Page 150 of 154 FirstFirst ... 50100140149150151 ... LastLast
Results 5,216 to 5,250 of 5379

Thread: Scientific knowledge

  1. #5216
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,646

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Creation.com's 'dog-like mammal' was apparently an egg-laying marsupial with no known present-day descendents. Not really very dog-like, then?

    Why do you think they use such language, Frank? Any ideas?

    Andy
    "We were schooner-rigged and rakish, with a long and lissome hull ..."

  2. #5217
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    26,216

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    I did warn you that Frank would deflect.





    You will need to spell it out s Frank ignores my posts.
    He ignores serious questions period.
    The definition of stupid has got to be the belief that more guns will negate the bloodshed done with guns.

  3. #5218
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by AndyG View Post
    Creation.com's 'dog-like mammal' was apparently an egg-laying marsupial with no known present-day descendents. Not really very dog-like, then?

    Why do you think they use such language, Frank? Any ideas?

    Andy
    nope, not really....

    looked like a dog?

    - but , hey! - wasnt the point that such a critter - dog, dog - like, marsupial , or whatever - should NOT have appeared "out of order in the fossil record"

    frank

  4. #5219
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by WX View Post
    He ignores serious questions period.
    Gary, i have put some thought, time, and effort in responding to you.

    I have asked for clarification of your direct questions and statements to me - but it seems you are ignoring all that?

    sincerely,

    frank
    Last edited by Frank!; 09-14-2018 at 07:05 AM.

  5. #5220
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Wakefield, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    8,921

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Pretty goofy article, Frank. I barely glanced at it before two glaring errors jumped out.

    A mammal hair was found in amber supposed 100 million years old.82 This is right in the middle of the alleged ‘age of dinosaurs’ when no such mammals supposedly existed.
    Mammaliformes emerged about 225 million years ago. True mammals (eutherians, or crown group mammals) have been around for about 167 million years (the earliest known eutherian, Juramaia, lived 161 million years ago). So, the existence of a mammal hair in a 100 million-year-old fossil is pretty cool, but not the least bit surprising. By that time, true mammals had already been around for 67 million years.

    A dog-like mammal fossil80 was found with remains of dinosaurs in its stomach—but, we’re told, no mammals large enough to prey on dinosaurs existed at that time.
    The "dog-like" mammal in question, an egg-laying critter called Repenomamus, emerged 125 million years ago and persisted for at least a couple of millions years. At that time, crown group mammals had already been around for at least 40 million years (see Juramaia, above). The Psittacosaurus that was found in its tummy belongs to a genus that appeared slightly before Repenomamus (126 million years ago), and persisted long after that mammal disappeared (until about 101 Ma).

    It's hard to see how this poses any sort of problem for the geological dating of fossils.

  6. #5221
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Taylor View Post
    Pretty goofy article, Frank. I barely glanced at it before two glaring errors jumped out.



    Mammaliformes emerged about 225 million years ago. True mammals (eutherians, or crown group mammals) have been around for about 167 million years (the earliest known eutherian, Juramaia, lived 161 million years ago). So, the existence of a mammal hair in a 100 million-year-old fossil is pretty cool, but not the least bit surprising. By that time, true mammals had already been around for 67 million years.



    The "dog-like" mammal in question, an egg-laying critter called Repenomamus, emerged 125 million years ago and persisted for at least a couple of millions years. At that time, crown group mammals had already been around for at least 40 million years (see Juramaia, above). The Psittacosaurus that was found in its tummy belongs to a genus that appeared slightly before Repenomamus (126 million years ago), and persisted long after that mammal disappeared (until about 101 Ma).

    It's hard to see how this poses any sort of problem for the geological dating of fossils.
    i posed the question earlier - is this merely a situation caused by the changing story in evolution?

    as i have noted, lineages are being extended to earlier times. is that the case here ? - that at the time the article was written, the information quoted was what was generally known at the time?

    i posed this as one possible explanation for the embarrassment.

  7. #5222
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    40,713

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    nope, not really....

    looked like a dog?

