Volcanic Activity and Accelarated Evolution

So, a few weeks ago, I noticed a random article online that mentioned a relatively new island that the earth burped up in the pacific ocean. On this 50 year old island, there were almost 90 new species of plant and bird life. This inspired me to do a search, and basically everywhere I looked, where ever there is volcanic activity, there seems to be new, undocumented biodiversity. The following is an abstract from a study of, accelarated evolution associated with volcanic activity.

Volcanic activity on the island of Hawaii results in a cyclical pattern of habitat destruction and fragmentation by lava, followed by habitat regeneration on newly formed substrates. While this pattern has been hypothesized to promote the diversification of Hawaiian lineages, there have been few attempts to link geological processes to measurable changes in population structure. We investigated the genetic structure of three species of Hawaiian spiders in forests fragmented by a 150-year-old lava flow on Mauna Loa Volcano, island of Hawaii: Tetragnatha quasimodo (forest and lava flow generalist), T. anuenue and T. brevignatha (forest specialists). To estimate fragmentation effects on population subdivision in each species, we examined variation in mitochondrial and nuclear genomes (DNA sequences and allozymes, respectively). Population subdivision was higher for forest specialists than for the generalist in fragments separated by lava. Patterns of mtDNA sequence evolution also revealed that forest specialists have undergone rapid expansion, while the generalist has experienced more gradual population growth. Results confirm that patterns of neutral genetic variation reflect patterns of volcanic activity in some Tetragnatha species. Our study further suggests that population subdivision and expansion can occur across small spatial and temporal scales, which may facilitate the rapid spread of new character states, leading to speciation as hypothesized by H. L. Carson 30 years ago

Link:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Now, I realize that this does not constitute as proof of anything, and my mind is made up regarding Darwinian evolution, macro-evolution, and micro-evolution...but, why does volcanic activity always seem to be associated with undiscovered biodiversity?

If evolution does indeed take thousands of years to manifest, then why are 50 year old islands sporting new species of plants and animals?

Here is a scenario for you to consider:

The biblical flood actually happened as described in Genesis, about 4,400 years ago. Each existing species of animal had its representatives carry its genetic material on to the ark, so that the earth could be repopulated after the flood. When the flood occured, not only did rain fall from the sky, but water erupted from below. This implies global volcanic activity, and possibly global continental displacement. When Noah and the animals finally left the ark, the earth would have been new...meaning that volcanic activity had given us a new crust. It is entirely possible that the new environment was a perfect one for accelarrated evolution.

Mind you, the flood occured 1,656 years after the fall of Adam, so that is only 1,656 years that life had to diversify on earth before the flood. Who knows how long Adam was in the garden of eden. With at least two of each animal on the ark, how much biodiversity could come after 50 years, 400 years, 1,000 years, etc.

Now, Im posting from a very antiquated smart phone, so I will be posting more links to support my theory as the discussion progresses.

Here is an excerpt from another article that supports my idea.

The researchers arrived at their conclusion after superimposing digitized world maps of seismically and volcanically active regions onto a map depicting biologically rich regions of the world. They found that tectonically active regions with the greatest upheaval from earthquakes and volcanoes were also regions that had the highest known levels of biodiversity.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

Please feel free to contribute more cases to this thread, both pro's and con's.

Well, for one, there has never been a global flood, and there most certainly was not one 4,400 years ago. Such a notion is absolutely, comically ridiculous. I would recommend putting down the religious books and picking up a textbook for awhile.

Edit: Are there really still people who believe such things in this day and age? Unreal...

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Because newly formed areas, especially volcanic islands, provide open niches and a natural genetic bottleneck.

Also, there is no time constraints on evolution.

And at no point in the history of the earth has the entire surface been covered by water ie no global flood.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Well, for one, there has never been a global flood, and there most certainly was not one 4,400 years ago. Such a notion is absolutely, comically ridiculous. I would recommend putting down the religious books and picking up a textbook for awhile.

