So what kind of selective pressure would cause a whale to lose it's teeth?

[Seymore4Head]

So what kind of selective pressure would cause a whale to lose it's
teeth?

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-whale-tells-tale-when-baleen-whales-had-teeth

[Ernest Major]

Analogous selection pressures to those that cause cave fish to loose
their sight - absence or reduction of selection against loss of function
mutations which can then be fixed by drift, and selection against the
cost of producing the lost structures.

--
alias Ernest Major

[Rolf]

"Ernest Major" <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ofehg6$lvm$1...@dont-email.me...

The "if you don't use it you lose it" principle in action?

> --
> alias Ernest Major
>

[Robert Carnegie]

If teeth dissolve in soda (which they don't) -

I put "dentist of the sea" into Google, what do
you think I got? 107,000 web pages to look at,
but my point... um... needs work.

But, I had a "wisdom" tooth removed. It was going
sideways. Some wisdom. I don't think whales do
have a dental plan.

[John Stockwell]

It's more along the lines that if you don't need it to survive and it
has an inherent liability that reduces your reproductive success, then
your line will lose it.

Cave fish don't loose eyes only because eyes offer not survival advantage,
but eyes also get infected and kill you before you can reproduce occasionally.



>
> > --
> > alias Ernest Major
> >

[Bill]

All part of a Grand Design no doubt. Your account here is
teleological, top to bottom.

Bill

[Wolffan]

On 2017 May 19, Bill wrote
(in article <ofo20o$msl$1...@dont-email.me>):

I’m fairly sure that no-one mentioned anything of the kind except you.

> Your account here is
> teleological, top to bottom.

How did you get to that conclusion? Do show your work, now.
>
>
> Bill

and he’s still running...

[John Stockwell]

We can only hope that Bill didn't reproduce.

[John Stockwell]

Nope. No teleology there and no design. All natural selection.

>
> Bill

-John

[jte...@gmail.com]

John Stockwell wrote:

> It's more along the lines that if you don't need it to survive and it
> has an inherent liability that reduces your reproductive success, then
> your line will lose it.

You're arguing logic, not biology. Most species
go extinct. They don't "lose it," they die.

Instead of decision making -- which you will now
deny -- you have to think of evolution as a
spaghetti Colander. Pour something really small
into a spaghetti colander and it passes through
the holes. Pour something large into the
spaghetti colander and it's trapped. If all you've
got is big things -- or medium things -- then
nothing is going to make it through. The colander
isn't a conscious agent. It's not capable of
caring, let alone making exceptions.

Same with evolution.

If a population needs it to survive, and it's
present within the population then those members
with it will survive. It'll be there DNA which
gets passed on. And if the population needs it and
it isn't present within the population, that
population will go extinct.

Most times they go extinct.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/160934793238

[Bill]

Wow, Science by assertion. No need for facts.
At last we can create our own reality with no explanations.

Bill

[Burkhard]

Not as far as I can see. The claim under consideration was that the
above explanation was teleological. That's not striclty a scientific
claim, but a meta-logical or methodological statement.


To evaluate it, nothing is needed in terms of facts by the actual text
and an understanding of what "teleological" means and how a teleological
explanation looks like.

Since the explanation had no similarity whatsoever with any recognizable
teleological explanation, his statement contains all the information
necessary.

[John Stockwell]

Remarkably cogent coming from you, and totally in agreement
with what I said.


>
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/160934793238

[Ray Martinez]

The question was rhetorical. Selection pressure doesn't exist.

Ray

[John Stockwell]

Maybe you should go away for about 20 years study,
then come back when you have learned something.

>
> Bill

[Ray Martinez]

On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:14:53 PM UTC-7, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> John Stockwell wrote:
>
> > It's more along the lines that if you don't need it to survive and it
> > has an inherent liability that reduces your reproductive success, then
> > your line will lose it.
>
> You're arguing logic, not biology. Most species
> go extinct. They don't "lose it," they die.
>

If I understand the point above correctly it says evolutionary biology and logic are mutually exclusive. I've been known to say that, haven't I? Yes, indeed!

Ray (species immutabilist)

[jillery]

Too bad for you it isn't your question.

--
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Attributed to Voltaire

[The Incredibly Lucky JTEM]

John Stockwell wrote:

> Remarkably cogent coming from you

You're in no position to judge.

> and totally in agreement
> with what I said.

It's not at all in agreement with what you said.

Your description had evolution as a given, while
I pointed out that it's the EXCEPTION to the rule,
not the rule. (Something you will now deny, being
nothing more than a pathetic wannabe)

To an emotion ladened "Mind" such as yours the
distinction may seem too subtle to worry about,
but outside your feelings there is a remarkably
clear difference.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161033610893

[Ernest Major]

Are you confused? You didn't ask the question. And the assertion that
selection pressure doesn't exist is pretty much confined to yourself;
not to mention that the person that asked the question doesn't seem to
be a creationist of any stripe.

