mammals because of the 'conditional' restraints on they're parents.

Does that make it simpler ??

This process is exactly the same with physics at the particle level .... chance and necessity.

Poppa calls it an 'act of freedom' .... nothing wrong with that term when it refers to unbounded teleology. Limits on this act would be bounded teleology ??

Whether it is animate or inanimate .... the system, the complete system, the Universe is evolving (changing)

Cosmic Evolution (in which biological evolution will eventually be a subset) is the same term as combinatorial necessity. The word 'Evolution' and 'Natural Selection' no longer just belong to biology .... but to everything ... and I am not being a word conflationist ... whatever that iz ... at least I don't think I am.

Charles Darwin's theory of Natural Selection, IMO, will eventually include all the scientific disciplines.

A rose by any other name still smells the same ... was that Democritus ... or ... ummm .... someone else ... lol

cool bananas ... greg

PS: please turn the blowtorch down before replying so my lap top screen doesn't melt....

[labelwench]

Whether it is animate or inanimate .... the system, the complete system, the Universe is evolving (changing)

Originally posted by Graybeard

While we may perceive and measure differences that we define as 'change', I would suggest that we would be unable to discern if such change should be accurately termed 'evolution' or if we are observing a phenomenon which is cyclical and our database is insufficient to make that determination?

Intuitively, anything that is a part of 'the universe', may experience a sense of 'change' which they might term 'evolution', yet that would seem to be an echo of the life force during our brief existence as sentient biology.

Just my limited perception......

We measure things all the time without truly understanding the half of what we see, as we are ever busy looking for the facts that fit our ideas rather than just looking at the results as they are.

[austintorn@aol.com]

Physicists had to come up with the law of point-of-view-invariance—after it didn't work out too well about the "law" that had everything else revolving around the Earth.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Electrons and protons, etc all still behave as they always have ... long before the Earth was formed, before life existed .... The Universe obeys the Laws of Physics .... its not lawless ... ??

Greg, did ya ever read John Wheeler...? I think he described this area of debate the best. He called it 'The Law of No Law', as when you try to boil it all down to what Allen has mentioned, the words start becoming meaningless. This is why 'The Law of No Law' can apply so much as a best fit to chance and randomness, or even 'The Act of Freedom' as Allen has stated it, but some strict linguists would demand 'acts of freedom' even to be too humanistic__but since quantum physics uses 'degrees of freedom', I can't see how even the most strict linguists could win that argument__so imo, 'The Act of Freedom' works. As to evolution, it still massively confuses the issues, as so many refer evolution strictly to the bio-evolution. With so many different fields of study involved, here at TQ, a set language would have to be adopted to settle such inter-disciplinary oppositions. Myself, I prefer to limit evolution to the bio-sphere, as most studies have done, since evolution has such a loose linguistics__that's why I stay away from it, as much as possible... I'd prefer something like, 'Cosmic Generation of Quantum State Changes' and 'Bio-Spheric Evolutions of Living Specimens'__or something to these affects/effects... It's just when we have so many different linguistic systems involved, it's most impossible to sort the languages used__to make any points at all, as we have no general agreed upon language for such successful dialogue...

"The Universe obeys the Laws of Physics .... its not lawless ... ??" In a strict sense, No... That would be stating the Universe obeys the Laws of Man, because it's man who's interpreted these laws of physics, and transposed them onto the 'Purely Combinatoric Universe...'__No...???

Now your starting to see .... no purpose, no choice .... lol

Greg, can't you ever remember what I've stated so many times__The Cosmic Universe has no purpose and no choice__The Bio-Universe has both purpose and Choice...!!! Ya gotta parse the words, into the proper categories, for them to have meaning... Dead does not apply to Live...

combinatoric necessity .... ??? Are you for real ...... You lambasted Democritus.... now you use his term ??

I merely stated he was a deductionist, and I favored induction, retroduction and abduction logics over the also needed deductive logics. I've also always stated the Cosmic Universe is 'combinatoric state changes of necessity', and the bio-universe is one of 'specialties and exceptions to the cosmic rules'__It exceeds necessity to purpose and choice. You keep confusing and conflating the two necessary distinctions. Keep em separate, and all is clear__Inanimate & Animate__Inanimate / | \ Animate...

