Scientists don't require time machines to study craters.

[sjastro]

A time machine is nonsense, but a telescope isn't ... right?

Looking back at the past is not the same as going back to the past.
The physics is explained with this Minkowski diagram.

 

[AV1611VET]

Looking back at the past is not the same as going back to the past.
The physics is explained with this Minkowski diagram.

Please note that the title of the OP says scientists don't REQUIRE them.

Thus whether one can be built or not, it's a moot point.

 

[sjastro]

Please note that the title of the OP says scientists don't REQUIRE them.

Thus whether one can be built or not, it's a moot point.

Did you look carefully at the Minkowski spacetime diagram it records a prediction made by evolutionary biology.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Looking back at the past is not the same as going back to the past.
The physics is explained with this Minkowski diagram.

View attachment 342226​

Just because I'm curious, in the diagram, does the plane 'hypersurface of the present' travel with you as you ascend?

 

[durangodawood]

Just because I'm curious, in the diagram, does the plane 'hypersurface of the present' travel with you as you ascend?

I dont think you can leave the present behind.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I dont think you can leave the present behind.

Well, yeah of course. Was just curious.

 

[Tuur]

Just because I'm curious, in the diagram, does the plane 'hypersurface of the present' travel with you as you ascend?

Yes, because information can travel no faster than the speed of light. The cone is a diagram of the time it takes for information to reach an observer. It's like how it take, on the average, over 8 minutes for light to travel from the sun to the earth. If for some reason the sun winked out, we wouldn't know about it until a little over 8 minutes later.

 

[Tuur]

Whodathunkit?

It's better than the one that ends with "Hold my beer."

 

[sjastro]

Just because I'm curious, in the diagram, does the plane 'hypersurface of the present' travel with you as you ascend?

The area inside the past and future light cones is where the universe is "time-like" and the trajectory of objects in spacetime with mass such planets, stars, galaxies even creationists are confined and travel at less than the speed of light.
In the time-like region causality is preserved, outside the region is where the speed of light is exceeded, the universe is "space-like" where causality is violated such as travelling from point A to point B but reaching point B before departing point A.

 

[sjastro]

Evidence from Chicxulub crater starting off with a gravimetric map of the region.
No time machine required.

 

[Tuur]

Evidence from Chicxulub crater starting off with a gravimetric map of the region.
No time machine required.

View attachment 342243

View attachment 342244

View attachment 342245

View attachment 342246​

Yes. Evidence was apparently discovered twice, both prior to the discovery of the iridium layer that led to the hypothesis that an asteroid led to the demise of the dinosaurs.

 

[sjastro]

In that other thread which was closed down a creationist mistakenly confused the fossil record at Tanis North Dakota with the mythical dinosaur graveyard at the Chicxulub crater in Mexico.
The story which unfolded from the fossil record at Tanis is a fascinating combination of science and detective work.

Sixty five million years ago the North Dakota region was the site for an inland sea.

​

Fossils of fish were found with microtektites in their gills, the microtektites were a chemical match found in cores from the Chicxulub impact site.

This plus other evidence from the site produced a classic piece of forensic science as to what happened at Tanis 65 million years ago.

• • Freshwater sturgeon and paddlefish that breathe and feed by sucking water in through their gills died with spherules caught in their gills—they were alive to inhale the spherules but died before the spherules entered their stomachs.
  • Fossil fish in the impact deposit were found oriented parallel to each other and parallel to the riverbank, with open mouths indicating death by suffocation.
  • This orientation and other sedimentary features indicate burial by sediments deposited by a strong onshore current, then a reversal to offshore flow, and then a repeat of onshore and offshore flow below the capping iridium-rich clay layer.
  • Animals and plants were buried upright, not flattened like typical fossil death assemblages.
  • Well preserved remains buried in the deposit include a turtle fatally impaled by a stick, fossils of hatchlings and intact eggs, fossil pterosaurs, and dinosaur parts.
  • Marine ammonites were distributed among the freshwater fossils as violent waves ran up as much as 30 ft (10 m) over the riverbank setting.
  • Some spherules made impact holes in the riverbank mud, while others were encased in tree resin and perfectly preserved from weathering in amber. Some of these may contain fragments of the actual impactor, studies are underway.
• What caused the violent end of this riverbank ecosystem?
  • Scientists estimate that tsunami waves would have taken 18 to 26 hours to reach the northern end of the Cretaceous Western Interior Seaway, but that would have been long after the iridium dust had settled from the atmosphere to form the clay layer that caps the roiled-up sediments. So something else must have caused the fierce agitation of the river.
  • Scientists believe the seismic S waves that arrived about 10 minutes after the impact set up seiches, huge surges of water that sloshed back and forth in the northern end of the Western Interior Seaway.
  • As an analog, Japan’s 2011 Tohoku earthquake had a magnitude of about 9.2 that caused 5 ft (1.5 m) seiches (standing waves) in Norwegian fjords nearly 5,000 mi (8,000 km) away. Magnitude 10 to 11 ground motion may have been at least 30 times more intense and would have had the power to induce seiche waves of 30 ft (10 m) or more in the inland Seaway.
• Scientists have also worked out that the impact occurred during the faunal and floral productivity of the Northern Hemisphere’s spring season.
  • Fossilized fish exhibited clear growth patterns in their bones, some with seven years of growth bands before the event. The last year of growth shows they had started the rapid growth of spring but had not reached the maximum growth rates typical of mid-summer.
  • In nearby Wyoming, studies in the 1990’s established a death assemblage of water lily fossils in ponds with some varieties having produced seeds while others were still blooming and died before producing seeds.
  • The active growth and pollination patterns exhibited in the riverbank and pond settings capped by the iridium layer are strong evidence for a spring impact in the Northern Hemisphere.
  • A spring impact would have made Northern Hemisphere flora and fauna more vulnerable to the effects of the impactor, while Southern Hemisphere species hibernating in autumn may have been somewhat protected.

