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.
You show no evidence of understanding.
You do not understand science.
I gave specific and testable predictions for what we could see.
However, since you have been utterly incapable of describing this different state past in any useful way, I can't be more specific. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and tell me what specifically was different about your different state past and we can work from there.
The way mass interacts with gravity and body size is well established. That's why bugs can have spindly legs compared to their body size while elephants can't.
Of course, if you actually knew how science works, you'd know this already, so this just further illustrates your complete lack of understanding when it comes to science.
Give examples.
Sharks, rays, bony fish, birds, insects, arachnids, amphibians, jellyfish, centipedes, millipedes, crocodiles, lizards and small mammals all existed prior to the KT boundary, and they all are exactly as we would expect if they were living in a world with the same laws that we have today. And that's not including plants.
There is a huge amount of evidence that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
Once again you make a claim. But you have totally failed to explain WHY flatworms disprove evolution.
And yet you claim the conditions WERE different and yet they looked basically the same.
Probably? Is this the best you've got? In other words you don't know. On what basis have you made this determination?
Modern toothless birds evolved in the Cretaceous, BEFORE the KT boundary. Hope, Sylvia (2002). "The Mesozoic Radiation of Neornithes". In Chiappe, Luis M.; Witmer, Lawrence M. Mesozoic Birds: Above the Heads of Dinosaurs. pp. 339–388. ISBN 0-520-20094-2.
Are childish insults the best you've got?
Seventh post in which you have been unable to provide any evidence for your claims.
can you show why its not true? do you realy believe that if we had a self replicating car it can evolve into an airplane in millions of years?This is your scientific proof?
LOL
No, robot penguins would evolve into airplanes. Self-replicating cars would just go extinct due to an inability to adapt to a changing environment.can you show why its not true? do you realy believe that if we had a self replicating car it can evolve into an airplane in millions of years?
You alluded to unspecific differences in bone structure we might see if gravity were somehow much greater or lesser.I gave specific and testable predictions for what we could see.
Not only can science not describe nature as it was, but it has no clue whether nature was the same or different! The bible does describe the world in the past in some detail. The world described simply differs fundamentally in many ways from the world and nature of today.However, since you have been utterly incapable of describing this different state past in any useful way, I can't be more specific. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and tell me what specifically was different about your different state past and we can work from there.
Maybe that is part of the reason birds today do not reach anywhere near the size some birds used to reach. But as explained gravity is really not an issue. We don't really know if there was any small difference or not. Looking at some ancient structures, it would make sense to me that gravity was somehow able to be reduced.The way mass interacts with gravity and body size is well established. That's why bugs can have spindly legs compared to their body size while elephants can't.
Give examples.
Speaking of crocodiles they found one up (fossil remains) in the arctic, so there again, we see things changed a lot!Sharks, rays, bony fish, birds, insects, arachnids, amphibians, jellyfish, centipedes, millipedes, crocodiles, lizards and small mammals all existed prior to the KT boundary, and they all are exactly as we would expect if they were living in a world with the same laws that we have today. And that's not including plants.
So what!!? I don't care if they did and then evolved in some cases BACK to birds! Fine with me. You see, the birds were created, and if dinos evolved from birds (and also into birds again later) all that would mean is that dinos were not created kinds but adaptations and evolved from created kinds! That would explain why none were in the ark also. God called the kinds into the ark. ( I suspect most dinos were extinct before the flood, but if any were still here, they would probably not have been invited)There is a huge amount of evidence that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
As explained above, it is not that they disprove the theory of man evolving from a shared ancestor with flatworms, but it shows that the worms are unchanged since creation!Once again you make a claim. But you have totally failed to explain WHY flatworms disprove evolution.
And yet you claim the conditions WERE different and yet they looked basically the same.
In common English let me interpret that for you. Some (probably not original kind birds but adaptations from kinds) birds that could leave remains did leave fossils in that time. It is not that birds evolved from the sorts of birds we see fossilized in that time! The opposite is likely true, that the birds that evolved from the created kinds are possibly the sorts of birds that COULD fossilize!Modern toothless birds evolved in the Cretaceous, BEFORE the KT boundary. Hope, Sylvia (2002). "The Mesozoic Radiation of Neornithes". In Chiappe, Luis M.; Witmer, Lawrence M. Mesozoic Birds: Above the Heads of Dinosaurs. pp. 339–388. ISBN 0-520-20094-2.
can you show why its not true? do you realy believe that if we had a self replicating car it can evolve into an airplane in millions of years?
so what about a self replicating robot (penguin)? do you think that a robot can evolve st epwise from a self replicating moleule?First, show me a self replicating car.
