Where are the dinosaurs?

[Mr Strawberry]

Yes -- or their byproducts.

You'd think by now we would be living on top of a big calcium mine; but I'm sure evolutionists have a program that gives an explanation for the absence of this fungible commodity.

Well, if you're looking for large amounts of calcium from living creatures there is this stuff called chalk, not to mention limestone and marble.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

No, AV1611VET, no. It is definitly what you say that earns you to be ridiculed, and not being christian. I don't know anyone here who ridicules RickG, Verysincere, NGC1672 or Lucaspa (long time not seen). They have christian faith symbols too, but are never ridiculed. Why, because they don't say ridiculous things.

It's what you say, not what you are.

Seconded. I regard RickG in particular as a poster who is always worth reading and would think very carefully before tackling him on any point. On the other hand, it is almost impossible to reply to the 'ridiculed' posters without sounding like an incredulous care assistant, and that is purely because what they post is drivelling nonsense.

 

[JoeyArnold]

When they were about to land on the moon, they thought it would be covered with much more dust than what was actually there.

 

[Nabobalis]

When they were about to land on the moon, they thought it would be covered with much more dust than what was actually there.

Your point?

I take it you are a one-liner YEC?

 

[AV1611VET]

No, AV1611VET, no. It is definitly what you say that earns you to be ridiculed, and not being christian. I don't know anyone here who ridicules RickG, Verysincere, NGC1672 or Lucaspa (long time not seen). They have christian faith symbols too, but are never ridiculed. Why, because they don't say ridiculous things.

It's what you say, not what you are.

Then how about you explain to me how those who say A get ridiculed; I come along and say just the opposite -- and then I get ridiculed.

Either way, we get ridiculed.

Can you explain that?

 

[AV1611VET]

I regard RickG in particular as a poster who is always worth reading and would think very carefully before tackling him on any point.

Good for you -- RickG has your respect, doesn't he?

As I have said before, if it wasn't for these faith icons, you couldn't tell some of these Christians from the non-Christians.

I have a feeling Mr. G and Lucaspa and some of the others have set a boundary they won't cross.

 

[driewerf]

Then how about you explain to me how those who say A get ridiculed; I come along and say just the opposite -- and then I get ridiculed.

Either way, we get ridiculed.

O really? When dad says "before the Flood the state was different". And you say" before the Fall there was no Second law of Thermodynamics", are they opposite? No, they are equally ridiculous.

But alas, at least, you admitted to be ridiculed for what you say.

 

[driewerf]

Good for you -- RickG has your respect, doesn't he?

And mine.

As I have said before, if it wasn't for these faith icons, you couldn't tell some of these Christians from the non-Christians.

Seen no difference between Verysincere's posts and mine? And you call science myopic?

I have a feeling Mr. G and Lucaspa and some of the others have set a boundary they won't cross.

Yep, and that line is named integrity.

 

[AV1611VET]

Seen no difference between Verysincere posts and mine? And you call science myopic?

I'll be honest -- I don't really read VS' posts.

They are usually long and I believe I have asked him a couple of questions that he ignored (I could be wrong here), and I just don't really read what he says.

When I go away for awhile, then come back and open a thread, I just zip down it really quick to see if anyone is addressing me.

If not, I usually go to the counting threads and go from there.

Sometimes though, I'll butt in and say something; but not that often.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, if you're looking for large amounts of calcium from living creatures there is this stuff called chalk, not to mention limestone and marble.

Well that certainly beats coprolite, doesn't it?

 

[driewerf]

I'll be honest

8)
WOW, that's a new.











Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[RickG]

And mine.
Yep, and that line is named integrity.

Bingo! That's the line.

 

[AV1611VET]

Bingo! That's the line.

IF you have to ridicule dad, Jazer and me to maintain your integrity, then I would say your integrity is just as good as the others'; and I'll leave it at that.

 

[RickG]

Then how about you explain to me how those who say A get ridiculed; I come along and say just the opposite -- and then I get ridiculed.

Either way, we get ridiculed.

Can you explain that?

Here's the difference AV. Yes this is the "Christian Forums", which provide a christian non hostile environment. What you an many other people, christian and non-christian as well, seem to forget that this particular part of the forums are called the "Science Forums", where, oh my goodness, science should be discussed. This particular thread is about dinosaurs. Religion should not even be brought up here.

I do not criticize "religious" beliefs, I criticize completely unfounded and INANE statements like, physics was different in the past", science can take a hike, you weren't there, etc.; in other words, statements that any 6th grader can tell you are silly and ridiculous. Those kinds of statements have no business in a forum where science is supposed to be discussed.

