Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Scientists Question Darwinism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stripe
    replied
    1997.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Do these look like cells in tissue?



    Sure do, don't they? A lot more than than these:


    They are both fossilized tissue. The reason that the first one looks so much better is that it was completely fossilized and all the organic matter was replaced by minerals. The second one looks less lifelike, because it was only incompletely fossilized, and the heme and collagen were not replaced, but merely preserved by excess iron.

    This is a common thing in marine paleontology; there are many instances where organic molecules (but not individual cells or tissue) remain preserved for millions of years.

    They aren't really cells or tissue; they are the shapes of cells, but the original molecules are mostly or entirely replaced by minerals.

    It would be pretty cool if that could happen; obtaining DNA or organelles from ancient organisms would be a real advance for biology. Still, there are things we can tell from the scraps of organic matter that remain...

    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jun 10; 94(12): 6291–6296.
    Heme compounds in dinosaur trabecular bone
    Mary H. Schweitzer,* Mark Marshall,† Keith Carron,‡ D. Scott Bohle,‡ Scott C. Busse,ยง Ernst V. Arnold,‡ Darlene Barnard,† J. R. Horner,* and Jean R. Starkey

    The test of heme (fragment of a hemoglobin molecules) showed that it was immunologically closest to birds and mammals, and was dissimilar to that of snakes, again confirming evolutionary predictions that archosaurs, including birds and dinosaurs, are more closely related to each other than they are to other reptiles.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stripe
    replied
    "I sense injuries. The data could be called pain."

    Leave a comment:


  • JudgeRightly
    replied
    Originally posted by ok doser View Post
    "I cannot self terminate - you must lower me into the steel"

    Leave a comment:


  • ok doser
    replied
    Originally posted by Stripe View Post


    Darwinists believe in magic.

    Describe a situation in which a body could be soaked in iron for even one year.
    "I cannot self terminate - you must lower me into the steel"

    Leave a comment:


  • Stripe
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    It's interesting that some organic molecules, stabilized by iron, can persist for millions of years.


    Darwinists believe in magic.

    Describe a situation in which a body could be soaked in iron for even one year.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    Does it taste like chicken?
    It should taste like heme-saturated collagen. That's what it is. "Tissue"is a group of cells organized for some function. These bits of organic compounds aren't even cells. But it's interesting that some organic molecules, stabilized by iron, can persist for millions of years.

    It was actually invert paleontologists who first noticed this, many years ago.

    Leave a comment:


  • Right Divider
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    It's crowded under the bridge today.
    Well then, get out from under the bridge.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    It's crowded under the bridge today.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stripe
    replied
    Originally posted by ok doser View Post
    I like the version of ignore where barbie turns red for a year and we all forget he ever posted here
    It's your fault he keeps coming back. You make him so enraged that he has an eternal drive to prove you wrong just once.

    Leave a comment:


  • ok doser
    replied
    I like the version of ignore where barbie turns red for a year and we all forget he ever posted here

    Leave a comment:


  • Stripe
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Gee, that improved things things hereabouts.
    You're doing ignore wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Barbarian
    replied
    Gee, that improved things things hereabouts.

    Leave a comment:


  • 7djengo7
    replied
    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    I wrote that birds are dinosaurs in the same sense that you are a therapsid reptile. You then affirmed that meant that birds are dinosaurs.
    When you say that I "affirmed that meant that birds are dinosaurs", what is the referent of your pronoun "that"?

    I never even once affirmed that what you wrote ("birds are dinosaurs in the same sense that you are a therapsid reptile") means that birds are dinosaurs. Not at all.

    What I have been affirming, rather, is the fact that your claiming that "birds are dinosaurs" means that you are claiming that birds are dinosaurs. The fact that you also wrote the words, "in the same sense that you are a therapsid reptile", doesn't, somehow, magically cancel out the fact that you are claiming that birds are dinosaurs.

    I've invited you, numerous times, to come out and affirm, flat out, which of these two mutually contradictory propositions is the true one, and which is the false one:
    1. birds are dinosaurs
    2. birds are not dinosaurs


    So far, you have persistently stonewalled against this question, because to answer it must needs embarrass you. But, you embarrass yourself equally by stonewalling against it, too. I would actually give you a bit of credit, and probably actually "Thank" a post of yours, were you to write a post in which you clearly, without equivocation, came out and confessed the truth that BIRDS ARE NOT DINOSAURS.

    You could simply write, "Birds are not dinosaurs!" Or, "Birds are not dinosaurs in any sense, whatsoever!"

    However, were you to confess the TRUTH, that BIRDS ARE NOT DINOSAURS, you know as well as I know, that you will be directly contradicting what Disney's Nat Geo (one of the big-name organs of "science") has affirmed. And, of course, who are you? You, of course, don't want to be seen as out of step with your masters from mainstream "science".

    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Which is your claim that you are a therapsid reptile.
    Again, I've never made any such claim: that's why you can't quote me as having made such a claim.

    Your phrase, "your claim that you are a therapsid reptile" is without a referent--meaningless--since I have never claimed to be a reptile.

    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    You aren't smart enough to pull off what you're trying to do here.
    Already pulled it off with my first post. I forced you to have to lie, stonewall, and dodge, to try (and fail) to save face for the stupidities you are proud, as a Darwin cheerleader, to parrot.

    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
    But since you're now reduced to trolling, you go into the troll file. Bye-bye.
    Feel free to cower and run away! I, for my part, have no plan to go anywhere. By all means, put me on ignore; I can continue to read your posts, and I can continue to pit your ravings as a Darwin cheerleader against your ravings as a Darwin cheerleader.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X