Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Once again, most dinosaur fossils--including those in the positions you describe--are not from the time of the CretaceousPaleogene extinction event. They are from isolated events like landslides and earthquakes. Why do you think they would all be from around the time of the meteor strike, and not the hundreds of millions of years before that?
well as we all know, there was meant to be a meteor impact in the cretaceous period, and this is when T-Rex lived in my example.
Now a landslide or earthquake. How would the animals remain embraced in such events? A velociraptor, also from the cretaceous period was eating prey. It was standing over it munching away quite happily and preserved like this. Surely a landslide or earthquake wouldn't preserve them in this exact position?
Why should I?You didn't answer my second question.
The T-Rex lived in the Cretaceous period, not after the Cretaceous period. T-Rex fossils are pretty much exclusively found before the extinction event, as is evidenced by the K-Pg boundary (and in the specific case of Tyrannosaurus we have only "a few dozen" such skeletons anyway.well as we all know, there was meant to be a meteor impact in the cretaceous period, and this is when T-Rex lived in my example.
These are not the only types of events that can lead to fossilization. Do you think animals jumped into tar pits?Now a landslide or earthquake. How would the animals remain embraced in such events? A velociraptor, also from the cretaceous period was eating prey. It was standing over it munching away quite happily and preserved like this. Surely a landslide or earthquake wouldn't preserve them in this exact position?
You asked whether squirrels could fly, so I need to know what you mean by "flight."Why should I?
I'm not the one who called these things "flying squirrels."
As far as "flight" is concened, use the standard dictionary definitions.
Merriam-Webster said:an act or instance of passing through the air by the use of wings
It would depend on how fast the landslide happened, what it was made of, et cetera.
Also, are you ever going to cite the specific example you're talking about? You speak about this like you're referring to some specific find.
They are saying they probably killed each other in the battle with deadly wounds
Cite the example? it was hailed as one of the best discoveries of ALL time in 2006.
Hang on, I'm a creationist yet I know about this?
Scientists believe that shortly after they died there was an earthquake that buried the bodies
well as we all know, there was meant to be a meteor impact in the cretaceous period, and this is when T-Rex lived in my example.
Now a landslide or earthquake. How would the animals remain embraced in such events? A velociraptor, also from the cretaceous period was eating prey. It was standing over it munching away quite happily and preserved like this. Surely a landslide or earthquake wouldn't preserve them in this exact position?
Please, you have made this claim but posted no photographs.
I seriously doubt if such a fossil has ever been found. The closest I can think of is the fossil of a fish eating a fish. That is totally different. The prey fish is so big it looks like the predator may have been choked to death by the smaller fish. That would explain why it was found that way.
That is the same as the fossil I discussed earlier. It is a fairly singular find and the theory is that they were encased in a sandstorm or trapped when a sand dune collapsed. It is also possible they had already killed each other ( Source):*blind post*
The claim is mentioned here: Fossil found of velociraptor eating another dinosaur | A Blog About History - History News
Palaeontologists continue to debate the fossil and many still consider it possible that the two animals killed each other - the Velociraptor's raptor-like claw is preserved lodged in the throat region of the much larger Protoceratops, which appears at the same time to be biting down on the predatory dinosaur's right arm.
*blind post*
The claim is mentioned here: Fossil found of velociraptor eating another dinosaur | A Blog About History - History News
Whoa folks! Don't shoot the messager! I just gave the link that came up when I Googled the information!
The T-Rex lived in the Cretaceous period, not after the Cretaceous period. T-Rex fossils are pretty much exclusively found before the extinction event, as is evidenced by the K-Pg boundary (and in the specific case of Tyrannosaurus we have only "a few dozen" such skeletons anyway.
These are not the only types of events that can lead to fossilization. Do you think animals jumped into tar pits?In any case, I can't find any evidence of this velociraptor fossil that was preserved "standing over" prey or "munching" on it. The best I can find: "...two hatchling Velociraptor skulls that were found near an oviraptorid nest in Mongolia (the eggs may have been a meal)" (source).