Just as much, I despise comments ridiculing religious beliefs. For the most part I ignore them, but occasionally I'll caution a poster that such comments are unnecessary and counterproductive.

One thing I have observed is that those who appear from their posts with little subject/topic knowledge, whether christian or non-christian are the ones who ridicule and make inflammatory comments. Conversely, those who appear from their posts to have a good subject/topic knowledge, whether christian or non-christian are the ones who behave as adults should and are the least offensive. Now understand, when I say "little subject/topic knowledge" or "good subject/topic knowledge", I am not talking about one's education or intelligence; but rather there apparent knowledge on the subject/topic. I do hope you understand the difference.

 

[AV1611VET]

This particular thread is about dinosaurs. Religion should not even be brought up here.

Why? what if the correct answer is, "God did it?"

You just can't separate science and religion, it doesn't work -- believe me, I know.

I've begged and begged Internet scientists to leave God and/or the Bible out of my thread, but to no avail.

If I started a thread and asked why Hurricane Katrina occurred; how should a Taoist answer?

In fact, it bothers me when Taoists answer with scientific jargon; and I've even called them on it.

Our religious beliefs aren't just something one can turn off when science enters the room.

(Well, I suppose Taoists can; but then I don't really consider a Taoist today even close to what a real Taoist is.)

 

[TeddyReceptus]

How do you know this?

Well that is probably a good question.

When you see something like a piece of "fossilized wood" like say this one:

There's still visible RINGS in there. But there's no more wood. So what happens when wood turns into THIS stuff.

This is mostly silica in some cases (this looks like some from the Petrified Forest in AZ so I think it's SiO2.)

Now we have to get the wood:

1. Preserved without oxidizing away (if you cut down a tree in your yard and let it set out there it will soon rot and oxidize away to nothing)

2. Bury it beneath some sediment and let it get exposed to groundwater which is carrying SiO2. SiO2 doesn't dissolve in groundwater very much. It depends on pH and can get much more soluble in high pH regions, but in regular water the solubility is only about 80mg per Liter (rough estimate from Wikipedia).

3. You need to move groundwater through the rock carrying tiny amounts of SiO2 and fill the spaces in the wood with SiO2 until you preserve the structure of the original tree. Down to the rings.

Now, not all fossils are like that. In some cases some fossils aren't "permineralized"(like the tree example above) or if they are they are replaced by more soluble materials like CaCO3 (calcium carbonate).

But in general it takes some time. But not all fossils are "replaced". Some things like bivalves and shells can remain as they are or they can even be dissolved and replaced by other minerals.

How people know this takes time is understanding a few key factors:

1. Getting the bones or shells or plant materials into a position where they can be preserved

2. If replacement or permineralization occurs you have to know how quickly water moves through the sediment/rock around it and the solubility of the replacing phase. Water moves somewhat slowly through sediment and when you couple that with low solubility materials you come up with a lot of time needed.

Now I'm sure that not all fossils take equally long to preserve and create, the ones that are like hard shells that don't get replaced take as long to "make" as it would the rock around them in which they are preserved.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

I think it was Fred Flintstone.

Now I have a question.. are you a bot?

You know I hadn't thought of that before, but it matches the pattern. How does a bot "engage" in conversation? By essentially constructing new (rational) sentences using key words from any given post.

I note that I've seen precious little from this poster that isn't simply just leveraging off of a post to ask another question. I don't seem to see much in the way of actual "conversation" (per se).

Maybe it's a person who is just playing a bot or maybe it's a bot of some sort.

Either way I kinda wish I hadn't just spent a lot of time explaining fossilization and perminerlization.

 

[AV1611VET]

You know I hadn't thought of that before, but it matches the pattern.

You do Turing tests, do you?

 

[RickG]

Why? what if the correct answer is, "God did it?"

There are copious forms and threads in the CF designed specifically for religion. This particular groups of threads is designed specifically for science. "God did it" is a religious view, not a scientific one.

You just can't separate science and religion, it doesn't work -- believe me, I know.

Then let me ask you this. Do you post in any of the CF religion specific forums and discuss science there? Do you talk about dinosaurs or the age of the earth in scientific terms? If so, please give me a link, because I would think if you did you would be directed to the science forums.

 

[AV1611VET]

There are copious forms and threads in the CF designed specifically for religion. This particular groups of threads is designed specifically for science. "God did it" is a religious view, not a scientific one.

I don't agree with you at all.

Put yourself in my place -- here's the question:

Why aren't there more dinosaur bones?

Now how am I supposed to answer this?

What you're basically saying, is that I shouldn't be allowed to answer this question, because saying the bones are on Neptune is a religious belief?