--
alias Ernest Major

[John Stockwell]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 3:44:54 PM UTC-6, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:14:53 PM UTC-7, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> > John Stockwell wrote:
> >
> > > It's more along the lines that if you don't need it to survive and it
> > > has an inherent liability that reduces your reproductive success, then
> > > your line will lose it.
> >
> > You're arguing logic, not biology. Most species
> > go extinct. They don't "lose it," they die.
> >
>
> If I understand the point above correctly it says evolutionary biology and logic are mutually exclusive. I've been known to say that, haven't I? Yes, indeed!

Well, Ray, you have found a new crank buddy. JTEM is just "lucky" to
be a crank and a crank magnet.

[John Stockwell]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 4:44:54 PM UTC-6, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> John Stockwell wrote:
>
> > Remarkably cogent coming from you
>
> You're in no position to judge.
>
> > and totally in agreement
> > with what I said.
>
> It's not at all in agreement with what you said.

Yeah it is.

>
> Your description had evolution as a given, while
> I pointed out that it's the EXCEPTION to the rule,
> not the rule. (Something you will now deny, being
> nothing more than a pathetic wannabe)

Laughable.

>
> To an emotion ladened "Mind" such as yours the
> distinction may seem too subtle to worry about,
> but outside your feelings there is a remarkably
> clear difference.

More crank behavior. Off your meds?



>
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161033610893

[r3p...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, May 25, 2017 at 12:59:53 PM UTC-7, John Stockwell wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 3:44:54 PM UTC-6, Ray Martinez wrote:
> > On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:14:53 PM UTC-7, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> > > John Stockwell wrote:
> > >
> > > > It's more along the lines that if you don't need it to survive and it
> > > > has an inherent liability that reduces your reproductive success, then
> > > > your line will lose it.
> > >
> > > You're arguing logic, not biology. Most species
> > > go extinct. They don't "lose it," they die.
> > >
> >
> > If I understand the point above correctly it says evolutionary biology and logic are mutually exclusive. I've been known to say that, haven't I? Yes, indeed!
>
> Well, Ray, you have found a new crank buddy. JTEM is just "lucky" to
> be a crank and a crank magnet.
>

But you hold all anti-evolutionists to be cranks, correct?

Ray

[John Stockwell]

There hasn't been a non-crank antievolutionist in decades.


>
> Ray

[The Incredibly Lucky JTEM]

John Stockwell wrote:

> More crank behavior. Off your meds?

You described evolution as a given. I corrected
you. Man up. Take your lumps. You said something
stupid. Accept your error.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161067460867

[eridanus]

Dear Ray. You are right. "Pressure selection" is a bad pair of words.
The correct phrase should say, "the use of fire conferred a survival advantage".
In the long range, humans that ignored the use of fire perished during some harsh glacial periods. Glacial periods were perfect to kill most human
beings out of the face of the planet. Only a few of them survived.

Eri

[eridanus]

"selection pressure over those with less advantages".
In the case of the fire, the knowledge of how to make and use fire was an
advantage. The selection was exerted against ignorant humans that do not.
Nature killed them by hunger during harsh periods. That is a form of pressure.
Eri

[The Incredibly Lucky JTEM]

eridanus wrote:

> In the long range, humans that ignored the use
> of fire perished during some harsh glacial
> periods. Glacial periods were perfect to kill
> most human beings out of the face of the planet.
> Only a few of them survived.

Glaciations did NOT kill off humans. What did
were the catastrophes which sparked glacial
advancement, Toba being the mother of all
catastrophes in human history...

If the Yellowstone or Tokyo calderas explode
tomorrow they'll release about the same
energy as 100,000 nuclear weapons -- more than
both the United States & Soviet Union stockpiled
during the peak of the Cold War. This will
produce an extremely long Nuclear Winter, or a
"Volcanic Winter," actually, immediately plunging
the earth into cold. Summers will be over for
at least a few years in the southern hemisphere,
probably at least a decade if not decades in the
northern hemisphere. Any population that isn't
along the equator or at least the coast is
probably doomed.

Toba was more than 2.5 times larger. It exploded
roughly 70,000 years ago.

The glaciers will probably see most of their
growth long after most of the people are dead,
when the skies above the southern hemisphere
are clear. This will allow the sun to warm the
southern hemisphere, produce evaporation which
will eventually hit the cold air up north (still
in relative darkness), fall as snow and
accumulate year after year. The glaciers
themselves are are cooling mechanism. They
reflect the sun's energy, keeping it from
warming the planet.

