1. Registering for the Forum

    We require a human profile pic upon registration on this forum.

    After registration is submitted, you will receive a confirmation email, which should contain a link to confirm your intent to register for the forum. At this point, you will not yet be registered on the forum.

    Our Support staff will manually approve your account within 24 hours, and you will get a notification. This is to prevent the many spam account signups which we receive on a daily basis.

    If you have any problems completing this registration, please email support@jackkruse.com and we will assist you.

Nick Lane's premise just took an interesting hit............in Cambridge.

Discussion in 'Factor X' started by Jack Kruse, Jul 5, 2018.

  1. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    Nick seems to value the most popular narratives in evolutionary biology puts oxygen front and center as the stimulus that drove complexity. Could Nick have missed how the sunlight at this time changed while animals in the oceans slightly changed oxygen tensions and the combination of both drove the Cambrian explosion? We know the sun is a G class star so it is now ten % brighter because it emits more UV light. We know UV light increase electric topology charge changes in water........UV light also makes water more transparent to sunlight. Could this light have lead to a non-linear stimulus change? We have a new idea that is sneaky smart.

    The geological record shows a clear link, albeit an often subtle and complicated one, between rises in oxygen levels and early animal evolution. Researchers argue that this suggests low oxygen availability had been holding greater complexity at bay — that greater amounts of oxygen were needed for energy-demanding processes like movement, predation and the development of novel body plans with intricate morphologies.

    It’s a very attractive, intuitive explanation. But Nicholas Butterfield, a paleobiologist at the University of Cambridge, asays it’s wrong.

    Interesting development............

    Butterfield is “a lone voice in the wilderness,” He has what many others might consider an unusual take on the oxygen story. He’s essentially turned the idea on its head. According to his theory, changes in environmental conditions weren’t the cause, but rather the consequence, of animals, migrating and perturbing their surroundings. We need to begin to appreciate that animals have a powerful, powerful impact on the carbon cycle and on how everything goes around. He makes a great point. That Calvin cycle is terribly misunderstood in science.

    In a paper published in the January issue of Geobiology, Butterfield braided fluid dynamics and ecology to present his case for animals driving oxygenation instead of the other way around. First, he argued, if there was enough oxygen to power unicellular eukaryotes 1.6 billion years ago — which was indeed the case if you look at the data yourself — then there would have been enough to run a whole assortment of animals. He believes early multicellular organisms would have consisted of flagellated cells moving in unison, collectively whipping their appendages to create currents that would have made it easier for them to obtain dissolved oxygen. He turns Nick's thesis around he made in his book Oxygen. Butterfield makes the case that if there was enough oxygen to run a single-celled eukaryote, there was also enough oxygen to run a fish. So oxygen limitation cannot be invoked to explain the billion-year delay in the evolution of animals.

    Hia point here is excellent and it made me smile because he opens to the door to how oxygen can be made by UV light in animals...........I have made the same point in blogs but I was not as eloquent as his work has made it.

    Butterfield's hypothesis focuses on diurnal vertical migration, a daily process during which sundry organisms, ranging in size and complexity from zooplankton and sponges to fish and squids, migrate between shallow and deeper waters to find food and avoid predators. By feeding up above and metabolizing down below, the animals scrub and help ventilate the ocean, raising oxygen concentrations at the surface while driving anoxic regions to greater depths.

    Animals all absorb UV light and their cells emit ELF-UV. We know in the venous system of all animals UV light exposure drives oxygen tension higher and this would cause oxygen release in exhalation as they moved through the environment.

    This redistribution of oxygen would also have improved the transparency of the water column in the seas, allowing light to penetrate farther down and escalating predators’ reliance on vision at deeper and deeper levels when hunting. The subsequent evolution of larger, deeper-diving visual predators would then have pushed the “oxygen minimum zones” to even lower depths, creating a feedback loop.

    Yes, Mr. Lane now has another theory that fits better with geologic data and the astronomy of our G class star.
     
    Alex97232, Allin, JanSz and 1 other person like this.

Share This Page