If I had to find another term for Evolution it would be 'combinatoric necessity'

Then you wouldn't be describing everything. You'd only be describing 'Cosmic State Changes', and nothing of the 'True Bio-Evolution' which has purpose and choice over the 'Combinatoric Processes...', even though they also be fully combinatoric__they are 'self-choice combinatoric' purposes, motives, aims, goals and ends... You always seem to forget about 'choices over chances...'

Democritus: The coming together (combinatory) of Chance and Necessity (please write this out 100 times ... lol

Please write this out 1000 times__'The Cosmic / | \ Biological Distinctions...'__'The Cosmic Fixed Mechanical States / | \ The Evolutionary Biological Choice States...'

Stop trying to duck and weave by employing the semantics...

No-body's employing semantic tricks except you. I'm simply trying to make ideas clear and distinct. You're trying to hide in the self-conflations...

.... Does the UNIVERSE EXIST independent of any teleological concept .... Yes or No ???

Absolutely not__because teleology is the existence and non-existence of the Universe__in a strict human sense__and since you asked a human, you get a human answer... Ask the Universe, proper, and see if you get an answer, Greg...??? When one talks to the Universe, proper, one is just talking to their own ego__It's an infinite regress, i.e., no number of words prove its logical truth validity__It's like talking to God__It ain't there, when you separate yourself from it__in strict logical sense__even though we know the Universe certainly exists without us__There's absolutely no proof possible of that fact... Science just also, like religion, likes to go where it can't provingly go...

Greg, we are not 'Robots', even as much as you'd seem to like to think so__'We're Living Choice and Chance Beings...'

'Its a severe handicap, especially at my time of life, but I'm verrry tough, and thats one consolation' ..... as the very old Turkey said when the Farmer told him he may have to send him to the market

cool bananas ... greg

Kill the Turkey and have a good meal__Boiling softens the meat__sometimes... Had an ol' cow ankle once__even boiling didn't help. Dulled every knife in the house, broke me teeth, and turned me green...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

From Thread Opener

• The third proposition is that teleological explanations are necessary in order to give a full account of the attributes of living organisms, whereas they are neither necessary nor appropriate in the explanation of natural inanimate phenomena.
• .
• I give a definition of teleology and clarify the matter by distinguishing between internal and external teleology, and between bounded and unbounded teleology. The human eye, so obviously constituted for seeing but resulting from a natural process, is an example of internal (or natural) teleology. A knife has external (or artificial) teleology, because it has been purposefully designed by an external agent. The development of an egg into a chicken is an example of bounded (or necessary) teleology, whereas the evolutionary origin of the mammals is a case of unbounded (or contingent) teleology, because there was nothing in the make up of the first living cells that necessitated the eventual appearance of mammals.

Lloyd ...... if you notice in the explanation above:

'bounded teleology' is 'necessary' or conditional on previous events

'unbounded teleology' is chance occurring ... not conditional

And this very conveniently leaves out the fact that living bio-beings have choice__That all important Choice in the teleological definitions, of which teleology is about__purposes, motives, aims goals origins and ends. Here's a full definition of Teleology:

Teleology (from the Greek τέλος - telos, root: τελε-, "end, purpose") is the philosophical study of telos (gr. τέλοϛ), i.e., of purpose, aim, end and/or design. The earliest known written use of the word teleology in English is by Anthony F. M. Willich in Elements of Critical Philosophy (179.
As a school of thought, teleology is often contrasted with metaphysical naturalism, which views nature as having no design or purpose.
Teleology was explored by Plato and Aristotle, by Saint Anselm around 1000 A.D., and later by Immanuel Kant in his Critique of Judgement. It was fundamental to the speculative philosophy of Hegel.
In general it may be said that there are two types of final cause or telos, which may be called intrinsic finality and extrinsic finality.[citation needed]

• Extrinsic finality consists of a being realizing a purpose outside that being, for the utility and welfare of other beings. For instance, minerals are "designed" to be used by plants which are in turn "designed" to be used by animals - and similarly humanity serves some ultimate good beyond itself.

• Intrinsic finality consists of a being realizing a purpose directed toward the perfection of its own nature. In essence, it is what is "good for" a being. Just as physical masses obey universal gravitational tendencies, which did not evolve, but are simply a cosmic "given," so life is intended to behave in certain ways so as to preserve itself from death, disease, and pain.