Imagine painting most of north America &
northern Europe in reflective white paint?
Think of the energy loss as it bounced back
all that sunlight...




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/962773160

[John Stockwell]

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 6:49:54 AM UTC-6, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> John Stockwell wrote:
>
> > More crank behavior. Off your meds?
>
> You described evolution as a given. I corrected
> you. Man up. Take your lumps. You said something
> stupid. Accept your error.

You didn't "correct" me, you made a more detailed
and pedantic statement of the same thing, adding
nothing to the discussion.

>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161067460867

[John Stockwell]

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 8:49:53 AM UTC-6, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> eridanus wrote:
>
> > In the long range, humans that ignored the use
> > of fire perished during some harsh glacial
> > periods. Glacial periods were perfect to kill
> > most human beings out of the face of the planet.
> > Only a few of them survived.
>
> Glaciations did NOT kill off humans. What did
> were the catastrophes which sparked glacial
> advancement,

Let the crank pedantry begin.

> Toba being the mother of all
> catastrophes in human history...

.... Which doesn't even show on the Vostok ice core record, which incidentally
shows 9 glacial/interglacial periods over the past 100,000 years, but
no "catastrophes" to go with them.

>
> If the Yellowstone or Tokyo calderas explode
> tomorrow they'll release about the same
> energy as 100,000 nuclear weapons -- more than
> both the United States & Soviet Union stockpiled
> during the peak of the Cold War. This will
> produce an extremely long Nuclear Winter, or a
> "Volcanic Winter," actually, immediately plunging
> the earth into cold. Summers will be over for
> at least a few years in the southern hemisphere,
> probably at least a decade if not decades in the
> northern hemisphere. Any population that isn't
> along the equator or at least the coast is
> probably doomed.
>
> Toba was more than 2.5 times larger. It exploded
> roughly 70,000 years ago.

Did not initiate a glacial period, though. The earth was in the
middle of a glaciation at that time. The peak of the last glaciation
was about 20,000 years ago.

>
> The glaciers will probably see most of their
> growth long after most of the people are dead,
> when the skies above the southern hemisphere
> are clear. This will allow the sun to warm the
> southern hemisphere, produce evaporation which
> will eventually hit the cold air up north (still
> in relative darkness), fall as snow and
> accumulate year after year. The glaciers
> themselves are are cooling mechanism. They
> reflect the sun's energy, keeping it from
> warming the planet.
>
> Imagine painting most of north America &
> northern Europe in reflective white paint?
> Think of the energy loss as it bounced back
> all that sunlight...

Guess you never heard of Milankovic Cycles...
(no doubt a stream of pompous pedantry will follow).

>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/962773160

[The Incredibly Lucky JTEM]

John Stockwell wrote:

> The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:

> > You described evolution as a given. I corrected
> > you. Man up. Take your lumps. You said something
> > stupid. Accept your error.

> You didn't "correct" me

If I have to be honest, I didn't think you
had what it takes to man-up.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161052484291

[The Incredibly Lucky JTEM]

John Stockwell wrote:

> Let the crank pedantry begin.

Instead of these constant emotional core
dumps, you could try identifying precisely
what you need to disagree with, and why.

> > Toba being the mother of all
> > catastrophes in human history...

> .... Which doesn't even show on the Vostok ice core record

Did you Google it? Toba? It ain't hard.
And all the information is there. Nothing
I said is even close to inaccurate.

But, I suppose you need to believe...

(Moron)




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161052484291

[John Stockwell]

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 1:09:53 PM UTC-6, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> John Stockwell wrote:
>
> > Let the crank pedantry begin.
>
> Instead of these constant emotional core
> dumps, you could try identifying precisely
> what you need to disagree with, and why.

How about learning to read? You said:

>Glaciations did NOT kill off humans. What did
>were the catastrophes which sparked glacial

>advancement, Toba being the mother of all
>catastrophes in human history...


You are claiming that "catastrophes which sparked glacial advancement".

I objected to it, because it is wrong. There is no evidence of glaciations
being caused or advanced in any significant way by "catastrophes."

[Wolffan]

On 2017 May 25, John Stockwell wrote
(in article<e6694c7b-1fb7-4f3c...@googlegroups.com>):

there hasn’t been a non-crank anti-evo in over a century.
>
>
> >
> > Ray

[The Incredibly Lucky JTEM]

John Stockwell wrote:

> You are claiming that "catastrophes which sparked
> glacial advancement".

It's not a claim. It's an inescapable consequence.

