What say you there, fuzzy britches? Feel like talking?
Posted on 06/09/2015 12:22:24 PM PDT by ETL
.
>> “I have no idea what constitutes a day to GOD” <<
.
Well, whatever it is, he expects us to honor the seventh one and keep it Holy!
“Isn’t it interesting that the pseudo scientists who made the discovery are attempting to get the news out, while fatidiously skating around any mention that these discoveries knock their whole “billions and billions” lash-up into a cocked hat?!”
No one claims that dinosaurs are “billions and billions” of years old.
.
Of course its serious.
Do you ever read any medieval literature?
.
“It’s simply a mathematical impossibility that you are going to find preserved soft tissue remains in something 75 million years old.”
Interesting, but total nonsense.
.
It K-Os 65 million just as thoroughly.
It K-Os 65 thousand too.
.
.
What is total nonsense are your inane replies.
.
The impossibility is more biological than mathematical. math is neutral to the magnitude of numbers.
“Of course its serious.
Do you ever read any medieval literature?”
Yes, I have. That proves dragons lived in Europe in the 1400’s? Columbus should have brought one over with him.
“It’s simply a mathematical impossibility that you are going to find preserved soft tissue remains in something 75 million years old.”
I’m sorry, I obviously haven’t seen the math that proves this. Please link so I can learn more about it.
I’ve often wondered that myself. Nobody has ever seen a dragon, but every culture has them, even the Aztecs.....................
* * *
We don’t *really* know that *all* the dinosaurs died out in the great extinction. If even a few of them survived in pockets here and there until, say, the Pleistocene, there could be myths handed down. And the bones probably wouldn’t have survived if the cave people used them for various things.
What say you there, fuzzy britches? Feel like talking?
Awesome post and well said.
It K-Os 3 thousand too.
If she’s a paleontologist, I picked the wrong major in college.
This article references this one from 2006:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-shocker-115306469/?no-ist
Where a 65 million year old T-rex fossilized bone was dissolved in acid to see what remained. They found stretchy remains. Tissue. Actual soft tissue. A chunk of it. Red blood cells too.
Here’s my beef. By any reasonable rules of decay, there should simply be no chance in a million that pliable soft tissue and red blood cells would remain intact no matter how they became fossilized for 60+ million years.
Here is my point. You can make the argument both ways on this.
1) It’s amazing that something carbon dated at 65 million years has soft tissue in it! Remarkable!!!
2) It’s amazing that carbon dating placed something at 65 million years old when it clearly has soft tissue in it. We had better check the validity of carbon dating!!!
Either statement is potentially valid about the results, unless you want to scream, “The science is settled.” And shut everyone down.
Yeah,
ugh, ugh, grunt, ugh, ugh...
“1) It’s amazing that something carbon dated at 65 million years ...
2) It’s amazing that carbon dating placed something at 65 million years old ....”
Both statements are invalid since carbon dating is only used to abou 50,000 years.
The pictures your posted look like the new Michelle Obama School Lunch Menu.
Yes, very likely.
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.