You see, i deal in well evidenced reality, not fantasy.
Perhaps you can first tell us the difference between a self-replicating robot penguin and a real penguin.so what about a self replicating robot (penguin)? do you think that a robot can evolve st epwise from a self replicating moleule?
You alluded to unspecific differences in bone structure we might see if gravity were somehow much greater or lesser.
You gave no details and it was basically a strawman argument because gravity on earth is really not an issue!
We might look at the possibility that gravity at times may have been able to be greatly mitigated or impacted.
Who knows?
After all we don't really know if the moon was the same distance, or if planets or space bodies perhaps used to have orbits that affected earth..etc. Again, you do not know. Add that to the list of things science is truly in the dark about. Thanks for that.
Not only can science not describe nature as it was, but it has no clue whether nature was the same or different!
The bible does describe the world in the past in some detail. The world described simply differs fundamentally in many ways from the world and nature of today.
It would be hypocritical to expect anyone to describe how God changed any forces or laws. The only thing that matters is whether He did change things. If He did, then the whole foundation and basis that science uses for all models of the far past and origins is laughably and fatally flawed.
Maybe that is part of the reason birds today do not reach anywhere near the size some birds used to reach. But as explained gravity is really not an issue. We don't really know if there was any small difference or not. Looking at some ancient structures, it would make sense to me that gravity was somehow able to be reduced.
" This formidable predator may have had a wingspan of 36 feet—close to the size a small aircraft.."
Ancient Winged Terror Was One of the Largest Animals to Fly
" Quetzalcoatlus northropi evolved a ridiculous 40-foot wingspan, cinching the record for the largest flying animal to this day."
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...gest-flying-dinosaur-was-a-four-winged-raptor
"
Several recent estimates put Quetzalcoatlus northropi at approximately 250kg.
Palaeontologists still have many questions about giant pterosaur flight. We don’t fully understand how they took off or what kind of flyers they were once in the air. Did they flap or soar? How long could they fly for? How did they land? In fact, some people still believe these giraffe-sized animals were too heavy to fly at all. "
Pterosaurs should have been too big to fly – so how did they manage it?
So science does not understand. If there were some aspect of nature in that day that was different, perhaps that would help the giants. We don't know. We do know they would not seem to make sense in this world today.
I look at an airplane that weighs 162 kgs. Then I wonder about some bird over 250 kgs!
"The Guinness World Record title of smallest and lightest turbofan-powered plane goes to the Bede BD-5, which has retained the honour since 1971 with its featherlight weight of 162.7 kg."
7 Extreme Planes: the Biggest, Smallest, Fastest and Slowest | Plane Finder
Speaking of crocodiles they found one up (fossil remains) in the arctic, so there again, we see things changed a lot!
With other creatures that are small and also exist today, the question arises..'if man shared an ancestor with the flatworm, why is it that we see the creatures unchanged since the dawn of time!?'
So what!!? I don't care if they did...
...and then evolved in some cases BACK to birds! Fine with me. You see, the birds were created, and if dinos evolved from birds (and also into birds again later) all that would mean is that dinos were not created kinds but adaptations and evolved from created kinds! That would explain why none were in the ark also. God called the kinds into the ark. ( I suspect most dinos were extinct before the flood, but if any were still here, they would probably not have been invited)
As explained above, it is not that they disprove the theory of man evolving from a shared ancestor with flatworms, but it shows that the worms are unchanged since creation!
Not just conditions. In the former nature creatures could rapidly evolve and adapt for conditions.
Nature itself was probably different.
The laws that govern how atoms behave for example.
The forces and laws that determine how DNA works. etc etc.
In common English let me interpret that for you. Some (probably not original kind birds but adaptations from kinds) birds that could leave remains did leave fossils in that time. It is not that birds evolved from the sorts of birds we see fossilized in that time! The opposite is likely true, that the birds that evolved from the created kinds are possibly the sorts of birds that COULD fossilize!
Yeah 'if gravity were a lot stronger the legs would be thicker, if it was weaker..skinnier' HahahaIt was not unspecific. I made specific statements about how the sizes of the bones and the bone density would change in differing levels of gravity.