In fact, "Glacial Maximum" coincides with major
eruptions in Japan... not as big as Toba, of
course, but it was ADDING to the situation that
already existed.

> I objected to it, because it is wrong.

No, you object to reality because you're a moron.

Go Google the climate impact of Krakatoa and
then look at this graph:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/16/1a/bf/161abf451ac509d6ca20acb47fd7a32a.jpg

Anyone who thinks that Toba didn't have a
massive COOLING effect on the planet is a
goddamn jackass.

You're not arguing against me, you idiot, you're
arguing against reality.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161120164979

[eridanus]

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 3:49:53 PM UTC+1, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> eridanus wrote:
>
> > In the long range, humans that ignored the use
> > of fire perished during some harsh glacial
> > periods. Glacial periods were perfect to kill
> > most human beings out of the face of the planet.
> > Only a few of them survived.
>
> Glaciations did NOT kill off humans. What did
> were the catastrophes which sparked glacial
> advancement, Toba being the mother of all
> catastrophes in human history...

You probably mean "glaciations do not killed them all".
Obviously.

There were more catastrophes than Toba. Like the supervolcano of the
Phlegraean Fields in the south of Italy that exploded 39,350 years ago
and spewed 150 Km³plus the supervolcano Uzon in Kamchatka 40,000 years ago
that spewed 1700 Km³ These two volcanoes combined had enough power to
exterminate the Neandertals and modern men living in the higher latitudes
of Europe and Asia. Toba was a little bigger, with 2.800 Km³ of material ejected. This is 1.5 times a bigger explosion of the two, Italy and
Kamchatka volcanoes combined but that occurred in the same period; around
40,000 years ago. If you look at the graphic NGRIP you can see that the cold
lasted 1,600 years. Those times were of much dying if you were living in
higher latitudes. But not all places were so mortal at the same time.
Humans were often on the verge of extinction, but they survived and grew
again and migrated. During the good times, humans grew, and during bad times
they were dying, on the verge of extinction.

Eri

[eridanus]

I have the NGRIP curve of temperatures, that could be found with google
and the temperature at the time previous to Toba Explosion was 7 C degrees
before average temperature of this interglacial. After the Toba explosion
the temperature plunged to -27 before present temperature, in NGRIP camp
in the north of Greenland.
As for Uzon and Phregraean volcaoes it dropped to -23 C degrees below
average. This was 40,000 years ago. The cold lasted 1,700 years.
Of course, those living closer to the equator had a bad spell of cold
and hunger, but survived.
As for the register on the ice cores, I had seen a graphic where it is shown this in a video and clicked a shot. It contains a graphic showing the spike
of sulphur.
But I found also a pdf on this theme, tittled <Direct linking of Greenland and Antarctic ice cores at the Toba eruption (74 ka BP)>
Then, I was watching this article... and it is.

http://www.clim-past.net/9/749/2013/cp-9-749-2013.pdf

I copy a fragment of the text
--------------
In this work we suggest a direct synchronization of Greenland (NGRIP) and
Antarctic (EDML) ice cores at the Toba eruption based on matching of a pattern
of bipolar volcanic spikes. Annual layer counting between volcanic spikes in
both cores allows for a unique match. We first demonstrate this bipolar
matching technique at the already synchronized Laschamp geomagnetic excursion
(41 ka BP) before we apply it to the suggested Toba interval. The Toba
synchronization pattern covers some 2000 yr in GI-20 and AIM-19/20 and includes
nine acidity peaks that are recognized in both ice cores.
The suggested bipolar Toba synchronization has decadal precision. It thus
allows a determination of the exact phasing of inter-hemispheric climate in a
time interval of poorly constrained ice core records, and it allows for a
discussion of the climatic impact of the Toba eruption in a global perspective.
The bipolar linking gives no support for a long-term global cooling caused by
the Toba eruption as Antarctica experiences a major warming shortly after the
event. Furthermore, our bipolar match provides a way to place palaeoenviron- mental records other than ice cores into a precise climatic context.
--------------

It looks like yes. It was registered in both hemispheres.