    - but , hey! - wasnt the point that such a critter - dog, dog - like, marsupial , or whatever - should NOT have appeared "out of order in the fossil record"

    frank
    And these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repenomamus are a problem to science how?

    While it is encouraging to hear evolutionists admit discoveries like this which challenge their way of thinking, the photos of the fossils and the description given in articles raise a caution flag. The dinosaur bones may only appear to be in the stomach of the dog-like creature when they really may just illustrate how the Flood waters would have buried one on top of the other



    On top of the spine and under a rib. The author must think that palaeontologists are as stupid as they are.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  8. #5223
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    o and Bruce - i think it is not so much the dating of the fossils as the question as to whether they were "out of order"

    and was it just a shifting of the goal posts - because, carried too far, the goal line becomes the whole boundary - ie no boundary, no falsification of the theory possible. no possible use for the theory....

    regards,

    frank

  9. #5224
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    26,216

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    Gary, i have put some thought, time, and effort in responding to you.

    I have asked for clarification of your direct questions and statements to me - but it seems you are ignoring all that?

    sincerely,

    frank
    What clarification do you need when I point out that it goes against the laws of physics and thermodynamics for the Ark to survive an asteroid impact that completely alters the Earths surface, floods the highest mountains and lays down thousands of metres of sedimentary rock.
    The definition of stupid has got to be the belief that more guns will negate the bloodshed done with guns.

  10. #5225
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    did you not follow the impactor posts??

    the Ark would have faced winds of 145mph and Noahs grandfather clock might have stopped

  11. #5226
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Wakefield, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    8,921

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    as i have noted, lineages are being extended to earlier times. is that the case here ?
    I can't imagine why you think this poses a problem for anyone. Currently, the oldest eutherian is Juramaia (161 Ma). That is the earliest known crown group mammal. However, earlier eutherian fossils are very likely to appear at some point. This will will push the date of the group back, and Juramaia will fall to second place.

    At one meter in length, R. giganticus is the current record-holder for an early Cretaceous mammal. It is perfectly possible (and entirely untroubling) that an even bigger one will be found at some point.

    The odd thing is that, far from being "fossils out of place," both the mammal hair and Repenomamus fall comfortably within the existing timeline for the emergence of mammals. If a eutherian fossil were to appear in reliably-dated Devonian sediments--like those at Miguasha, which I had the pleasure of visiting, this summer--that would be a complete game-changer, but I rather doubt it will happen.

    i think it is not so much the dating of the fossils as the question as to whether they were "out of order"
    But they're not out of order. See above.

  12. #5227
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Pollen in the precambrian?

  13. #5228
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Wakefield, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    8,921

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    Pollen in the precambrian?
    LOL. Maybe that one will stand up to scrutiny, eh?

    OK, click through from the article you posted, from the link embedded in the phrase "Perhaps most astonishingly pollen fossils..." It leads to a page on your favorite site, which concerns an article published way back in 1964, concerning what the author (Bailey) described as "possible microfossils" in the Roraima formation. In the very first paragraph they make this claim:

    Although the discovery was published in Nature, there were no subsequent articles dealing with it.
    That is simply untrue. In 1967, a response was published in Nature, by the very person who took the original photomicrographs! He concluded that the "possible microfossils" were not organic at all, but pyroclastic in origin. The article is here: https://www.nature.com/articles/2151261a0 It's behind a paywall, but if this fifty-year-old exchange in Nature really fascinates you I could send the original.

    Either your favorite site was unaware of Allen's response (in which case you are being misled by incompetent scholars) or it has deliberately concealed that article (in which case you are being misled by dishonest scholars). Either way, you are being misled.
    Last edited by Bruce Taylor; 09-14-2018 at 08:56 AM.

  14. #5229
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    14,156

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    I been thinking about that uke. How’s it play?

    Peace,
    Post Colombian

  15. #5230
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Wakefield, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    8,921

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by amish rob View Post
    I been thinking about that uke. How’s it play?

    Peace,
    Post Colombian
    Pretty good! Of course I would think that.

