Descoberto um organismo que se mantem parado, sem evoluir, há mais de 2 bilhões de anos! E isto é explicado pela Matrix/DNA Theory

(Aprenda Inglês e ao Mesmo Tempo Obtenha Informações Atualizadas do Mundo)

Descoberto um organismo que se mantem parado, sem evoluir, há mais de 2 bilhões de anos! E isto é explicado pela Matrix/DNA Theory

Noticia de Hoje:

Scientists discover organism that hasn’t evolved in more than 2 billion years

Cientistas descobrem organismo que não evoluiu em mais de 2 bilhões de  anos.

Link:  http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/scientists-discover-organism-that-hasnt-evolved-in-more-than-2-billion-years

So how do scientists explain a species living for so long without evolving? Ins’t there evolution? How does Darwinists explain it?

Então, como os cientistas explicam uma espécie vivendo  tanto tempo sem evoluir? Não existe a evolução? Domo os Darwinistas explicam isso? 

Bem… o bicho foi encontrado. Agora tem um debate entre duas teorias: Charles Darwin e Louis Morelli. Cada qual julgando que sua explicação faz mais sentido que a outra. Vamos ver/traduzir a noticia e depois, estas duas explicações:

xxxx

An international team of scientists has discovered the greatest absence of evolution ever reported — a type of deep-sea microorganism that appears not to have evolved over more than 2 billion years. 

Uma equipe internacional de cientistas descobriram a maior ausência de evolução nunca registrada antes – um tipo de micro-organismo das profundezas oceânicas que parece não ter evoluído por mais de 2 bilhões de anos. 

But the researchers say that the organisms’ lack of evolution actually supports Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.

Mas os pesquisadores dizem que a falta de evolução do micro-organismo na realidade reforça a teoria da evolução de Charles Darwin.

The findings are published online today by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

A descoberta está publicada pelo published online today nos Procedimentos da Academia Nacional de Ciências.

The scientists examined sulfur bacteria, microorganisms that are too small to see with the unaided eye, that are 1.8 billion years old and were preserved in rocks from Western Australia’s coastal waters.

Os cientistas examinaram bactérias sulfúricas, micro-organismos que  são muito pequenos para se ver a ôlho nu, têm 1,8 bilhões de anos e foram preservados em rochas nas áreas costeiras das águas da Austrália Ocidental. 

Using cutting-edge technology, they found that the bacteria look the same as bacteria of the same region from 2.3 billion years ago — and that both sets of ancient bacteria are indistinguishable from modern sulfur bacteria found in mud off of the coast of Chile.

Usando as mais avançadas tecnologias, eles descobriram que a bactéria se parece com a mesma bactéria da região que tem 2,3 bilhões de anos – e que ambas as bactérias são indistinguíveis da moderna bactéria sulfúrica achada em pântanos lamacentos nas costas do Chile. 

“It seems astounding that life has not evolved for more than 2 billion years — nearly half the history of the Earth,” said J. William Schopf, a UCLA professor of earth, planetary and space sciences in the UCLA College who was the study’s lead author. “Given that evolution is a fact, this lack of evolution needs to be explained.”

“É surpreendente que a vida não tenha evoluído por mais de 2 bilhões de anos – aproximadamente a metade da história da Terra,” disse J. Willian Schopf, professor de ciências da Terra, planetas e espaço sideral no Colégio UCLA e foi o líder desta pesquisa. ” Considerando-se que a evolução é um fato, esta falta de evolução necessita ser explicada.”

Charles Darwin’s writings on evolution focused much more on species that had changed over time than on those that hadn’t. So how do scientists explain a species living for so long without evolving?

As escritas de Charles Darwin sobre evolução focalizaram muito mais nas espécies que mudaram ao longo do tempo do que nas que não mudaram. Então, como os cientistas explicam uma espécie vivendo por tão longo tempo sem evoluir?

“The rule of biology is not to evolve unless the physical or biological environment changes, which is consistent with Darwin,” said Schopf, who also is director of UCLA’s Center for the Study of Evolution and the Origin of Life.

A regra da biologia é não evoluir a menos que o ambiente biológico ou fisico mude, o que é consistente com Darwin,” disse Schopf, que tambem é diretor do Centro de Estudos da Evolução e Origem da Vida da UCLA. 

The environment in which these microorganisms live has remained essentially unchanged for 3 billion years, he said.

O ambiente no qual estes micro-organismos vivem tem permanecido essencialmente inalterado por 3 bilhões de anos, ele disse.

“These microorganisms are well-adapted to their simple, very stable physical and biological environment,” he said.

“Estes micro-organismos estão bem adaptados ao seu simples e estável ambiente físico e biológico,” ele disse.

“If they were in an environment that did not change but they nevertheless evolved, that would have shown that our understanding of Darwinian evolution was seriously flawed.”

“Se eles estivessem num ambiente que não mudou mas assim mesmo eles tivessem evoluído, isto teria mostrado que nosso entendimento da evolução Darwinista estaria seriamente falho.”