Well, there some problems, I post another fragment,

-----------
So far, tephra originating from Toba has not been identified in Greenland
(Abbott et al., 2012) or in Antarctic ice cores. Already in 1996, however,
Zielinski et al. (1996) suggested that the Toba eruption could be associated
with a major sulphuric spike identified in the Greenland GISP2 ice core at the
transition from Greenland Interstadial 20 (GI-20) to Greenland Stadial 20
(GS-20) occurring close to the Marine Isotope Stage 4/5 (MIS 4/5) boundary.
A few years later, Toba tephra was identified in marine sediment cores from
the Arabian Sea, which show a glacial climate variability comparable to that
of the Greenland ice cores (Schulz et al., 1998).
The position of the tephra in those and several other marine records seems
to confirm the timing of the Toba eruption at the GI-20 to GS-20 transition
(Schulz et al., 2002; Kudrass et al., 2001; Huang et al., 2001).
------------
other fragment
Being a much larger eruption than any historical eruption and probably being
among the largest volcanic eruptions of the Quaternary, the environmental and
climatic effects of the 74 ka BP Toba eruption are topics of great interest
and debate. The suggested climatic impact of the Toba eruption ranges from
very little impact (Haslam and Petraglia, 2010; Oppenheimer, 2002; Chesner
and Luhr, 2010) to severe impact of “volcanic winter and accelerated
glaciation” (Rampino and Self, 1992). The effect of the eruption on regional
vegetation, humans, and mammals is discussed in a number of papers (e.g.
Petraglia et al., 2007; Louys, 2012) and the topic is still controversial
(Williams, 2012). For archaeology the Toba eruption is of particular interest
because it may have occurred close to the time when Homo sapiens migrated
out of Africa and into Eurasia (Rasmussen et al., 2011) and it is speculated
that the eruption may have caused a “human population bottleneck” (Ambrose,
1998). Beyond the climate impacts of the Toba eruption, the event provides
an important, distinct and widespread time marker beyond the 14C dating range
(e.g. Lane et al., 2011).
--------------
There is some point in which presents some speculation about several Toba explosions separated by some centuries.

Well, you can watch and read the article carefully if you want. I had found
it just a few minutes ago. I am so happy. For this it a question of interest
to me.

Eri

[eridanus]

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 7:59:54 PM UTC+1, John Stockwell wrote:

You should watch A graphic of NGRIP temperatures for the past 130,000 years.

The last peak it looks to me was before the Younger Dryas, some 14,000 years
ago. The next peak back in time was a very weak one about 23,000 years ago.
Then another very thin peak some 27,000 years ago, and other 28,000 years ago.
Each of these peaks of temperature lasted as little as 280 years. It is not that
bad, but when you had started to love the balmy temperatures some 7 degrees
Celsius below present, it has finished. Just nine generations and the precious
high temperatures were gone. They dropped 12 or 14 C degrees. If this cold
catches you a little hungry, you are lost. The falls in temperatures were
precipitous. It looks like in 100 or 120 years it had dropped 7 C degrees.
But the rises in temperature were much faster. In ten years or so, it could
had risen 4 or 5 degrees. Something spectacular.
I had a graphic of GRIP and NGRIP reporting the temperatures from 50,000 to
30,000 years ago. I had been plotting some volcanoes of great power for this
period, and it looks like they caused some of the drops. I am assuming the
list of volcanoes I have is incomplete. It is difficult to have a complete
list of volcanoes.

Eri

[The Incredibly Lucky JTEM]

eridanus wrote:

> The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:

> > Glaciations did NOT kill off humans. What did
> > were the catastrophes which sparked glacial
> > advancement, Toba being the mother of all
> > catastrophes in human history...

> You probably mean "glaciations do not killed
> them all". Obviously.

What I meant was that nearly all the
casualties had already died before the
glaciers saw any major advancement.

> There were more catastrophes than Toba.

I mentioned a few elsewhere.

> Like the supervolcano of the
> Phlegraean Fields in the south of Italy that
> exploded 39,350 years ago
> and spewed 150 Km³plus

Yup. That's one of the ones I mentioned. Supposedly
plant pollen in Europe all but vanished for a
year or more, due to the volcanic winter.

> the supervolcano Uzon in Kamchatka 40,000 years ago
> that spewed 1700 Km³ These two volcanoes combined
> had enough power to exterminate the Neandertals and
> modern men living in the higher latitudes
> of Europe and Asia.

I'm guessing that they were gone entirely. From
what I understand, so called "Neanderthals"
after this belonged to "Modern" haplogroups i.e.
they were hybrids. That, or they were the origins
of some modern haplogroups, something which
nobody seems willing to entertain.

> Toba was a little bigger, with 2.800 Km³ of material ejected.

That's __A lot__ bigger!

> This is 1.5 times a bigger explosion of the two,
> Italy and Kamchatka volcanoes combined but that
> occurred in the same period; around 40,000 years ago.

Toba's "Biggie" was supposedly around 70k years
ago... ish.

> Humans were often on the verge of extinction,
> but they survived and grew again and migrated.

It's why we say we're Hss today, instead of
Neanderthal or Denisovan or something else.

The southern hemisphere recovered the most quickly.
That meant south America, Sundaland & Africa.

