|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Soracilla defends the Flood? (mostly a "Joggins Polystrate Fossils" discussion) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Yahoo Search - Web Search
Scroll down to the "Newly Found Dinosaur Tissue Raises Hope of Extracting DNA" item. Eentsy-weentsy pictures.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
I am just going by the news stories and what the scientists have themselves reported Going by the news stories is a bad idea. Bet you haven't read what the scientists themselves wrote. As quoted at Dino-blood and the Young Earth, what the scientists themselves wrote is quote:{emphasis added - JonF} Doesn't sound as if they are sure at all. But there probably are traces of dinosaur collagen there. You have yet to establish that it is unreasonable to expect that such things should occasionally happen in mainstream science timelines. Your opinion doesn't count (given that you have no demonstrated and relevant expertise); facts, evidence, and analysis do.
Actually these bones were found in porous rock (i.e. Sandstone) so that, coupled with the fact that bone itself is porous, suggests quite strongly (in my opinion) that such would be "unusual" Even assuming that you are correct about the type of rock (unlikely given your track record in geology), it comes down to ... your opinion. But, yes, it would be unusual. Unusual happens. Deal with it.
opinion based on sound principles of science, as opposed to the wild and fantasy ridden speculations of so called "Scientists" who are to this day, propagating gross distortions and lies to the American public with regard to the unscientific hypothesis of the spontaneous generation of life apart from a Creator. Glad to see that you agree that all you have is your opinion ... this item, at least, is not even evidence. Much less "overwhelming" evidence. I'm really underwhelmed so far. When are you going to post a measurement of the age of the Earth that yields less than 1,000,000 years?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
A report is expected at The Panda's Thumb Real Soon Now, but PZ Myers has posted some great pictures (including SEM shots) at Pharyngula, in Tyrannosaur morsels.
He quotes the paper and comments:
quote:quote:So, basically, these cells were entombed in a thick mineral sarcophagus, protected from bacteria and other external insults. There have to have been other factors at playcells are full of enzymes that trigger a very thorough self-destruct sequence at deathso I'm definitely looking forward to the molecular analysis. Even if their form was preserved, I expect these cells to be denatured monomer soup on the inside.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1706 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
So, basically, these cells were entombed in a thick mineral sarcophagus, protected from bacteria and other external insults. Yes, and I'm pretty sure this was the case with the other occurrence as well. Just going by memory, the bones were silicified, so they weren't really normal bones any more and the collagen was protected.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RandyB Inactive Member |
Jon said: Re: This just in ...
Yahoo Search - Web Search Scroll down to the "Newly Found Dinosaur Tissue Raises Hope of Extracting DNA" item. Randy: Like I said: The Dinosaurs are NO OLDER than the Mammoths and Mammoth bones buried in the tundra soil and in Ice. Message 182 of 18403-24-2005 08:45 PM Reply to: Message 180 by RandyB 03-24-2005 08:10 PM IP Logged Re: Old earth based on Coal - reference With regard to Collagen, Randy said:"I am just going by the news stories and what the scientists have themselves reported" Jon: Going by the news stories is a bad idea. Bet you haven't read what the scientists themselves wrote. Randy: I have read some of the technical articles, and newspaper articles, and I also have several more (very technical papers on this) that I have not read yet -- because I am still studying Fossil trees. Jon: As quoted at Dino-blood and the Young Earth, what the scientists themselves wrote is quote:While some of the biomolecules are most likely contaminants, the probable presence of collagen type I suggests that some molecules of dinosaurian origin remain in these tissues. {emphasis added - JonF} Randy: At least one of the articles I recall said that they had DEFINITELY isolated Collagen molecules. Jon: ... But there probably are traces of dinosaur collagen there. You have yet to establish that it is unreasonable to expect that such things should occasionally happen in mainstream science timelines. Your opinion doesn't count (given that you have no demonstrated and relevant expertise); facts, evidence, and analysis do. Randy: Integrity is, in my opinion, a LOT more important than "so called" expertise. And until the "scientific" community comes clean and admits that they have LIED to the public with regard to the scientifically impossible "odds" of a self-replicating cell organizing itself, they have ZERO credibility. In other words: A degree is only as good as the person using it. And it is a FACT that almost all scientists are BIASED when it comes to their opinions regarding the (subjective) FACTS and what they really mean. Randy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Like I said: The Dinosaurs are NO OLDER than the Mammoths and Mammoth bones buried in the tundra soil and in Ice. Yes, you said, and your only support is your opinion. The sum total of your support for your claim is the claim itself, when you asserted "just like the Mammoth bones found today in the actic regions". Evidence is what you are supposed to be supplying here, remember? Overwhelming evidecne is what you offered, and you've failed miserably at providing any evidence. I even outlined what you could do to try so support your opinion with evidence, which you ignored. Like I said, and backed up with detailed discussion and evidence: "... thousands of studies using different and independent methods, cross-correlated and triple-checked, all pointing a complex and long but coherent and consistent history of the Earth ... that's overwhelming evidence. You haven't even got intriguing rumors."