And just exactly how do you know this for sure? Its attitudes like this that continue to drive a wedge between the spiritual world and what a pannel of men deem scientifically sound.

a reply to: Cypress

Also, there is no time constraints on evolution.

That isnt what they teach us in school these days, but that is my point; it doesnt take thousands of years for adaptation and biodiversity.

And again, how do you know that there was no flood. Multiple ancient civilizations had flood myths, maybe they were trying to tell us something.

We already know that there is more fresh water inside the earth than there is water in the oceans. Both the bible and the Babylonian myths told is this. Furthermore there are geological indicators all over the world to point to a global cataclysm.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Cypress
Furthermore there are geological indicators all over the world to point to a global cataclysm.

Please tell us what these indicators are then, and provide some legitimate sources backing up your claims.

There is zero evidence of any global flood (or any other global cataclysm) happening, ever. And certainly not in recorded history. Continuing to make such patently, verifiably false statements only serves to make you look foolish and uneducated.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Well, there is the cambrian explosion, the polystrate (upright) fossils found all over the world, the discovery of underwater shorelines as deep as 400 ft, the fact that the continents look as though they have literally been ripped apart, the fact that radio-active dating has proven to yield inconsistent results, and, oh yeah, there is more than enough water under the crust to cover the entire surface of the earth (that was a recent find that apparently the ancient world already knew about). Now, I know what mainstream science has to say about these phenomena, Im just saying that those THEORIES have not and cannot be sufficiently proven. As far as geology and biology goes, my education is high school level. Im not uneducated, I just think that the high school science curriculum is more often than not, full of crap when it comes to evolution and the age of human civilization.

If that makes me sound uneducated, then I'm happy to accept that label. At least I can still think out side of the box.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

If that makes me sound uneducated, then I'm happy to accept that label. At least I can still think out side of the box.

Making ignorant assertions is not "thinking outside the box". Neither is blindly accepting the baseless claims of a 2,000 year old book. As far as thoughts to box proximity goes, you are firmly within a box of blind belief and self-delusion.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Well, for one, there has never been a global flood, and there most certainly was not one 4,400 years ago. Such a notion is absolutely, comically ridiculous. I would recommend putting down the religious books and picking up a textbook for awhile.

And just exactly how do you know this for sure? Its attitudes like this that continue to drive a wedge between the spiritual world and what a pannel of men deem scientifically sound.

The geologic record is pretty definitive about it. If a global flood had occurred 4400 years ago, we'd have evidence of it in the geologic layers ANYWHERE on earth that you dug. No such evidence exists.

I give you the KT Boundary. This boundary can be seen no matter where you dig on the planet. It is the point that the dinosaurs went extinct. We also know of ancient floods in the geologic record, so we know that they would be preserved for us to see. If a global flood had occurred a similar boundary to the KT boundary would be in the geologic record. No such boundary exists.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Cypress

Also, there is no time constraints on evolution.

That isnt what they teach us in school these days, but that is my point; it doesnt take thousands of years for adaptation and biodiversity.

Yes it is. It's called punctuated equillibrium

And again, how do you know that there was no flood. Multiple ancient civilizations had flood myths, maybe they were trying to tell us something.

Geologic record says it didn't happen. Can't argue with the rocks under our feet.

We already know that there is more fresh water inside the earth than there is water in the oceans. Both the bible and the Babylonian myths told is this. Furthermore there are geological indicators all over the world to point to a global cataclysm.

That water is mineralized and probably has NEVER been free flowing on the surface.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

And again, how do you know that there was no flood.

Ice cores show a record dating back hundreds of thousands of years. A global flood would have destroyed the polar ice caps removing any record of sediment. This is not case, ice core samples from around world show no record of a global flood.
news.nationalgeographic.com...

Although it is not the deepest Antarctic core (the 3,263-meter [10,705-foot] Vostok core holds this record), its compressed ice does provide the longest polar climate record, going back 800,000 years.

Problems with a global flood

rationalwiki.org...