Problem: Sundaland was Ground-Zero for Toba,
South America was unpopulated (or barely
populated) and Africa was literally the only
place that could see a quick recovery. So that's
Hss. Us. So called "Modern Man." We exist because
of these events.

No, not DESPITE these catastrophes but BECAUSE
of them.

Modern humans never "Survived" these events, we
were created by them.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161171079028

[John Stockwell]

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 1:09:53 PM UTC-6, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> John Stockwell wrote:
>
> > The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
>
> > > You described evolution as a given. I corrected
> > > you. Man up. Take your lumps. You said something
> > > stupid. Accept your error.
>
> > You didn't "correct" me
>
> If I have to be honest, I didn't think you
> had what it takes to man-up.

I don't think that you know how to be honest, so
your comment is just a meaningless insult.


>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161052484291

[John Stockwell]

Nope. I am arguing against cherry picking, which is what you
are doing.

>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161120164979

[John Stockwell]

The point that you are missing is that the change in isostatic
loading is causing the increase in eruptions.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL067285/abstract

Deglaciation and glacial erosion: A joint control on magma productivity by continental unloading
Authors

First published: 19 February 2016Full publication history
DOI: 10.1002/2015GL067285 View/save citation
Cited by (CrossRef): 1 article Check for updates

Article has an altmetric score of 141
Funding Information

Abstract

Glacial-interglacial cycles affect the processes through which water and rocks are redistributed across the Earth's surface, thereby linking the solid Earth and climate dynamics. Regional and global scale studies suggest that continental lithospheric unloading due to ice melting during the transition to interglacials leads to increased continental magmatic, volcanic, and degassing activity. Such a climatic forcing on the melting of the Earth's interior, however, has always been evaluated regardless of continental unloading by glacial erosion, albeit the density of rock exceeds that of ice by approximately 3 times. Here we present and discuss numerical results involving synthetic but realistic topographies, ice caps, and glacial erosion rates suggesting that erosion may be as important as deglaciation in affecting continental unloading. Our study represents an additional step toward a more general understanding of the links between a changing climate, glacial processes, and the melting of the solid Earth.


>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/161120164979

[eridanus]

The most common things I had read is that the modern man already existed more
than 100,000 years ago. That is, they existed before Toba. The question is
not this. I was postulating that sometimes in some regions of the planet,
most people was wiped out; exterminated. Then, Toba exterminated all people
living in Sumatra, and all people in India. In other places far off, they
were not exterminated 100% but some 95% or 95. But not only humans, other
animals were also on the brink of extinction. But in some regions they were
literally exterminated. Most of the tefra of Toba fell over India, that was
full of forests. The result of so much tefra killed all those forests, and
all grasses, etc. No human or animal remained alive in India. Unless you
are fingering some region far off in the north.
Anyway, the graph of temperatures NGRP and the records of sulfate in the ice
cores of Greenland and Antarctica, showed two explosions of Toba, separated
by 4,000 years. Then, the first explosion caused a extreme glacial period
lasting 1.300 years, withe temperatures 20 C degrees before present. The temperatures rose again, and after 2,700 years of good clime (only 7C degrees
below present)Toba exploded again some 75,000 years ago. This exploded with
more power, plunging the temperatures 27C degrees that lasted for 2,000 years.
Then, after this glacial period, temperature rose again to -7 C degrees before
present temp. But it soon began to fall again to -25C degrees before the actual
temperature. 70,000 years ago, there was another spike of temperature lasting
almost nothing; fifty or hundred years and it fell again fast to -25 degrees.
During the most frigid of the times, only people living near the equator had
some chances of survival. Some scientist had speculated with the possibility
that humans survived this periods eating sea-food in the shores.
If you want to have an idea you must watch the graphic NGRIP showing the
ice core temperatures records of dO18 isotopes.
The graphic I am watching contains also the curves of Epica Dome C in
Antarctica. There most of this period from the present to 130,000 years ago
the temperature was only 5 to 8 degrees below present temperature in the
Antarctica. All this jittery of temperatures up and down do not existed in
the Antarctica because it was isolated by some cold ocean and currents.

Then, my idea is that past human adventures were very complex, and humans
were on the verge of extinction many times. There is a video tittled How the
Climate changed the History that I could not find in youtube. I got it in
Spanish. Well, they have a moment in which some scientist are extracting
mud from a ancient crater in Germany. The study of this mud shows that
climate changed in a hundred years or in less, from being a forest to being
a desert, or a tundra. For 3 or 4 hundred years, it was a cold desert, than
it had a period in middle in which appears some sign of having grasses or
some light forest, to go back to desert.
But it looks like the combination of the supervolcano of the Phrearaean Fields and Uzon in Kamchatka in less than 1,000 years was too much for anyone living
in Eurasia. Uzon was a volcano much powerful than the Italian one.
eri

[JTEM is my hero]

He was wrong. Evolution is not a given.