But there probably are traces of dinosaur collagen there. You have yet to establish that it is unreasonable to expect that such things should occasionally happen in mainstream science timelines. Your opinion doesn't count (given that you have no demonstrated and relevant expertise); facts, evidence, and analysis do.
Randy: Integrity is, in my opinion, a LOT more important than "so called" expertise. And until the "scientific" community comes clean and admits that they have LIED to the public with regard to the scientifically impossible "odds" of a self-replicating cell organizing itself, they have ZERO credibility. In other words: A degree is only as good as the person using it. And it is a FACT that almost all scientists are BIASED when it comes to their opinions regarding the (subjective) FACTS and what they really mean. Interesting. I make a side comment on expertise, and that's what you choose to rant about. Having a little trouble responding tho the substantive portions of the posts? Integrity is probably more important than expertise; similarly, evidence is definitely more important than expertise. You have yet to establish that it is unreasonable to expect that such things should occasionally happen in mainstream science timelines. Your opinion doesn't count; facts, evidence, and analysis do. Still waiting for your response to the rest of the points in Message 166, especially your further discussion of the San Andreas Fault in The San Andreas Fault: Randy Berg's evidence for YEC.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RandyB Inactive Member |
Randy: Like I said: The Dinosaurs are NO OLDER than the Mammoths and Mammoth bones buried in the tundra soil and in Ice.
Jon: Yes, you said, and your only support is your opinion... you asserted "just like the Mammoth bones found today in the actic regions". Jon: Evidence is what you are supposed to be supplying here, remember? Overwhelming evidecne is what you offered, Randy: Unfossilized Dinosaur Bones have also been found in the Arctic, in about the same condition as Mammoth bones. But as far as "evidence" goes, when someone wants to believe something very badly, they tend to shut out any and all evidence that is contrary to what they believe -- even if it is BOLDLY staring them right in the face. Anyway: Here is a Link with more info on those Unfossilized Dino bones.Page not found – Earth Age Below is some more info and Refs regarding this.At: www.earthage.org/youngearthev/... {Shortened display form of URL. - Adminnemooseus} we find: A 1987 article in the Journal of Paleontology begins as follows: "Hadrosaur bones have been found on the Colville River north of Umiat on the North Slope of Alaska." 51 What is perhaps most interesting about these "many thousands of bones" is that they "lack any significant degree of permineralization."52,53 In fact, the people who discovered them didn't report it for 20 years because they thought they were bison bones. Because these bones were partially exposed in a "soft, brown, sandy silt,54 and because every year the snow melts, this means that every year these bones are subject to the elements for two to three months. These bones represent another significant blow to the evolutionary-based dating of dinosaurs. 51. Davies, Kyle L., "Duck-Bill Dinosaurs (Hadrosauridae, Ornithischia) From The North Slope Of Alaska," Journal Of Paleontology, Vol. 61, No. 1, Jan. 1987, pp. 198-200. 52. Ibid. 51, p. 198; and ibid. 36-A, pp. 11-12. 53. Ibid. 50 p. 29. 54. Ibid. 51 p. 198. Sorry no more time. Randy This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-27-2005 02:32 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1706 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
Randy: Unfossilized Dinosaur Bones have also been found in the Arctic, in about the same condition as Mammoth bones. But as far as "evidence" goes, when someone wants to believe something very badly, they tend to shut out any and all evidence that is contrary to what they believe -- even if it is BOLDLY staring them right in the face. Anyway: Here is a Link with more info on those Unfossilized Dino bones.Page not found – Earth Age Sorry, once again, Randy, but the bones are not unmineralized. Check out these references. There is also no DNA present. http://dml.cmnh.org/2001Aug/msg00337.html http://dml.cmnh.org/2001Aug/msg00313.html In my own inquiries, I have also found that there is the possibility that there is confusion regarding the hadrosaur fossils and a nearby concentration of mammal bones in the recent sediments. Once again, it appears that YECs hear what they want to hear and disregard good science... even when it is staring them boldly in the face.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
So, Randy, as edge pointed out your claim of unfossilized dinosaur bones is probably totally wrong and questionable at best ... and even if one or two unfossilized dinosaur bones were found, that would not be justification for equating the condition or age of all dinosaur bones with the condition or age of typical mammoth bones. This is "overwhelming" evidence?
Still waiting for your response to the rest of the points in Message 166, especially your further discussion of the San Andreas Fault in The San Andreas Fault: Randy Berg's evidence for YEC.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
Much of the recent messages have no real contact with the theme of the topic. Indeed, I think there are other active topics which should be the home of some of this stuff.
Do you people pay absolutely no attention to the topic title? Adminnemooseus New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures Thread Reopen Requests Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024