You can argue all the hundreds of definitions of teleology forever, but you can not deny the fact; teleology is about purposes and goals, and when one author uses any special definitions of teleology, which this author does not in his entire article you cited, but if so, then that author is open to critical logical review of his ideas, to the history of the debates of the ideas pertaining to the subject... For millennia, this subject has been debated, and it's mainly about motives, purposes, aims goals and ends__or causes and effects of bio-beings' actions__Whether you define it from your author, Wiki or history, etc., etc., etc__And strict science has plenty of history about teleology__It's not about the way people think__It's about how people Act__The obvious objective actions__Bounded and Unbounded Actions__Chance, Choice and Laws of...

It was chance that mammals appeared, but necessity that they're offspring were mammals also ........ all future siblings are mammals because of the 'conditional' restraints on they're parents.

No argument there...

Does that make it simpler ??

This process is exactly the same with physics at the particle level .... chance and necessity.

Poppa calls it an 'act of freedom' .... nothing wrong with that term when it refers to unbounded teleology. Limits on this act would be bounded teleology ??

Did you forget that motive, purpose, aims, goals and ends are within bounded teleology__'The Choice Boogie-Man' to you, I guess__'The Self-Life Choices...'__or Liberty, Freedom With Bounded Choices of The Physical Laws...

Whether it is animate or inanimate .... the system, the complete system, the Universe is evolving (changing)

Yes, in total, but look at the minimal amount science knows of it to be evolving__Only the Bio-Sphere. Science has no known knowledgeable Facts, that the Geo-Sphere is evolving__It's still all just mere theory__Whether big bang, inflation, expansion, emergence or whatever__It's got Absolutely no proof, at this level of theories... The only proof we've got is; 'The Universe Absolutely__By Necessary Combinatoric Logic__Must Exist, and Exist As Absolute Substance__Eternally'__As otherwise, it's an infinite regress to the impossible no-thing state of pure ego, and Absolutely no proof possible... You can beat this bush forever, no greater proof exists, than the logical combinatoric necessity of chance and choice exists__Chance is randomness__Choice is Habits...

Cosmic Evolution (in which biological evolution will eventually be a subset) is the same term as combinatorial necessity. The word 'Evolution' and 'Natural Selection' no longer just belong to biology .... but to everything ... and I am not being a word conflationist ... whatever that iz ... at least I don't think I am.

Sorry Greg, but that is exactly what conflationism is. You can't just use your or other egos to state the classes evolution includes. There's no such agreed upon classification in the sceinces, nor do I think there can be__due to the fact, it conflates hard science with the soft sciences__Physics being a hard measurable science, and evolution being a soft and mostly unmeasurable science... You can't scientifically categorize the hard sciences of strict measurement, under the soft science of often unmeasurable evolution__That ain't science, that's mere conflation of category science... Fields of Science Link...There exists no universal scientific agreement as to Categories, especially to One General Category, and that's why I've also suggested we use Peirce's category list, as it covers everything known to scientific thought and reality__but nobody seems to realize how necessary this is to any ToE comprehension__So, flounder around in the Universal Waters, as everybody does...

Charles Darwin's theory of Natural Selection, IMO, will eventually include all the scientific disciplines.

That would rather be a joke, when you can't even YET fully define what 'Natural Selection' fully means... What is it, the foolish 'Selfish Gene' as subjective dumbo Dawkins has proposed...??? You see this area puts you right in the middle of science's and philosophy's main debate__'How does inanimate matter, produce animate beings...' Until your 'Natural Selection' can answer that question__it's just an infinite regress to the non-scientific pure egos__Lotta' information__'NO Logical Facts of Completion...' Even if it were completed, 'Natural Selection' would still only pertain to animate life forms, and not inanimate geo-state changes__That's pure chance, randomness and combinatoric necessity... Greg, if we don't make the proper category distinctions, we can't communicate, and make any sense at all__That's A Linguistic Necessity...