Made a dumb mistake, John Stockwell wrote:
> I don't think

Neither does evolution. In fact, it's not
even a thing. It's a result. "Evolution"
is what we label the result of successful
reproduction.

...in the old days we only labeled it
"Evolution" if the organism went through
a significant change, while the working
definition here, in talk origins, makes
"Evolution" a euphemism for "Reproduction."

..."A change in allele frequencies over time."

It's actually a stupid definition as time is
almost never known. So the change is just as
likely -- or more likely -- to be observed over
distance. And maybe not even distance, as
there are places on this earth where the
environment changes quite radically across a
very short distance... Hawaii being an
awesome example.

https://www.hawaii-forest.com/koppens_climates/

But, worst of all, "Changes in allele frequencies
over time" is synonymous with -- now get this --
reproduction. And according to the scientific
rules of precedence, the older name/term takes
precedence, so no more evolution, it's just
"Reproduction."

Well, according to THIS group anyway...

Now crap your pants over the fact that I
just stated the obvious.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/168172070268

[JTEM is my hero]

John Stockwell wrote:

> .... Which doesn't even show on the Vostok ice core record, which incidentally
> shows 9 glacial/interglacial periods over the past 100,000 years,

You are so full of shit!

https://www.clim-past.net/9/749/2013/cp-9-749-2013.pdf

Secondly, the last glacial period was longer than that!
The last glacial period lasted more than 100k years.



-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/168168140748

[JTEM is my hero]

John Stockwell wrote:

> Nope. I am arguing

At this point you're in denial. You're
not arguing, you're in denial.

Toba didn't start a glacial period. We
were already inside of a glacial period
when it exploded, and no estimates place
the recovery time for the northern
hemisphere at anything less than DECADES.

....but according to you this didn't
make one bit of difference to the glaciers.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/168168140748

[JTEM is my hero]

Your randomly chosen cite addresses,
what? Specifically. What do you believe
it addresses and how does it do this?





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/168172070268

[JTEM is my hero]

eridanus wrote:

> Then, my idea is that past human adventures were very complex, and humans
> were on the verge of extinction many times.

Despite what some people might be saying in
this thread, volcanic winters are well
understood and nobody involved in climate
science would or could deny that they are
real.

...and anyone who tells you that major
reduction in global temperatures lasting
decades -- plural -- won't grow existing
glaciers is a goddamn fool. But, it wasn't
only volcanoes.

Objects from space keep hitting the earth.
There's even an impact crater that's
suspiciously close in age to one of the
three major collapses of ancient Egyptian
civilization. Yes I'm saying that many
believe that an impact event threw the
climate into a tailspin, resulting in the
collapse of a civilization.

So it's not just volcanoes.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/168172070268

[J.LyonLayden]

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 4:09:53 PM UTC-4, John Stockwell wrote:
> On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 1:09:53 PM UTC-6, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> > John Stockwell wrote:
> >
> > > Let the crank pedantry begin.
> >
> > Instead of these constant emotional core
> > dumps, you could try identifying precisely
> > what you need to disagree with, and why.
>
>
>
> How about learning to read? You said:
>
> >Glaciations did NOT kill off humans. What did
> >were the catastrophes which sparked glacial
> >advancement, Toba being the mother of all
> >catastrophes in human history...
>
>
> You are claiming that "catastrophes which sparked glacial advancement".
>
> I objected to it, because it is wrong. There is no evidence of glaciations
> being caused or advanced in any significant way by "catastrophes."

Most scientists think Toba sent us into another glacial period, or at least sped up it's onset. There were quite a few glacial periods during the Ice Age.

>
>
>
> >
> > > > Toba being the mother of all
> > > > catastrophes in human history...
> >
> > > .... Which doesn't even show on the Vostok ice core record

Do you not know how to read the Vostok ice core record?

[J.LyonLayden]

Sorry but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory

Thousand year cooling periods during the Ice Age generally increase glaciation.

>
>
> >
> > The glaciers will probably see most of their
> > growth long after most of the people are dead,
> > when the skies above the southern hemisphere
> > are clear. This will allow the sun to warm the
> > southern hemisphere, produce evaporation which
> > will eventually hit the cold air up north (still
> > in relative darkness), fall as snow and
> > accumulate year after year. The glaciers
> > themselves are are cooling mechanism. They
> > reflect the sun's energy, keeping it from
> > warming the planet.
> >
> > Imagine painting most of north America &
> > northern Europe in reflective white paint?
> > Think of the energy loss as it bounced back
> > all that sunlight...
>
> Guess you never heard of Milankovic Cycles...
> (no doubt a stream of pompous pedantry will follow).

