User Tag List

Page 6 of 32 FirstFirst ... 345678916 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 474

Thread: Did we re-evolve after the comet that killed all the dinosaurs?

  1. #76
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,595
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked 1,386 Times in 714 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1011259
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    Knight;
    Here is the wiki on the K/T extinction event;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretace...tinction_event

    It includes this picture;

    And this text;


    The reason they think meteor or such is the iridium they tend to find in this layer.

    This is a great oportunity to go see what those crazy old earthers are talking about, go see the layer, get some samples from it, look at the dirt above and below.
    The old earthers say it's an extinction event from 65 million years ago that took out most life on the planet.
    What do you say it is?
    You really buy that fool?

    Seriously??? Do you?

    Look how thick those layers are. Every time I look at strata I laugh thinking that people actually believe those dramatically different layers represent millions of years of slow build up (what happened to erosion??). It kills me! I will never, ever, never buy that lie. It's so obviously false.

    Then, we get a real life example of strata being laid down in floods all over the word and it looks just like normal strata, except it didn't takes millions of years to lay down it only took hours or minutes.

    A much more reasonable and logical explanation for most strata is liquefaction.
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

    Download the new TOL app for iPhone, iPad, and Android...


  2. #77
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    15,134
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 7,322 Times in 5,835 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147791
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    Why?
    When?
    Because volcanoes produce iridium and because there are a LOT of volcanic remnants that are morphologically similar the planet over.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.


  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    Tambora (July 3rd, 2016)

  4. #78
    Journeyman Mr Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    227
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Little Buzz View Post
    Plus the dinosaurs were cold-blooded, so any lack of sunlight would seriously affect their mobility.
    As has been pointed out dinosaurs appear to have no been entirely cold-blooded. It's also worth noting that in a creature the size of, say, a Triceratops or Stegosaurus, let alone a Diplodocus, it makes very little difference. The ratio of surface area to volume means that they would pretty much maintain their body temperature anyway, just through heat produced as a by-product of metabolism and movement.
    If you're really a Goth, where were you when we sacked Rome?

  5. #79
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,595
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked 1,386 Times in 714 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1011259
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Jack View Post
    As has been pointed out dinosaurs appear to have no been entirely cold-blooded. It's also worth noting that in a creature the size of, say, a Triceratops or Stegosaurus, let alone a Diplodocus, it makes very little difference. The ratio of surface area to volume means that they would pretty much maintain their body temperature anyway, just through heat produced as a by-product of metabolism and movement.
    Sorta like Oprah Winfrey?
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

    Download the new TOL app for iPhone, iPad, and Android...


  6. #80
    Journeyman Mr Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    227
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight View Post
    Sorta like Oprah Winfrey?
    Yeah, pretty much
    If you're really a Goth, where were you when we sacked Rome?

  7. #81
    Journeyman Mr Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    227
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight View Post
    A much more reasonable and logical explanation for most strata is liquefaction.
    See this is classic Creationism. Look! It produces something that vaguely approximates layering! It must be the explanation!

    Except it isn't. Because it completely fails to explain almost every feature of real sedimentary layers. It can't explain the differences between desert sandstones, and water-deposited sandstones, or mudstones; it can't explain surface features, or the pattern of the fossil record; it can't explain unconformitites, it can't explain sills and dykes. It can't explain the formation of metamorphic rocks, nor why they differ. Even the simple existence of the KT boundary demonstrates it's falsity.

    And that's the really tragic thing about all Creationist explanations, and the real reason that science has no time for them: how utterly incapable they are of even explaining the observable facts yet alone making anything resembling a prediction.

    Over in another thread you asked "Can questions like these only be discussed by scholars?", and this is the reason why it matters. If you'd actually studied the science and observations behind this to even a fairly basic level you'd have the knowledge to realise that the link you posted fails miserable to do what it purports to do and is packed full of factual inaccuracies and misunderstandings to boot.
    If you're really a Goth, where were you when we sacked Rome?