A rose by any other name still smells the same ... was that Democritus ... or ... ummm .... someone else ... lol

So does a skunk...

cool bananas ... greg

PS: please turn the blowtorch down before replying so my lap top screen doesn't melt.... [/QUOTE]
Ahhh, I was tired the last few days. Wife and I went gold panning and detecting__Digging down through a boulder basin kinda wears one out__Sorry... I'll just pick on ya a wee' bit...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Yeah, I went over my word count before finishing post, as I wanted to point this out in the above post:

"Intrinsic finality consists of a being realizing a purpose directed toward the perfection of its own nature. In essence, it is what is "good for" a being. Just as physical masses obey universal gravitational tendencies, which did not evolve, but are simply a cosmic "given," so life is intended to behave in certain ways so as to preserve itself from death, disease, and pain..."

Also, notice that 'symmetry and asymmetry' are just contingent descriptors of chance, randomness and necessity__within the geo-sphere's cosmic descriptions of physical state changes__and not considered as 'evolution', per say... All that gets into absolute fundamental motion necessities of the FS__which Dave, Tim and I have gone over quite extensively, especially Dave and Tim's conversations, but also Dave's many threads on motion and the FS__Absolute Necessity...

The "cosmic given" above, is all we scientifically know, and only by the scientific observations and measurements of the 'given/existing geo-states, producing the known bio-states of...'

Imo, there's just no way to join these geo and bio states__as 'evolution'__without conflation__and conflation solves nothing... The Universe exists and changes geo-states__The Bio-Sphere evolves and changes bio-states, with the geo-states' em-fields help__Maybe the two can be classed under 'Universal State Changes', but that's the only unification of terms I see technically possible__'Universal State Changes'__as such would apply to both geo and bio-state changes, but not 'Evolution'__as a total category__'Evolution' is too loose a term... 'Evolution' implies the entire Universe evolved__and we scientifically have absolutely no evidence of the entire Universe evolving__That's just another 'god-ego-theory'__Scientifically, we only absolutely know it exists__We can measure it, at least the parts we have physical access to, and that's most all of it, by way of telescopes and radio-scopes, x-rays etc...

Hope that helps...
Lloyd

[Graybeard]

Kill the Turkey and have a good meal__Boiling softens the meat__sometimes... Had an ol' cow ankle once__even boiling didn't help. Dulled every knife in the house, broke me teeth, and turned me green...

Over here we have a receipe for Galah. A galah is a parrot, a very cheeky one that can perform amazing aerial acrobatics ... and seems to know it.



Anyway, the recipe goes like this .. catch and kill the galah, put into a large pot of boiling water with a large rock ... boil for 5 hours, then throw away the parrot and eat the rock ... rotflmao

Lloyd ... very long and complex posts ..... 06:00 here and just got to work. Had not had time to fully understand your posts.

Look .... here is our main point of difference. Animate and Inanimate.

I don't recognise a difference. Before you go ape-shit, just stop a second and calm down. Just give me a few moments to explain this outlandish statement

The progress of evolution, since the Universe began, consists of increasing levels of complexity marked by 'Phase Transitions'.

We perceive these differences in complexity, but we don't necessarily perceive the Phase transitions (because they are not easily conceptual). When a certain level of complexity is reached and energy is still accruing ... then a phase transition occurs.

Here is an example of water going thru a phase transition CLICK

All things go thru phase transitions .... including Fields (important) !!

In our 'mental capacity' we see 'change'. We recognise 'change' and our memory banks record these changes as events. The same as you mark off time according to 'The tick-tick-tick of the caesium atom is a sliding-time-scaler constant of all finite universal motion." L.G.''

But in actual fact, what is really occurring is that particles are exchanging energy packets .... alternatively 'matter is in motion'. This is imperceptible to our senses.

The Universe is a timeline. The 'milestones' are not real .... just examples of noticeable change. examples: particles to atoms, atoms to molecules, molecules to amino acids, to proteins, to complex sugars, to life.

But a close examination of the timeline will show that these 'milestones' are just conveniences, just markers. NO more change occurs at a milestone than anywhere else on the timeline.

Yours is the opinion that the difference between inanimate/animate holds a huge secret that will reveal the TOE. I am not of that opinion ...

Mine: the TOE will be revealed in the close examination of the timeline, with no false distinctions.

For you all that glitters is gold, but I believe the secret is in the dross.

Its that simple.