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance
Well, there is the cambrian explosion,

you're really comparing a 50 year period of recent history with a 40 MA +/- time frame and thinking it is an equitable comparison? interesting.

the polystrate (upright) fossils found all over the world,

rapid deposition of sedimentation isn't synonymous with a world wide flood event, carboniferous polystrates not remotely the same as an alleged flood event from 6-7KYA

the discovery of underwater shorelines as deep as 400 ft

in geology those are referred to as continental shelves. they also weren't all above water a few thousand years ago.

the fact that the continents look as though they have literally been ripped apart

incredulousness at plate tectonics doesn't disprove the reality of them.

, the fact that radio-active dating has proven to yield inconsistent results,

not a fact at all, in fact the opposite is true.

and, oh yeah, there is more than enough water under the crust to cover the entire surface of the earth (that was a recent find that apparently the ancient world already knew about).

confirmation bias much?

Now, I know what mainstream science has to say about these phenomena, Im just saying that those THEORIES have not and cannot be sufficiently proven.

oh goody... we get to play the "it's just a theory" game again for someone else who can't be bothered with basic due diligence then wants to be defensive ahead of the curve knowing they will be called ignorant or uneducated. Wouldn't it just be easier to get the appropriate education?

As far as geology and biology goes, my education is high school level. Im not uneducated, I just think that the high school science curriculum is more often than not, full of crap when it comes to evolution and the age of human civilization.

No offense, but if the entirety of your hypothesis is based solely on what you learned in high school then you are for all intents and purposes uneducated , or at least properly educated on the topics. There are people who dedicate years and years of their lives to subsections of the topics you pontificate about yet you feel that 20-25 weeks of a high school course is satisfactory knowledge to attack an entire scientific discipline? wow...
If that makes me sound uneducated, then I'm happy to accept that label. At least I can still think out side of the box.

You're sticking with what works in a very narrow window of YEC teachings, hardly outside the box. More like a pinprick dead center in the box.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The geologic evodence proves there was never a global flood. There were catastrophic localized floods but never a global flood. There is an entire thread on this site devoted to this matter if you are interested.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
Now, I realize that this does not constitute as proof of anything, and my mind is made up regarding Darwinian evolution, macro-evolution, and micro-evolution...but, why does volcanic activity always seem to be associated with undiscovered biodiversity?

If I remember correctly, it has to do more with the fact that it is an island, rather than the volcano itself, but that definitely has an effect as well. Organisms that migrate to islands tend to go through faster evolution because they are adjusting to that newer smaller environment with limited options and food, and specific niches and quite often it results in organisms getting smaller over time. Volcanoes can cause devastation on the island, so it leads to extinctions faster.

If evolution does indeed take thousands of years to manifest, then why are 50 year old islands sporting new species of plants and animals?

There is no timetable on evolution. Basically organisms that had better traits for surviving on islands survived while others were either killed by the volcano or the inability to compete for food. Don't forget that the organisms that migrated to the island had already been evolving thousands of years before, but the mutations were probably neutral because they had no affect on survivability UNTIL they got to the island.

That's very interesting. I suppose that the energies near a volcano vary much more greatly as well (certainly in temperature). Also, I suppose that the mineral content in fresh volcanic rock is much more diverse than in the top soil of say, an ancient forest wrenched of nutrients over the centuries. That may also contribute to the diversity.

originally posted by: Asynchrony
That's very interesting. I suppose that the energies near a volcano vary much more greatly as well (certainly in temperature). Also, I suppose that the mineral content in fresh volcanic rock is much more diverse than in the top soil of say, an ancient forest wrenched of nutrients over the centuries. That may also contribute to the diversity.

Good point! There's also the possibility that the local volcanic activity creates an environment where the mutation rate is accelerated as well, so new traits could possibly emerge faster. Hopefully the day will come where we can scan DNA and map the genome instantly to compare it. It would sure help us figure out if indeed the rates are higher when coupled with volcanism. It would make sense.