Schopf said the findings therefore provide further scientific proof for Darwin’s work. “It fits perfectly with his ideas,” he said.

Schopf  disse que a descoberta portanto provêm mais provas cientificas para a obra de Darwin. “Isto se enquadra perfeitamente com suas idéias,” ele disse.

The fossils Schopf analyzed date back to a substantial rise in Earth’s oxygen levels known as the Great Oxidation Event, which scientists believe occurred between 2.2 billion and 2.4 billion years ago.

Os fósseis que Schopf analisou são do tempo em que ocorreu um substancial acréscimo dos níveis de oxigênio no Evento da Grande Oxidação, o qual os cientistas acreditam ter ocorrido entre 2,2 e 2,4 bilhões de anos atrás. 

The event also produced a dramatic increase in sulfate and nitrate — the only nutrients the microorganisms would have needed to survive in their seawater mud environment — which the scientists say enabled the bacteria to thrive and multiply.

O evento tambem produziu um dramático acréscimo em sulfato e nitrato – os únicos ingredientes que seriam necessários para a sobrevivência dos micro-organismos em seu lamacento ambiente nas águas marítimas – o qual habilitou as bactérias a prosperar e multiplicar, dizem os cientistas.

Schopf used several techniques to analyze the fossils, including Raman spectroscopy — which enables scientists to look inside rocks to determine their composition and chemistry — and confocal laser scanning microscopy — which renders fossils in 3-D.

Schopf usou várias técnicas para analisar os fósseis, incluindo a Raman espectroscopia – a qual habilita os cientistas a olharem dentro das rochas para determinar sua composição e química – e “laser comfocal scanning microscopia – o qual revela fósseis em 3-D. 

He pioneered the use of both techniques for analyzing microscopic fossils preserved inside ancient rocks.

Ele foi pioneiro no uso de ambas as técnicas para analisar microscopicamente fósseis preservados no interior de rochas antigas.

Co-authors of the PNAS research were Anatoliy Kudryavtsev, a senior scientist at UCLA’s Center for the Study of Evolution and the Origin of Life, and scientists from the University of Wisconsin, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Australia’s University of New South Wales and Chile’s Universidad de Concepción.

Schopf’s research is funded by the NASA Astrobiology Institute.

A pesquisa de Shopf foi financeada pelo Instituto de Astrobiologia da NASA.

xxxx

Vejamos agora a controvérsia e explicações diferentes das duas teorias ( ainda a traduzir):

Darwin’s Theory: 

“The rule of biology is not to evolve unless the physical or biological environment changes, which is consistent with Darwin,” said Schopf, who also is director of UCLA’s Center for the Study of Evolution and the Origin of Life. The environment in which these microorganisms live has remained essentially unchanged for 3 billion years, he said.

“These microorganisms are well-adapted to their simple, very stable physical and biological environment,” he said. “If they were in an environment that did not change but they nevertheless evolved, that would have shown that our understanding of Darwinian evolution was seriously flawed.”

Schopf said the findings therefore provide further scientific proof for Darwin’s work. “It fits perfectly with his ideas,” he said.

xxxx

louismorelli ( comentario postado  em http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/12/25/thunderdome-57/comment-page-2/#comment-909646 )

 To Amphiox
4 February 2015 at 8:32 pm
Oops, thats:
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/scientists-discover-organism-that-hasnt-evolved-in-more-than-2-billion-years.

The explanation from Matrix/DNA Theory is better than the one from Darwin’s Theory.

Darwin’s Theory suggests that “The rule of biology is not to evolve unless the physical or biological environment changes. The environment in which these microorganisms live has remained essentially unchanged for 3 billion years. These microorganisms are well-adapted to their simple, very stable physical and biological environment.”

Matrix/DNA Theory suggests that primordial organisms from 2 billions years ago still are very similar to LUCA – the Last Universal Common Ancestor of all biological systems. LUCA is the astronomic system that produced biological systems, as the astronomic model suggested by the theory. Luca is shared into left-face ( which also is the male face and the first stage of a life) and right-face ( which is also the female face, and the last stage of a life). All left-face informations are radiated by planet’s nucleus, while all right face informations are radiated by stars radiation. The deep floor of oceans are invaded by Earth-nucleus radiation while Sun’s radiation does not reaches there. So, the organisms formed at oceans’ floor have only the first part of informations that would be necessary for a complete living organism. And the absence of Sun’s photons-informations will not promote evolution of this half-life.

The Darwin’s explanation is flawed. We now that life has an inner force towards evolution and if the environment stops, life will change it. The environment for our primate ancestors was the jungle, we changed it for the urban environment as required by our life’s evolution. Like the biological production of oxygen was preparing the evolution of life here. And by another hand, if the organism was well adapted and the environment did not change, should have today a super-population of those organisms, like happened with fungus, lichens, etc. But actually these organisms are scarce.

The state of these organisms was predicted by Matrix/DNA which is earning everyday that a new scientific discovery is published.

Tags: , , ,