  16. #5231
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    14,156

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Fluorocarbon strings make a world of difference. Once I tried a set, I changed all my strings.

    Peace,
    Robert

  17. #5232
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    49,788

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    And you no doubt wear your polonium halo while playing.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  18. #5233
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    14,156

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    It sounded a joke, but he only joke was I have multiple ukes. And, honestly, I wish I had one more. A nice one.

    Fluorocarbon strings changed the tone, character, and playability of even the cheapest uke I have, though. And they tune quicker, and hold tune longer.

    Peace,
    Robert

  19. #5234
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    14,156

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    And, no, Keith, I’m more a brass ring than a halo.

    Peace,
    Robert

  20. #5235
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Concord, Massachusetts
    Posts
    2,320

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Bruce: thank you for your input on the evolution of mammals. We did point out the pyroclastic origin of the so-called, "Pre-cambrian pollen microfossils" umpteen pages ago, but Frank! has a very short memory.

    Fitz
    "Wherever there is a channel for water, there is a road for the canoe. " - Thoreau

  21. #5236
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    14,156

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Pyroclastic? Precambrian?

    Oh, Yeah, I’m proofing bread!

    Peace,
    Loafing Today

  22. #5237
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Wakefield, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    8,921

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Fitz View Post
    Bruce: thank you for your input on the evolution of mammals. We did point out the pyroclastic origin of the so-called, "Pre-cambrian pollen microfossils" umpteen pages ago, but Frank! has a very short memory.

    Fitz
    Oh, sorry. I haven't followed this thread too closely. This morning, I saw some big, fat fish swimming around in the barrel and thought, hey, why not? Of course, when you shoot a fish on the internet, it keeps swimming.

  23. #5238
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,646

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    I'm a leftie, but I've left my ukulele strung rightie, and am therefore learning chords 'upside down'. Is this a bad mistake?

    (And thanks for the fossil debunking, Bruce. Frank has weird ideas, but some real scientific gems pop out on this interminable thread now and again.)

    Andy
    "We were schooner-rigged and rakish, with a long and lissome hull ..."

  24. #5239
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    14,156

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Yes!

    The high top string is the critical part. Only the uke and the banjo are like that. That way, your thumb play that toot high when you’re fingerpicking or claw hammering. It also provides a nice accent with the thumb on the down strum.

    You play uke, too?!

    Damn geography. Damn it well.

    Peace,
    Robert

  25. #5240
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,646

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by amish rob View Post
    You play uke, too?!
    No, oh wise emperor-for-life: I torture it. Just started - not least to attempt, one decade or so hence, to accompany my wife who's a mean mandolineer. "Play me 'Shoals of Herring', Colleen", I'll say. And only a little slower than Alexa, the tune arrives.

    Now that's miraculous magic.

    Andy
    "We were schooner-rigged and rakish, with a long and lissome hull ..."

  26. #5241
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    49,788

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    You should try the charango; I think it's a lot more fun than the ukulele (well, at least a lot louder).


    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  27. #5242
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    983

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Rob:
    I am curious if your reply of "Yes!" to AndyG indicates that you think learning chords upside down is a bad idea, or if it was an exultant, life-affirming, "Yes! There are more crazies out there who play a ukelele just like me!" kind of reply? I bet Andy would really like to know. It will affect his career as a musician immensely.

  28. #5243
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    14,156

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge


    Or, get a pickup, and ditch the whole band.

    Peace,
    Robert

    P.S. That young lady rips the charango. Thanks for the intro, Keith. To both.

  29. #5244
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    14,156

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by robm View Post
    Rob:
    I am curious if your reply of "Yes!" to AndyG indicates that you think learning chords upside down is a bad idea, or if it was an exultant, life-affirming, "Yes! There are more crazies out there who play a ukelele just like me!" kind of reply? I bet Andy would really like to know. It will affect his career as a musician immensely.
    Right. Sorry. I think the uke should be strung “properly”, as should a five string banjo.

    Guitars, basses, etc., I’m sorta meh about.