  8. #82
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,595
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked 1,386 Times in 714 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1011259
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Jack View Post
    Except it isn't. Because it completely fails to explain almost every feature of real sedimentary layers. It can't explain the differences between desert sandstones, and water-deposited sandstones, or mudstones; it can't explain surface features, or the pattern of the fossil record; it can't explain unconformitites, it can't explain sills and dykes. It can't explain the formation of metamorphic rocks, nor why they differ. Even the simple existence of the KT boundary demonstrates it's falsity.
    Uh apparently you didn't read it.

    And sorry... but Dr. Walt Brown's evaluation carries a bit more weight than your opinion. No offense.
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

    Download the new TOL app for iPhone, iPad, and Android...


  9. #83
    TOL Legend Granite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Live free or die.
    Posts
    11,974
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 22 Times in 20 Posts

    Blog Entries
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    512634
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight View Post
    Uh apparently you didn't read it.

    And sorry... but Dr. Walt Brown's evaluation carries a bit more weight than your opinion. No offense.
    Knight, even other creationists dispute Brown's findings and "research." I wouldn't put much stock into his evaluation or his pet hydroplate theory.
    If wealth was the inevitable result of hard work and enterprise, every woman in Africa would be a millionaire.
    --George Monbiot




    Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
    --Homer J. Simpson

  10. #84
    Journeyman Mr Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    227
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight View Post
    Uh apparently you didn't read it.
    I did read it.

    And, unlike you, I know enough about geology, and physics, to spot the blatant holes in it all. Although I can't claim to be an expert on either.
    If you're really a Goth, where were you when we sacked Rome?

  11. #85
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,595
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked 1,386 Times in 714 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1011259
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Jack View Post
    I did read it.

    And, unlike you, I know enough about geology, and physics, to spot the blatant holes in it all. Although I can't claim to be an expert on either.
    So a self admitted non-expert knows more than Dr. Walt Brown.

    Makes sense to me.
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

    Download the new TOL app for iPhone, iPad, and Android...


  12. #86
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,595
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked 1,386 Times in 714 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1011259
    Quote Originally Posted by Granite View Post
    Knight, even other creationists dispute Brown's findings and "research." I wouldn't put much stock into his evaluation or his pet hydroplate theory.
    That's true.

    Walt Brown rejects unscientific theories such as the canopy theory. It's no wonder other creationists aren't sure what to think of him. Yet his work is gaining traction. I believe his theories will eventually replace all the other creationist theories.

    I have never met one person that hasn't been extremely impressed when they actually read the entire book "In the Beginning".
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

    Download the new TOL app for iPhone, iPad, and Android...


  13. #87
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    1,532
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight View Post
    So a self admitted non-expert knows more than Dr. Walt Brown.

    Makes sense to me.


    What is Brown's doctorate in? Is it geology? Physics?

  14. #88
    Journeyman laughsoutloud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    102
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight View Post
    That's true.

    Walt Brown rejects unscientific theories such as the canopy theory. It's no wonder other creationists aren't sure what to think of him. Yet his work is gaining traction. I believe his theories will eventually replace all the other creationist theories.

    I have never met one person that hasn't been extremely impressed when they actually read the entire book "In the Beginning".
    Except Mr. Jack- he just said that he read it and was not impressed.

    I couldn't make it all the way through. It is patently ridiculous. I did try though - read many, many chapters... just couldn't do it all - found it boring after a while.

    Consider the "lensing" effects that are supposed to account for the stratification of animals killed in the flood. Smart lensing, I suppose it should be called, since it never sorts animals by size (so little dinosaurs don't end up with little rabbits), and knows to keep people far away from marsupial cats.

    This isn't science, it is apologetics, plain and simple. It is like a cargo cult, with all the trappings of science, but no understanding of what it means. Cobbling together an explanation for how things "must have" happened, if Genesis 1 and the Flood were historical events is not science, and no amount of rationalization and patient piecing together elaborate scenarios will make it so.
    Last edited by laughsoutloud; April 22nd, 2008 at 05:28 PM.

  15. #89
    Over 500 post club SUTG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Cole Valley, CA
    Posts
    626
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by koban View Post
    What is Brown's doctorate in? Is it geology? Physics?
    Brown has a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  16. #90
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    1,532
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SUTG View Post
    Brown has a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.


    So he's a non-expert when it comes to geology? Just like Mr Jack?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us