I have. But what's your point?


>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- --
> >
> > http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/962773160

[J.LyonLayden]

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 5:20:03 AM UTC-5, J.LyonLayden wrote:
> On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 4:09:53 PM UTC-4, John Stockwell wrote:
> > On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 1:09:53 PM UTC-6, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> > > John Stockwell wrote:
> > >
> > > > Let the crank pedantry begin.
> > >
> > > Instead of these constant emotional core
> > > dumps, you could try identifying precisely
> > > what you need to disagree with, and why.
> >
> >
> >
> > How about learning to read? You said:
> >
> > >Glaciations did NOT kill off humans. What did
> > >were the catastrophes which sparked glacial
> > >advancement, Toba being the mother of all
> > >catastrophes in human history...
> >
> >
> > You are claiming that "catastrophes which sparked glacial advancement".
> >
> > I objected to it, because it is wrong. There is no evidence of glaciations
> > being caused or advanced in any significant way by "catastrophes."
>
>
> Most scientists think Toba sent us into another glacial period, or at least sped up it's onset. There were quite a few glacial periods during the Ice Age.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > > Toba being the mother of all
> > > > > catastrophes in human history...
> > >
> > > > .... Which doesn't even show on the Vostok ice core record
>
> Do you not know how to read the Vostok ice core record?

This sounds mean so I'll restate. Do you know how to read the Vostok ice core record and when and what would you expect from it to coincide with Toba's eruption?

[eridanus]

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 10:20:03 AM UTC, J.LyonLayden wrote:
> On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 4:09:53 PM UTC-4, John Stockwell wrote:
> > On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 1:09:53 PM UTC-6, The Incredibly Lucky JTEM wrote:
> > > John Stockwell wrote:
> > >
> > > > Let the crank pedantry begin.
> > >
> > > Instead of these constant emotional core
> > > dumps, you could try identifying precisely
> > > what you need to disagree with, and why.
> >
> >
> >
> > How about learning to read? You said:
> >
> > >Glaciations did NOT kill off humans. What did
> > >were the catastrophes which sparked glacial
> > >advancement, Toba being the mother of all
> > >catastrophes in human history...
> >
> >
> > You are claiming that "catastrophes which sparked glacial advancement".
> >
> > I objected to it, because it is wrong. There is no evidence of glaciations
> > being caused or advanced in any significant way by "catastrophes."
>
>
> Most scientists think Toba sent us into another glacial period, or at least
> sped up it's onset. There were quite a few glacial periods during the Ice Age.

Watching the graphic of GISP Toba explosion made worse the temperatures.
It do not started a glacial age, the period was already in a glacial age.
I am watching a graphic of the previous glacial age, from 100k to 10k years
ago and it shows a great jittery of temperatures up and down, well understood
in the graphic. I had been comparing some graphics and it presents a fall in
temperature of 5 or 7 C degrees after some big powerful volcanoes. For other
falls in temperature of the curve, I have not found any big volcanoes in
the list to associate with the fall in temperature lasting several centuries.
In particular, it exists for the approximate period of the TOBA activity three
explosions dated aprox. 69, 73 and 77 thousand years ago.
I had framed the dust of GISP2 with the temperatures of the same GISP2. It clearly shows a coincidence between dust and lower temperatures. The fall in
temperatures correlate well with the explosion of most powerful in this period.
If those graphs are real, the result of a honest work or totally invented
for a purpose is a different argument.
eri

[JTEM is my hero]

Ray Martinez wrote:

> If I understand the point above correctly it
> says evolutionary biology and logic are
> mutually exclusive.

They are.

You can rationalize your logic, make it fit --
as we are talking about PAST results, things
that have already happened -- but evolution
doesn't care a whit.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/168269853953

[JTEM is my hero]

J.LyonLayden wrote:

> Most scientists think Toba sent us into another glacial period,

prolonged/deepened the one we were in.

We're talking about the earth being instantly
thrown into a global winter, with temperatures
dropping a conservatively estimated 20F and
staying that way for years -- the north hemisphere
going a decade AT LEAST without a summer...

But, nope, why would glaciers get any bigger just
because of that?





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/168269853953

[JTEM is my hero]

J.LyonLayden wrote:

> This sounds mean so I'll restate. Do you know how to read the Vostok ice core record and when and what would you expect from it to coincide with Toba's eruption?

Direct linking of Greenland and Antarctic ice cores at the Toba
eruption (74 ka BP)

https://www.clim-past.net/9/749/2013/cp-9-749-2013.pdf

Some idiot read a headline and went no further...




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/168262727153