 

[AV1611VET]

Fossils of fish were found with microtektites in their gills, the microtektites were a chemical match found in cores from the Chicxulub impact site.

Wow -- imagine that.

There were fish around when this thing hit the earth.

What's your point?

 

[sjastro]

Wow -- imagine that.

There were fish around when this thing hit the earth.

What's your point?

What's more to the point is you are blinded by your own prejudice.
Did the fact of glassy particles found in the gills of the fossilized fish matched those found at Chicxulub escape you?
To use a modern day analogy ballistics matched the bullet to the gun which fired it.

 

[AV1611VET]

What's more to the point is you are blinded by your own prejudice.
Did the fact of glassy particles found in the gills of the fossilized fish matched those found at Chicxulub escape you?
To use a modern day analogy ballistics matched the bullet to the gun which fired it.

Okay.

Let's color code this for simplicity.

A yellow planet is circling the sun.

A blue asteroid impacts the yellow planet.

Fish here, there, and everywhere end up carrying blue things around.

What has just been demonstrated here?

If a blue asteroid hits a yellow planet in the Mexican area, and fish in Siberia show up with blue stuff on them, then I'd say the blue asteroid made a big splash.

Again ... what exactly are you saying?

 

[sjastro]

Okay.

Let's color code this for simplicity.

A yellow planet is circling the sun.

A blue asteroid impacts the yellow planet.

Fish here, there, and everywhere end up carrying blue things around.

What has just been demonstrated here?

If a blue asteroid hits a yellow planet in the Mexican area, and fish in Siberia show up with blue stuff on them, then I'd say the blue asteroid made a big splash.

Again ... what exactly are you saying?

Do you even have the vaguest idea of the implications behind your post?
For someone whose mantra is "Science can take a hike" is basically stating the science is right and the creationist account is wrong.
In the closed thread the creationist Mr "Go Google It" posts were based on this link where the dinosaur extinction was due to the great flood of Noah's time as described in the Bible.

What happened to your prime directive "Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted"?
Well you sure have done it here and if the creationist position about the dinosaur extinction is wrong then you have demonstrated the Bible cannot be a literal account as it is subject to interpretation.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you even have the vaguest idea of the implications behind your post?

Yes.

Do you?

Well you sure have done it here and if the creationist position about the dinosaur extinction is wrong then you have demonstrated the Bible cannot be a literal account as it is subject to interpretation.

Did I say one word about the dinosaurs going extinct?

 

[sjastro]

Yes.

Do you?



Did I say one word about the dinosaurs going extinct?

Is this the best you can do; come up an incoherent post after unintentionally destroying the creationist argument about dinosaur extinction and your "Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted." mantra.

 

[AV1611VET]

Is this the best you can do; come up an incoherent post after unintentionally destroying the creationist argument about dinosaur extinction and your "Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted." mantra.

Astro, what are you expecting of me re this dinosaur extinction deal, that I'm somehow being pulled into?

1. The dinosaurs went extinct due to an asteroid hitting the earth.
2. The dinosaurs died in the Flood.
3. The dinosaurs died after the Flood, due to the new [polar] climatology.

Let me know.

 

[sjastro]

Astro, what are you expecting of me re this dinosaur extinction deal, that I'm somehow being pulled into?

1. The dinosaurs went extinct due to an asteroid hitting the earth.
2. The dinosaurs died in the Flood.
3. The dinosaurs died after the Flood, due to the new [polar] climatology.

Let me know.

You are so desperate to change the subject and I will not oblige you.
Let’s look at one of your “Boolean” standards.
Bible says x, Science says y = go with x.

You have violated your own standard by agreeing with the science in which case,
Bible says x, Science says y = go with y.

The only way out of your dilemma if the Bible and science are saying the same thing.
Bible says x, Science says x = go with x.
Yet in the closed thread you did not challenge the creationist Mr "Go Google It" and his minion but continued with your cheap shots at science.
You have destroyed the notion of the Bible as being infallible and your Boolean standards with it.