Or are you talking about this one?
It's an incredibly rare find, and the prevailing theory is that they were swept up in a sudden, massive sandstorm, or the equally-sudden collapse of a sand dune (explaining why they were encased in sand). If you believe that this is impossible, witness the evidence from Pompeii, where the lava and ash that preserved its citizens came in at 100 mph, and resulted in scenes like this:
http://peripateticbone.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/body-2.jpg (click to expand)
http://static.environmentalgraffiti.com/sites/default/files/images/9jpg_0 (click to expand).
I can easily see why two dinosaurs locked in a deadly struggle might not be completely aware of their surroundings.
It is also possible that they both died during a fight, and thus would have had difficulty running awayAnd you are certainly not alone in mistakenly ascribing human-like intelligence to dinosaurs, but to be honest I'm not sure what running away would have accomplished in that situation.
In any case--such fossils are, as I said, extremely rare. Very useful, but very rare. And definitely--given the time periods involved--not evidence of any sort of alien activity.
Yes. However, to clear up any confusion, most fossils were created by much less dramatic processes. There was not an extinction event characterizing every fossil we find; in fact, extinction events have the opposite effect and cause us to suddenly find many fewer fossilsSo we agree that most, if not all, dinosaurs became extinct through some natural disaster whatever it was.
Scientists do not believe that velociraptors evolved into birds. This is similar to believing that chimpanzees evolved into humans. Actually, the current scientific consensus is more along the lines of "birds are the only surviving dinosaurs" than "dinosaurs evolved into birds."I keep seeing new findings which causes excitement among the scientific community, such as velociraptor having feathers which is a leap towards evolution into birds. Other places of information state they went extinct in the cretaceous period. How could velociraptor have evolved into birds when it was suddenly made extinct?
Both. Velociraptors went extinct, as did nearly all species of dinosaurs, including most birds, but a few species managed to survive, though we have fossil evidence for only one (source):We obviously have 2 sides of a coin here which do not match. Evolution/extinction. Which one is the right one?
Massive extinction of birds at the Cretaceous-Paleogene (K-Pg) boundary said:The fossils described here show that rather than disappearing gradually over the course of the Cretaceous, at least four separate lineages of archaic birds persisted up to the K–Pg boundary: Enantiornithes, Hesperornithes, Ichthyornithes, and Palintropiformes. These four clades are a major part of the fauna, comprising 7 of the 17 species (41%) recognized here. Definitive fossils of archaic birds have never been reported from the Paleogene (7), and our examination of Paleocene fossils from North America (SI Appendix) failed to identify any archaic birds.
Significantly, enantiornithines are not the dominant members of this fauna. Although it has been argued that enantiornithines dominated Mesozoic terrestrial ecosystems (3, 4), this assemblage is actually dominated by ornithurines (23) (Fig. 4). In particular, many of these birds were found to represent advanced ornithurines, i.e., closer to the crown than Ichthyornis. We can therefore document the existence of a major radiation of advanced ornithurines before the end of the Cretaceous. However, we could not definitively refer any of these fossils to the avian crown; thus claims of a major neornithine radiation in the Cretaceous are not at present supported by the fossil record. One of these species, Ornithurine C, is known from the Paleocene and therefore represents the only Maastrichtian bird known to cross the K–Pg boundary.
I'm going to resist making the easy joke hereand how is someone like me (a creationist) supposed to get their head around such contradictory proposals?
such as velociraptor having feathers which is a leap towards evolution into birds
So we agree that most, if not all, dinosaurs became extinct through some natural disaster whatever it was. I keep seeing new findings which causes excitement among the scientific community, such as velociraptor having feathers which is a leap towards evolution into birds. Other places of information state they went extinct in the cretaceous period. How could velociraptor have evolved into birds when it was suddenly made extinct? We obviously have 2 sides of a coin here which do not match. Evolution/extinction. Which one is the right one? and how is someone like me (a creationist) supposed to get their head around such contradictory proposals?
Then what brainiac named them "flying squirrels"?They don't fly they glide.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?