I will try to attach the Timeline (with all its false distinctions in the next post)

cool bananas ... greg

[Graybeard]

1. The Very Early Universe (page 3)

1.1 Summary
1.2 The Planck Epoch.
1.3 The Grand Unification
1.4. The Inflationary

2. The Early Universe (page 9)

2.1 Summary
2.2 The Electroweak
2.3 The Quark Epoch
2.4 The Hadron Epoch
2.5 The Lepton Epoch
2.6 The Photon Epoch
2.7 Matter domination
2.8 Recombination
2.9 Dark ages

3. Structure Formation (page 18)

3.1 Summary
3.2 Reionization
3.3 Formation of Stars
3.4 Formation of Galaxies
3.5 Formation of Groups
3.6 Formation of our Solar System

4. Birth of the Earth system. (page 37)

4.1 Summary.

5. Start of Pre-Cambrian Eon: Hadean Era (page 38)

5.1 Escaping Gases build early Atmosphere
5.2 Meteorite bombardment.
5.3 Earth's Core forms
5.4 Great Oceans form.
5.5 Oldest known Rocks.
5.6 Evidence of Life.

6. Pre-Cambrian Eon: Archaean Era (page 41)

6.1 Summary
6.2 Bacteria diversify.
6.3 Photosynthesizing Bacteria
6.4 Oldest Fossils
6.5 Small Continents form.
6.6 The Lithosphere breaks up.
6.7 Continents begin shifting.
6.8 First Eukaryotes.
6.9 Continent building ends
6.10 Bacteria on land.
6.11 The Continents join.


7. Pre-Cambrian Eon: Proterozoic Era (page 43)

7.1 Summary
7.2 Banded iron formations.
7.3 The Oxygen Revolution
7.4 Oxidation produces "Red Beds".
7.5 Oxygen levels reach three percent
7.6 Oldest Eukaryote Fossils.
7.7 True Algae..
7.8 Rodinia Supercontinent forms.
7.9 Soft-bodied Animals.
7.10 The Riddle of Ediacara.
7.11 Major Glaciation period begins.
7.12 Breakup of Rodinia Supercontinent.
7.13 Protective Ozone Layer in place.
7.14 Vendian Extinction.

8. Paleozoic Era: Cambrian Period (page 46)

8.1 Summary.
8.2 Hard-Shelled Animals.
8.3 Oldest Arthropod Fossils.
8.4 Chordates.
8.5 The Cambrian explosion.
8.6 Marine Reefs.
8.7 Gondwana Forms..

9. Paleozoic Era: Ordovician Period (page 50)

9.1 Summary.
9.2 Land Plants.
9.3 Fishes.
9.4 Sharks.

10 Paleozoic Era: Silurian Period (page 52)

10.1 Summary.
10.2 Vascular Land Plants.
10.3 Great Mountain Ranges form.
10.4 Arthropods on land.

11 Paleozoic Era: Devonian Period (page 53)

11.1 Summary
11.2 Oxygen nears present-day levels.
11.3 Land Vertebrates.
11.4 Selective Effect .
11.5 Seed Plants.

12 Paleozoic Era: Carboniferous Period (page 55)

12.1 Summary.
12.2 Carbon Sinks form in "coal forests".
12.3 Reptiles.
12.4 Conifers.

13 Paleozoic Era: Permian Period (page 57)

13.1 Summary.
13.2 Cycads.
13.3 Pangaea Supercontinent forms.
13.4 Drying trend begins.
13.5 Mammal-like Reptiles.
13.6 Mother of all Extinctions

14 Mesozoic Era: Triassic Period (page 59)

14.1 Summary.
14.2 Dinosaurs..
14.3 Mammals.
14.4 Crocodiles
14.5 Flying reptiles.
14.6 Series of Extinctions

15. Mesozoic Era: Jurassic Period (page 62)

15.1 Summary.
15.2 Pangaea starts to break apart.
15.3 Birds.
15.4 Exaptation

16 Mesozoic Era: Cretaceous Period (page 63)

16.1 Summary.
16.2 Flowering plants.
16.3 The Second Mother of all Extinctions
16.4 Opportunity knocks

17. Cenozoic Era: Paleocene Epoch (page 65)
17.1 Summary.
17.2 Tropical climate extends to Polar Regions.
17.3 Primates.
17.4 Rodents..
17.5 Bats.

