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.
notto said:No 'blood' has ever been found in a dinosaur bone.
But his proposals were accepted within his own lifetime, quite quickly actually. How long are you suggesting that the age of the earth has been falsified?duordi said:No. they are put to the test every day....
but a change in the basic time scale is not possible without much trauma.
When Einstein suggested that straight was bent and time wasn't the same everywhere the scientific community when through a lot of trauma and some very smart men tried, and are still trying to prove him wrong.
That was because he was challenging the core beliefs and not just tweaking at the edges.
This is a new one for me. Yes, there were arguments over his theory, of course. But having an argument over a theory and hating someone are quite different things.He was of course hated with a passion at the time.
No, she was not fired. As far as I know she is still working in paleontology, although I'm not sure where she is working nowadays. Nobody is fired in science for daring to publish something that is contrary to what was previously thought.In the same way to suggest that a catastrophic event has occurred in the recent past will of course cause a tar and feathering.
Treatment in the forum is nothing compared to what happens in the real world.
The individual which dared to publish the information about the blood in the dinosaur bone, was of course fired.
She has more guts then I have.
Duane
They also have found small red microstructures that resemble red blood cells.
Yes, you are right of course, Columbus did not make the journey until after the culture and beliefs changed.rmwilliamsll said:that is untrue. Columbus and most educated people knew that the earth was round but the diameter, despite being calculated correctly in 200BC, was miscalculated by at least 1/3 by Columbus possibly deliberately....
see:
http://www.id.ucsb.edu/fscf/library/RUSSELL/FlatEarth.html
http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Scolumb.htm
...
duordi said:Here is the site
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/dinosaurs/dn7195
I am curious, now that you have found it to be true.
duordi said:Yes, you are right of course, Columbus did not make the journey until after the culture and beliefs changed.
Even at that point there were many who thought differently, like that he was going to fall off the edge of the world.
IN the same way during Einstiens time we could find information about people who were for and against the emerging thinking.
Duane
If it was not blood what was it?Tomk80 said:But his proposals were accepted within his own lifetime, quite quickly actually. How long are you suggesting that the age of the earth has been falsified?
This is a new one for me. Yes, there were arguments over his theory, of course. But having an argument over a theory and hating someone are quite different things.
No, she was not fired. As far as I know she is still working in paleontology, although I'm not sure where she is working nowadays. Nobody is fired in science for daring to publish something that is contrary to what was previously thought.
Besides, she has never published that what she saw was blood. IIRC, her first exclamation when she looked at the bones was: 'hey that looks like blood.' After researching it was shown that it was not blood. 'Looks like' does not equal 'is'.
Duane, why don't you give us the sources of your assertions. I'm quite certain that they are not telling the truth and if it is the same story I tracked down before, you have been lied to quite severely.
Yes, but the knowledge was lost during the dark ages.Frumious Bandersnatch said:Actually Eratosthenes (284-192 B.C) had calculated the circumference of the earth to better than 0.5%. Ptolomy did a later calculation and botched it coming up about 30% short. It was this number that led Columbus to think that he could make it.
FB
duordi said:Yes, but the knowledge was lost during the dark ages.
Duane
If it was not blood what was it?Tomk80 said:Ah, it is another story. However, no blood was found. From the article:
That is something different from 'they have found red blood cells'. If that would have been the case, they would have said so. Also, you said she was fired? Are you talking about Schweitzer? She has quite a good track record, from my limited knowledge on paleontology, her name comes by quite often on these sort of things. Her bosses would be quite insane to fire her and as far as I can gather, she has not been.
duordi said:The only reason it can't be blood is that it would mess up the current date estimates.
So what you are saying is that if it dosen't match your acceptded ideas then you are willing to reject scientific evidence to follow your beliefs.
I don't know. In any case, not blood, since then they would have said it was blood, wouldn't they?duordi said:If it was not blood what was it?
Yes, and it resembles red blood cells. But you can see whether something is a red blood cell or not through a microscope, so if it would have been a red blood cell in stead of something resembling it, they would have stated so in the article."Palaeontologists have extracted soft, flexible structures that appear to be blood vessels from the bone of a Tyrannosaurus rex that died 68 million years ago. They also have found small red microstructures that resemble red blood cells."
It was checked microscopically.
No, the reason it was not blood is because it was not blood. Again, you can recognize whether something is a blood cell (not blood, blood is a mixture of blood cells (red and white) and proteins) under a microscope. So if they state in the article that is was a microstructure resembling a red blood cell, it was not blood or they would have said so, wouldn't they? My best guess is that it was a protein encapsulement with traces of heme on it. Heme contains the iron that is present in blood cells, which gives it a red color. The microstructure (not, microstructure, not cell) will probably be something embedded in the 'soft, flexible structure'. I have no idea what this structure is made of, my best guess is that it is formed by protein chains. I'll have to track down the actual article to maybe be able to tell more about it, if it isn't too complicated for me to follow.The only reason it can't be blood is that it would mess up the current date estimates.
No, I'm saying that if they would have found red blood cells, they would have written that they had found red blood cells in the article. That really shouldn't be that hard to follow, should it?So what you are saying is that if it dosen't match your acceptded ideas then you are willing to reject scientific evidence to follow your beliefs.
I think that you may find that actually thoroughly reading an article has nothing to do with faith, but everything with reading.Your faith is very strong and I admire you for that.
I think you may find that reality has a way of being very persistant.
Duane
notto said:You first say that the iridium layer marks the flood. We know that there was much sediment below that and there is much sediment above that. We can see no difference above or below with regards to the rate of sediment accumulation. Where is the evidence of the flood in all of this?
notto said:At what rate did the sediment below the iridium layer accumulate? Why can't we see this flood evidence above and below the iridum layer? Why does it all look like it was layed down by the same processes we see accumulating sediment and causing erosion today?
notto said:What specific evidence of the flood does the iridium layer provide? How do we know it was an effect of the flood? What leads you to that conclusion?
duordi said:Why in the world would you think that the layers below the flood would form any different then afterwards.
duordi said:Notice that the meteor impacts are not random, indicating the concentrated impacts are part of a single event.
duordi said:Why in the world would you think that the layers below the flood would form any different then afterwards.
The during the flood part might be kind of complicated though.
What would you expect to be different?
And there are differences.
Be aware the I asked these questions myself.
You may not want to find what you will find.
The best explaination I have heard which explains the iridium layer is a meteor strike.
The Earth went through some geological turmoil and radioactive materials were dispersed on the Earths surface.
The expected results are earthquakes, floods, tidal waves, and atmospheric climatic changes.
Oh, and a lot of dead things all at once.
My personal opnion was developed after looking a the meteor impact distribution at this site.
http://www.unb.ca/passc/ImpactDatabase/CILocSort.html
Notice that the meteor impacts are not random, indicating the concentrated impacts are part of a single event.
The estimated equivalent megaton total from the meteor creator record is about 12,000 times the current nuclear arsenal of the world.
The next question of course is what does an event of this sort do to the slow gradual assumptions normally applied to Earth history theory.
Duane
Frumious Bandersnatch said:BTW, the idea that a uniform layer of fine meteorite dust somehow settled out all over the earth during a raging global flood is pretty strange. The impacts are not random for two reasons, their evidence is lost in geological unstable areas with active mountain building or in areas of extensive erosion and 2. They are not found in areas that have been explored less such as equatorial Africa and the Amazon. The Chixulub impact crater was only recently discovered after all. There may be many more out there to find.
FB
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?