Posted on 11/22/2009 8:10:55 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Fungi are single or multi-celled organisms that break down organic materials, such as rotting wood, in order to absorb their nutrients. Neither plant nor animal, they range from mushrooms to single-celled yeast.
Scientists were investigating organic chemicals trapped in an Italian sedimentary rock formation when they found evidence that an extinct fungus feasted on dead wood during a time when the world’s forests had been catastrophically eradicated.[1] What could have caused such a universal effect on forests, and why does organic material remain in rocks that are supposedly 251.4 million years old?...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
How can your steady stream of plagiarized replies be telling the “truth” if you are pretending they came from you, when they really came from someone else? Indeed, I have even caught you changing your plagiarized quotes to make them seem more definitive or authoritative than they really are. The person who does such things is dishonest, and that person is you.
Let’s not forget about Natual Plagiarizer...err...Natural Law.
Btw, did you notice that our resident rogue mod is once again defying Jim Robinson’s express wishes that Creation/ID articles be allowed to be posted in News/Activism?
Sorry NP...err...NL, forgot to ping you to last.
OK. Clueless, and therefore reduced to rank speculation bereft of any factual support. Thanks for writing.
You are absolutely the most ignorant fool that posts here!
Hey worm brain, just how would a 'chemical' get 'fissilized?'
You haven't the slightest notion what fossilization even is!
Everytime I catch you in a lie you rachet up your ad hominem rhetoric. Keep it up and you will force that "rogue mod" to punch your ticket.
Wow, GGG's big sister to the rescue, just like grade school. Grow-up.
It's not clear to me that anyone has a clue.
OK. If that's the best you can do, that's the best you can do.
So which ones are you; Batman and Robin or the Skipper and Gilligan?
Indeed, it was but a few weeks ago that Ira thought only fossilized bones can be demineralized!
LOL!
Yep. It's the best you can do.
Which one are you, authentic poster or plagiarist?
[[just how would a ‘chemical’ get ‘fissilized?’]]
Carbonated dating sets the date at around a brazillion years BC
Funny coming from a heliocentrist creationist that believes prayer can cure appendicitis.
This is a nice set-up for the lies to come. No, BTMS*, they didn't exactly find "organic materials"....they found breakdown products of organic chemicals.
If Reduviasporonites were algae, then their widespread distribution around the globe would indicate that the world was dominated by “ponding and swamping.” However, if they were fungi, then the globe was dominated by “massive loss of standing biomass”―a worldwide deforestation catastrophe. Intriguingly, the global nature of the great Flood, as described in Genesis, matches the universality of either scenario.
Wow.....made that all up on his own? Never heard of salt water algae? you betcha BTMS*...everything perfectly matches the notion that Man lived with dinosaurs until 4351 years ago. Suuuuuuuure it does.
The scientists associated the timing of this fungus’ proliferation on earth with the Permian-Triassic extinction event, wherein about 96 percent of marine and 70 percent of land organisms went extinct. At that time, “the world’s forests were wiped out,”1 providing a planet-wide food source for the fungus.
...and why exactly will you, a scientific ignoramus, ever take a scientist's research without twisting it to suit your needs?
The catastrophe has been associated with a tremendous, continent-sized lava flow that made what is known today as the Siberian Traps. This covers an astounding 100,000 square miles of Siberia. In 1991, the flow was implicated as a possible trigger for worldwide extinction.4 In this view, the toxic fumes from the massive lava fields created enough acid rain to kill earth’s forests.
OYG.....a RATIONAL explanation....on to stupid questions...
But if this hypothesis is correct, why were more marine creatures exterminated than land creatures? It should seemingly be the other way around.
Stupid questions from a dumbarse. Gee, BTMS*, MAYBE, just MAYBE catastrophic environmental problems would have a tremendous affect on marine environments of all kinds on all levels of the food chain? Ya think? Nawwww.....doesn't fit the Flood and Man living with dinosaurs.
The chemical analysis was performed with an instrument sensitive enough to measure tiny amounts of carbon and nitrogen, including their isotopes. Did these elements come from the bodies of the original microfossils, or were their well-preserved cell wall shapes comprised of replacement material?
Bet you never played with a MassSpec before. Stupid question designed to drive the thinking of the ignorant reader. It's a combination of both, Dippy...not an "either/or". The organic chemical breakdown products were left over from the organism that was fossilized. What you're finding out is that while bones will fossilize more completely....just think calcium, whereas organisms not made of bone or shell will have remnants of organic chemicals. SHOCKER!! ....but this leads to talk of dinosaur soft tissues....
Similar to the chemical analyses of dinosaur soft tissue, including well-characterized collagen found in “fossil” dinosaur bone,
Wow, BTMS*....how about lying some more? Yes, despite you """", the dinosaur tissues were fossilized, that's why they had to demineralize them.
the existence of organic cell wall material from so long ago presents a challenge to the age interpretation of millions of years assigned to the remains.
False claim, BTMS*.....and they didn't find "organic cell wall material"...they found Organic break down products...chemical remnants of what used to be organic compounds. That they can still detect carbon and nitrogen is wholly unsurprising to me......of course, I do a lot of protein chemistry.
Rambling on with selective quoting about chitin gets you nowhere.
A Genesis Flood model might incorporate all of this data with fewer assumptions.
Riiiiiiiight....a Genesis Flood model is wholly based on assumptions that you, sir, are twisting all science to incorrectly fit.
From the account given in the biblical text, more land creatures would have survived than marine creatures, since land creatures were preserved on a giant barge.
....except all those pesky dinosaurs that were somehow left behind.
And when “the fountains of the great deep [broke] up,”6 hot mantle material—including lava, steam, and water―would have been ejected up through earth’s crust. This singular destructive event would have provided the tremendous energy required to have made a Siberia-sized lava flow.
.....and this is just a ludicrous statement. Eart to BTMS*, you think you can learn the difference between lava flows occuring on land and those occuring underwater? How exactly is Siberia part of "the great deep"??
According to most Flood geologists
There is no such thing as a Flood geologist. There are geologists, and there are people that twist science to fit their theology.
the fossil-bearing rock strata were deposited during the Flood year.
....a completely ludicrous notion.....but so is Man living in the time of 100+ species of large meat eating dinosaurs.
And the recent occurrence of the Flood, as determined by biblical chronology, answers the question of why such short-lived Reduviasporonites chemicals persist in sedimentary rocks up to this day.
False conclusion, BTMS*....stop perverting science to fit your theology.
.....or maybe, just going out on a limb here, they don’t like non-news articles being posted in the news section.
The perversion of original science to fit a theology is not “news”....nor is it a “new” tactic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.