18. Cenozoic Era: Eocene Epoch (page 67)

18.1 Summary.
18.2 Whales.
18.3 Continents near present-day positions.
18.4 Drying and cooling trend begins.

19 Cenozoic Era: Oligocene Epoch (page 69)

19.1 Summary.
19.2 Grasses.
19.3 Ape/Human line evolves.

20 Cenozoic Era: Miocene Epoch (page 70)

20.1 Summary.
20.2 Short-term Warming and Drying.
20.3 Great Mountain Building.
20.4 Kelp forests.
20.5 Inland Seas dry out.
20.6 Crossing Over.
20.7 Grazing Horses.
20.8 Orangutan line separates from African Ape/Hominid line.
20.9 Extinction .
20.10 Chimpanzee and Hominid lines separate

21 Cenozoic Era: Pliocene Epoch (page 73)

21.1 Summary.
21.2 Hominids.
21.3 Global Ice Ages begin.
21.4 Ice Age Cycles.

22 Cenozoic Era: Pleistocene Epoch (page 74)

22.1 Summary.
22.2 Early humans..
22.3 Modern humans.
22.4 Extinction
22.5 A Smoking Gun?

23 Cenozoic Era: Holocene Epoch (page 76)

23.1 Summary.

24 Today, 13.7 billion years. (page 77)

24.1 Summary.
24.2 Super Clusters.
24.3 Nearby Superclusters.
24.4 Distant Superclusters.

25. Death of the Universe. (page 79)

25.1 Summary
25.2 Emerging Scientific basis.
25.3 Role of the Shape of the Universe.
25.4 Theories about the End of Universe.

26. Cosmic uncertainty. (page 90)

27. Observational constraints. (page 91)

28 Life in a mortal universe (page 92 )

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Far too much science fiction__lacking science proof...

Will address in next post...

1. The Very Early Universe (page 3)

1.1 Summary
1.2 The Planck Epoch.
1.3 The Grand Unification
1.4. The Inflationary

2. The Early Universe (page 9)

2.1 Summary
2.2 The Electroweak
2.3 The Quark Epoch
2.4 The Hadron Epoch
2.5 The Lepton Epoch
2.6 The Photon Epoch
2.7 Matter domination
2.8 Recombination
2.9 Dark ages

3. Structure Formation (page 18)

3.1 Summary
3.2 Reionization
3.3 Formation of Stars
3.4 Formation of Galaxies
3.5 Formation of Groups
3.6 Formation of our Solar System

4. Birth of the Earth system. (page 37)

4.1 Summary.

5. Start of Pre-Cambrian Eon: Hadean Era (page 38)

5.1 Escaping Gases build early Atmosphere
5.2 Meteorite bombardment.
5.3 Earth's Core forms
5.4 Great Oceans form.
5.5 Oldest known Rocks.
5.6 Evidence of Life.

6. Pre-Cambrian Eon: Archaean Era (page 41)

6.1 Summary
6.2 Bacteria diversify.
6.3 Photosynthesizing Bacteria
6.4 Oldest Fossils
6.5 Small Continents form.
6.6 The Lithosphere breaks up.
6.7 Continents begin shifting.
6.8 First Eukaryotes.
6.9 Continent building ends
6.10 Bacteria on land.
6.11 The Continents join.


7. Pre-Cambrian Eon: Proterozoic Era (page 43)

7.1 Summary
7.2 Banded iron formations.
7.3 The Oxygen Revolution
7.4 Oxidation produces "Red Beds".
7.5 Oxygen levels reach three percent
7.6 Oldest Eukaryote Fossils.
7.7 True Algae..
7.8 Rodinia Supercontinent forms.
7.9 Soft-bodied Animals.
7.10 The Riddle of Ediacara.
7.11 Major Glaciation period begins.
7.12 Breakup of Rodinia Supercontinent.
7.13 Protective Ozone Layer in place.
7.14 Vendian Extinction.

8. Paleozoic Era: Cambrian Period (page 46)

8.1 Summary.
8.2 Hard-Shelled Animals.
8.3 Oldest Arthropod Fossils.
8.4 Chordates.
8.5 The Cambrian explosion.
8.6 Marine Reefs.
8.7 Gondwana Forms..