How would I know if it changed?? How would we know if there was some other force that countermanded or balanced gravity in those former times? Why would it matter either way? Do you feel some compulsion to pretend you know what you do not know?Gravity was not an issue? Are you saying that gravity is not one of the things that changed?
And by an amazing coincidence, gravity was mitigated by the EXACT amount required to produce life forms that look exactly like what we would expect to see if the laws hadn't changed at all. Are you going to keep invoking coincidence to support your preposterous claims?
You propose that when we do not know we should believe whatever godless nonsense someone might have on offer? Science doesn't know and the bible weighs in (as does history) in favor of big differences.You are insisting that we take your guess seriously, despite the fact that there is no evidence for your DSP idea, you can't specify what laws were different, you can't specify HOW they were different, you are incapable of proposing any mechanism for such a change, you can't explain why things from before the alleged change fit with present laws... And you expect us to take you seriously?
Let's see some data for the pre KT era? You got yourself into that mess, now let's see the goods.If the moon was at a different distance, then we would see fossil indications of different tidal effects. Yet there are no indications at all that the moon's distance from earth has been changing in any way other than the way we already know it is.
There is no question whether the bible is true. What, you decided it must be false and decided to invent strange stories?So you've just decided that the Bible MUST be literally true and you've come up with a fanciful idea to try to explain it.
The flying creatures I linked to make that look like donald duck's baby.Literally five seconds on Google was enough to tell me that the largest flying bird ever was Argentavis. It's size has not been able to be precisely measured, since the single specimen we have of its arm is damaged, but current estimates put it between 5 to 6.5 meters. Even so, its weight would have been only about 70 kilograms or so, about the same as an adult person (and a fairly light adult at that - for a point of comparison, my husband is high nineties).
But the bit that completely destroys your argument is the fact that it lived between 9 million and 6.8 million years ago.
Ah, yes, the bird you cite probably was. But maybe it was born in the former one! The dino type flying creatures I cited were pre present nature.Now, if - as you claim - the present laws came into effect at the time of the KT boundary, then this bird was living in the present state!
The KT boundary was 65 million years ago - so when these birds appeared, it had already been the present state for more than 55 million years! Thus, these massive birds prove that such large flying creatures could exist in the present state! No past state required!
And just to hammer that final nail into the coffin, ALL of these massive birds are built according to present state laws of aerodynamics. We NEVER find any of these birds with structures that don't make sense according to present scientific understanding.
They use maybes to speculate how, in this nature, such giants could get off the ground. This was all admitted to be unknown. In other words the played the game of 'let's look at all possible wild scenarios based on this present nature laws that could possibly allow the giants to get up up and away'Did you even bother to read the article? It answers many of your questions. Of course, you like to quote mine, and take the fact that there are a few people who disagree and pretend that means that science has no idea at all. That's not very honest, is it?
The article I referred to and quoted was thisWow, it seems like you are being deliberately deceptive here. Your source says, "...that 10–11 m wingspans and masses of 200–250 kg are the most reliable upper estimates of known pterosaur size."
UPPER ESTIMATES.
That means that they could have been lower. But here you are claiming that all the animals weighed about 250.
What did you think creatures that flew would look like, no wings!!? Now when they talk about some bird needing to climb a hill or something and jump off to be able to fly, and never be able to land and feed...my eyebrows go up a little.And once again, I will point out that the body structure of all these massive flying creatures fits exactly with what we would expect if the laws of aerodynamics were the same back then as they are today.
Your religious theory is called that, and it also involves the plates moving in the same way. However your religious models all sit upon the foundation of same nature past based dates as to when this happened.It's called plate tectonics, I thought everyone knew about that. We literally have lots of evidence to explain why there were reptiles there - different atmosphere had created a greenhouse effect, raising temperatures.
Because they are well adapted to the niche they inhabit and the selective pressures that would drive them to evolve and change have not changed much for a very long time. If there are no changes in selective pressures, then once an organism is well adapted, it isn't going to change much.
Yes, your fantasy is known.I never said that dinosaurs evolved from birds.
I said that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
If a flatworm is supposed to be the oldest living ancestor of man, why are they still the same now as near the time of creation??If the animals were changing so much, why are you making such a big deal about how flatworms have not changed at all?
- Flatworms haven't evolved at all, so evolution is bunk!
- Animals could evolve much more rapidly than they do today!
In ways that allowed man to live 1000 years for example.Different how? Be specific.
