I'll ignore the problems with the 3.5 billion year gap in the fossil record and the problems with radiocarbon dating (especially in metamorphic rocks)
I'll ignore the philosophy and deal with the scientific issues here.
(1) You can't radiocarbon date metamorphic rock. In fact, you can't radiocarbon date most other sorts of rock -- even sedimentary rock. To be successfully radiocarbon dated, an object must (a) be organic and (b) contain carbon. This excludes limestone and virtually all metamorphic rock, including only (if such a thing exists -- I've never heard of such a thing) metamorphic mudstones or lake-sediments.
On the other hand, you can potassium-argon date igneous rocks, and -- to a lesser extent -- most metamorphic rocks.
(2) Were there a 3.5 billion year gap in the fossil record, we'd have no fossils at all, as the fossil record is only roughly one billion years old.
I've considered this question at length, and have finally developed a system to determine which animals I can or cannot kill:
Unique data content.
Ants are perfect genetic copies of each other; their brains can only carry a few bytes of unique data at a time. I can kill ants with impunity.
Cows are genetically distinct (containing more than a few megabytes of distinct data), but their brains are virtually identical. I wouldn't go on a mad cow-slaughtering spree, but I wouldn't necessarily feel guilty about eating a cheeseburger on a fresh, thick kaiser roll.
Apes? Dolphins? African Grey Parrots? Dogs? Octopi? To all appearances, these animals possess not only unique genetic data, but also a certain amount of reasoning ability and memory. As they contain unique psychic data, I'd definitely have some qualms about killing them for any reason. In fact, I might go so far as to suggest that apes, dolphins, and African Greys be treated as almost human -- we don't really know how smart they are, and until we know, we should be treating them well.
Which brings us to people. People contain BIGNUM amounts of unique data apart from their genetic data. People are far more important than ants, bacteria, and even dogs. All effort should be expended to keep them alive and kicking.
As much as I'd like to see Marilyn Manson's mutilated dead body, none of these things are to be found on the site.
In general, it's a nightmare of slow-to-download Flash.:/
It's interesting that you say this.
Caucasians -- as well as every other race -- share 98% of their DNA with chimpanzees. If it's *only* 95% that we share with Indians... wow. They were here a long, long time before us.
Slashdot Mirror
(1) You can't radiocarbon date metamorphic rock. In fact, you can't radiocarbon date most other sorts of rock -- even sedimentary rock. To be successfully radiocarbon dated, an object must (a) be organic and (b) contain carbon. This excludes limestone and virtually all metamorphic rock, including only (if such a thing exists -- I've never heard of such a thing) metamorphic mudstones or lake-sediments.
On the other hand, you can potassium-argon date igneous rocks, and -- to a lesser extent -- most metamorphic rocks.
(2) Were there a 3.5 billion year gap in the fossil record, we'd have no fossils at all, as the fossil record is only roughly one billion years old.
I've considered this question at length, and have finally developed a system to determine which animals I can or cannot kill:
Unique data content.
Ants are perfect genetic copies of each other; their brains can only carry a few bytes of unique data at a time. I can kill ants with impunity.
Cows are genetically distinct (containing more than a few megabytes of distinct data), but their brains are virtually identical. I wouldn't go on a mad cow-slaughtering spree, but I wouldn't necessarily feel guilty about eating a cheeseburger on a fresh, thick kaiser roll.
Apes? Dolphins? African Grey Parrots? Dogs? Octopi? To all appearances, these animals possess not only unique genetic data, but also a certain amount of reasoning ability and memory. As they contain unique psychic data, I'd definitely have some qualms about killing them for any reason. In fact, I might go so far as to suggest that apes, dolphins, and African Greys be treated as almost human -- we don't really know how smart they are, and until we know, we should be treating them well.
Which brings us to people. People contain BIGNUM amounts of unique data apart from their genetic data. People are far more important than ants, bacteria, and even dogs. All effort should be expended to keep them alive and kicking.
As much as I'd like to see Marilyn Manson's mutilated dead body, none of these things are to be found on the site. In general, it's a nightmare of slow-to-download Flash. :/
It's interesting that you say this. Caucasians -- as well as every other race -- share 98% of their DNA with chimpanzees. If it's *only* 95% that we share with Indians ... wow. They were here a long, long time before us.