9. Paleozoic Era: Ordovician Period (page 50)

9.1 Summary.
9.2 Land Plants.
9.3 Fishes.
9.4 Sharks.

10 Paleozoic Era: Silurian Period (page 52)

10.1 Summary.
10.2 Vascular Land Plants.
10.3 Great Mountain Ranges form.
10.4 Arthropods on land.

11 Paleozoic Era: Devonian Period (page 53)

11.1 Summary
11.2 Oxygen nears present-day levels.
11.3 Land Vertebrates.
11.4 Selective Effect .
11.5 Seed Plants.

12 Paleozoic Era: Carboniferous Period (page 55)

12.1 Summary.
12.2 Carbon Sinks form in "coal forests".
12.3 Reptiles.
12.4 Conifers.

13 Paleozoic Era: Permian Period (page 57)

13.1 Summary.
13.2 Cycads.
13.3 Pangaea Supercontinent forms.
13.4 Drying trend begins.
13.5 Mammal-like Reptiles.
13.6 Mother of all Extinctions

14 Mesozoic Era: Triassic Period (page 59)

14.1 Summary.
14.2 Dinosaurs..
14.3 Mammals.
14.4 Crocodiles
14.5 Flying reptiles.
14.6 Series of Extinctions

15. Mesozoic Era: Jurassic Period (page 62)

15.1 Summary.
15.2 Pangaea starts to break apart.
15.3 Birds.
15.4 Exaptation

16 Mesozoic Era: Cretaceous Period (page 63)

16.1 Summary.
16.2 Flowering plants.
16.3 The Second Mother of all Extinctions
16.4 Opportunity knocks

17. Cenozoic Era: Paleocene Epoch (page 65)
17.1 Summary.
17.2 Tropical climate extends to Polar Regions.
17.3 Primates.
17.4 Rodents..
17.5 Bats.

18. Cenozoic Era: Eocene Epoch (page 67)

18.1 Summary.
18.2 Whales.
18.3 Continents near present-day positions.
18.4 Drying and cooling trend begins.

19 Cenozoic Era: Oligocene Epoch (page 69)

19.1 Summary.
19.2 Grasses.
19.3 Ape/Human line evolves.

20 Cenozoic Era: Miocene Epoch (page 70)

20.1 Summary.
20.2 Short-term Warming and Drying.
20.3 Great Mountain Building.
20.4 Kelp forests.
20.5 Inland Seas dry out.
20.6 Crossing Over.
20.7 Grazing Horses.
20.8 Orangutan line separates from African Ape/Hominid line.
20.9 Extinction .
20.10 Chimpanzee and Hominid lines separate

21 Cenozoic Era: Pliocene Epoch (page 73)

21.1 Summary.
21.2 Hominids.
21.3 Global Ice Ages begin.
21.4 Ice Age Cycles.

22 Cenozoic Era: Pleistocene Epoch (page 74)

22.1 Summary.
22.2 Early humans..
22.3 Modern humans.
22.4 Extinction
22.5 A Smoking Gun?

23 Cenozoic Era: Holocene Epoch (page 76)

23.1 Summary.

24 Today, 13.7 billion years. (page 77)

24.1 Summary.
24.2 Super Clusters.
24.3 Nearby Superclusters.
24.4 Distant Superclusters.

25. Death of the Universe. (page 79)

25.1 Summary
25.2 Emerging Scientific basis.
25.3 Role of the Shape of the Universe.
25.4 Theories about the End of Universe.

26. Cosmic uncertainty. (page 90)

27. Observational constraints. (page 91)

28 Life in a mortal universe (page 92 )

[Graybeard]

Far too much science fiction__lacking science proof...

Will address in next post...

Thank you for your considered reply .....


So Abram rose, and clave the wood, and went,
And took the fire with him, and a knife.
And as they sojourned both of them together,
Isaac the first-born spake and said, My Father,
Behold the preparations, fire and iron,
But where the lamb for this burnt-offering?
Then Abram bound the youth with belts and straps,
And builded parapets and trenches there,
And stretchèd forth the knife to slay his son.
When lo! an Angel called him out of heaven,
Saying, Lay not thy hand upon the lad,
Neither do anything to him, thy son.
Behold! Caught in a thicket by its horns,
A Ram. Offer the Ram of Pride instead.

But the old man would not so, but slew his son,
And half the seed of Europe, one by one.

cool bananas ... greg