Yes! If the radioactive decay we see today was not responsible for all the ratios, it had to be different.In what way were these laws different? What were the differences in the way atoms behaved compared with how they behave today?
Modern DNA does not allow us to live 1000 years, nor does it accommodate lightning fast evolving.In what way were these laws different? What were the differences in the way DNA worked compared with how it works today?
No. The reason they stared to appear in the fossil record along with man and other animals is not because they evolved. The reason is likely that they stated to be able to leave fossilized remains! They were here since week one as was man.But they just coincidentally evolved to look just like they had evolved from the fossilized birds.
Yeah 'if gravity were a lot stronger the legs would be thicker, if it was weaker..skinnier' Hahaha
How would I know if it changed??
How would we know if there was some other force that countermanded or balanced gravity in those former times? Why would it matter either way? Do you feel some compulsion to pretend you know what you do not know?
Strawman. Who cares if it was the same or a little different either way? The fossils would not tell us that. You kidding?
You propose that when we do not know we should believe whatever godless nonsense someone might have on offer? Science doesn't know and the bible weighs in (as does history) in favor of big differences.
Let's see some data for the pre KT era? You got yourself into that mess, now let's see the goods.
There is no question whether the bible is true.
What, you decided it must be false and decided to invent strange stories?
The flying creatures I linked to make that look like donald duck's baby.
Not at all. You see what you date anywhere from billions to millions to tens of thousands of years is actually only thousands of years ago in actual reality time. (ART)
Ah, yes, the bird you cite probably was. But maybe it was born in the former one! The dino type flying creatures I cited were pre present nature.
The reality of the timing is that the flood was, say, 4500 years ago and the nature change over a century after that. ALL your imaginary same state past dated religious imaginary years fit into THAT time frame. The period after the KT, till now was less than 4500 years. Just like the rapid separation of continents was in that timeframe! Your imaginary years claim hundreds of millions of years for it!!! That is how bad your religious dates are.
Flying creatures existed since creation week. There was still air you know! What does NOT make sense here is how the flying giants got off the ground if nature was as now!
They use maybes to speculate how, in this nature, such giants could get off the ground. This was all admitted to be unknown. In other words the played the game of 'let's look at all possible wild scenarios based on this present nature laws that could possibly allow the giants to get up up and away'
The article I referred to and quoted was this
"
"
Several recent estimates put Quetzalcoatlus northropi at approximately 250kg.
Palaeontologists still have many questions about giant pterosaur flight. We don’t fully understand how they took off or what kind of flyers they were once in the air. Did they flap or soar? How long could they fly for? How did they land? In fact, some people still believe these giraffe-sized animals were too heavy to fly at all. "
Pterosaurs should have been too big to fly – so how did they manage it?
Let's be honest.
What did you think creatures that flew would look like, no wings!!? Now when they talk about some bird needing to climb a hill or something and jump off to be able to fly, and never be able to land and feed...my eyebrows go up a little.
Your religious theory is called that, and it also involves the plates moving in the same way. However your religious models all sit upon the foundation of same nature past based dates as to when this happened.
Yet in recent news we see such creatures under a lake in the arctic!! You think nothing much changed there?
Yes, your fantasy is known.
Others claim something else.
Example:
"The general and long-held belief that raptors and other ground-dwelling dinosaurs eventually became birds is brought into question by the research, which Ruben says offers sound evidence that birds eventually became certain types of dinosaurs. For instance, the velociraptor so prominent in Jurassic Park might actually have been a flightless bird."
Study questions current evolutionary beliefs about birds
If a flatworm is supposed to be the oldest living ancestor of man, why are they still the same now as near the time of creation??
Flatworms Are Oldest Living Ancestors To Those Of Us With Right And Left Sides, Researchers Report In Science
Why imagine tens of thousands of evolving steps from a flatworm to man when we see flatworms are the same!?
In ways that allowed man to live 1000 years for example.
Yes! If the radioactive decay we see today was not responsible for all the ratios, it had to be different.
Modern DNA does not allow us to live 1000 years, nor does it accommodate lightning fast evolving.
No. The reason they stared to appear in the fossil record along with man and other animals is not because they evolved. The reason is likely that they stated to be able to leave fossilized remains! They were here since week one as was man.
can you show why its not true? do you realy believe that if we had a self replicating car it can evolve into an airplane in millions of years?
so what about a self replicating robot (penguin)? do you think that a robot can evolve st epwise from a self replicating moleule?
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?