    Peace,
    Recovering Guitarista (Though Quad And I Have Been Threatening A Band...)

  30. #5245
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Ok , thanks Bruce
    Ive got some digging.....
    (and potentially apologies to Fitz )

    I can remember the surge of joy and wonder when I recognized the tune I was trying to play on the fiddle.

    Prob all for the best for myself and the universe that i left it at that.

  31. #5246
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Have just read every word of

    The evolutionary paradox of the Roraima*pollen*of South America is ...

    Dunno y - as layman i could only guess at the technical terms - but the bloke seemed competent and genuine.

    Want to find the follow-up Nature article

  32. #5247
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    26,216

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    did you not follow the impactor posts??

    the Ark would have faced winds of 145mph and Noahs grandfather clock might have stopped
    Yer dreaming....we are talking about the same flood aren’t we? The one that overtops the highest mountains and lays down thousands of metres of sediments?
    The definition of stupid has got to be the belief that more guns will negate the bloodshed done with guns.

  33. #5248
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Concord, Massachusetts
    Posts
    2,320

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Here is the Nature article:

    https://www.nature.com/articles/210292a0

    This paper was written half a century ago, almost as old as the Bible!
    Last edited by Fitz; 09-14-2018 at 04:58 PM.
    "Wherever there is a channel for water, there is a road for the canoe. " - Thoreau

  34. #5249
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,405

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Taylor View Post
    LOL. Maybe that one will stand up to scrutiny,....
    ............
    .......



    That is simply untrue. In 1967, a response was published in Nature, by the very person who took the original photomicrographs! He concluded that the "possible microfossils" were not organic at all, but pyroclastic in origin. The article is here: https://www.nature.com/articles/2151261a0 It's behind a paywall, but if this fifty-year-old exchange in Nature really fascinates you I could send the original.

    Eit ......................
    ............misled.
    Yes please , Bruce - particularly the 1967 article cos i cant find a ref so far

    Ta,

    Frank

  35. #5250
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    40,713

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    Yes please , Bruce - particularly the 1967 article cos i cant find a ref so far

    Ta,

    Frank
    Will this do anyone?
    YEC Silvestru (2012) cites Bailey (1964) and Stainforth (1966) as early reports of microfossils in the Roraima Supergroup of British Guiana (now Guyana). Bailey (1964) described possible organic microfossils as coming from Roraima “Formation” stream pebbles and boulders in the Kako River, which is located in western Guyana (Figure 1). Rather than identifying the possible microfossils as pollen or spores, Bailey (1964) thought that the “organic” materials resembled foraminifera or radiolaria.
    Allen (1967) is an important response to Bailey (1964) that Silvestru (2012) either overlooked or failed to mention. Allen (1967) disagreed with Bailey (1964) and argues that the “microfossils” are actually volcanic ash particles. Allen (1967, p. 1262) states:
    “The present communication is not intended to comment on any aspect of the Roraima Formation but to correct the impression that the microscopic objects figured by Bailey [1964] are of organic origin. Bailey's photomicrographs were taken by me, and I have examined a number of thin sections of the 'type-material', including specimen H 265. In my view, all the features observed under the microscope are consistent with a pyroclastic origin for these small bodies, which display the characteristic morphology of globular areas of vesiculated volcanic glass in varying stages of disruption.”
    “Disruption” probably refers to alteration of the particles. In the presence of air and water, volcanic glass typically alters to clays, iron oxides and other materials over time. The photographs of “microfossils” in Bailey (1964) and Allen (1967) do indeed strongly resemble microscopic volcanic glass particles.
    Bailey (1964) even admits that “sponge spicule” fossils found in the Roraima “Formation” may actually be volcanic glass shards. So, Allen (1967) was not the only individual to think that the “microfossils” of the Roraima Supergroup were actually volcanic glass particles. Considering Dr. Allen’s expertise and familiarity with the samples, there is little doubt that Allen (1967) is correct and that Bailey (1964) misinterpreted particles of volcanic glass as fossils. After Allen (1967), the claims in Bailey (1964) were largely forgotten.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •