cambrian death cause

quote:

---

If I went to church, I might do just that. Why, you got something against prayer?

---

No, I have a problem with hypocracy. People claim that science is a godless endeavor, yet they trust science to help them cure diseases. They trust science to peer into the past for paternity tests and crime scene forensics, yet this same methodology doesn't apply to biology since it conflicts with their preconcieved religious ideology.

quote:

---

OK so how do we know this thing shed the teeth that were found as part of it's complete body?

---

Teeth were found separate from any complete fossil. Let's run through this again. Sharks throughout history, both today and in the fossil record, have multiple rows of teeth. Sharks today shed their front teeth which are replaced by the teeth in the rows behind it. In the fossil record we find teeth separate from the jaws of sharks. The jaws we do find have mutliple rows of teeth just like sharks do today. Whenever we find shark teeth we find shark fossils. Where we don't find teeth we don't find shark fossils. Your theory is that sharks didn't shed their teeth and their lifespans were significantly longer and this is why we find zero evidence of their existence when trilobites were still around. I have another theory. Aliens beamed the sharks and the shark teeth up into their UFO's so that they could play a little cosmic joke on humans. Guess what, my UFO theory has as much evidence as your theory. Prove that UFO's didn't beam up sharks and their teeth.

quote:

---

After all, you are almost a shark psyhic!

---

Who is the one claiming longer shark lifespans that have never been observed? Who is claiming that not one shark shed it's teeth like they do RIGHT NOW? I observe, you make claims that are not based in reality.

1) Yes, sorry, but 6 days is close enough to at once.2) Any guess on how long they stayed in one place?3) Oh, no so all life didn't stay in one place for awhile. But you just said "possibly yes" to that. So some life was created spread out? But just life extant in the Cambrian? Is that it then
and all the rest were localized?But I thought the localization was why we don't find certain fossils in lower layers? Is that true?But since Cambrian life wasn't localized then all of it should be in all the lower layers. So when did it die? Why did it die?
And why are there layers of different species? You would think? What would you think it might have to say? And why were they winning the day? And who were they?This message has been edited by NosyNed, 07-16-2004 02:57 AM

actually, that seems to be the flaw in YOUR model. not only does an abrupt change not make any sense, every evidence points to an earth much, much older than 6000 years. where did the water go then? hmm? you jsut claimed it was a miracle. more or less. as long as we're on the same page here, you're basically saying that this whole bit is basically a religious belief. you've uhh, never read the bible, have you? and i think i had a topic on this, but lets take a look at job's leviathan.

quote:

---

Job 41:15 [His] scales [are his] pride, shut up together [as with] a close seal.
Job 41:16 One is so near to another, that no air can come between them.

---

no dinosaur skin imprint ever found has had that type of scale. they appear to have had more lizard-like skin.

quote:

---

Job 41:19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps, [and] sparks of fire leap out.
Job 41:20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as [out] of a seething pot or caldron.
Job 41:21 His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.

---

dinosaurs show no evidence of breathing fire. no animal ever found has, although a few lizards do nasty things like squirt poison out of their eyes.

quote:

---

Psa 74:14 Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, [and] gavest him [to be] meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness.

---

heads. plural. dinosaurs, and every other living creature except certain conjoined twins, have only one head. in ugaritic lore, i think he had 7 heads.so no. not talking about a dinosaur. people who espouse this view just haven't read the bible carefully enough. it's talking about something greater, and the symbolic interpretation i presented is the standard, scholarly viewpoint. i don't make this stuff up. please clarify. was it a day? or two days? or no days? how carefully are you reading? god flies over the waters. then he creates light. and then he creates dark. and then the evening and the morning were the first day, which means the "let there be light" part was before the first day, because dark had not been defined yet.how long a time was that? can you say? a day? two days? three? a week? lemme know what you come up with. no, it showed that a bunch of things all died around the same time. so does the ordivician extinction above it. and the silurian, devonian, mississippian, pennsylvanian, permian, triassic, jurassic, cretaceous and tertiary extinctions. some were bigger than others. the jurassic wasn't that big of a deal, but the cretaceous whiped out most of the life on the planet.what's the big deal about the cambrian one? which is? pop quiz, what was alive in the cambrian period? what did the extinction kill off? what survived? do you even know?

i wasn't aware of any examples of megaladon, other than teeth. sharks don't fossilize very well, because the cartilidge rots too quickly. but the teeth and jaws are bone, so those get preserved sometimes. but all i've seen of megaladon is the teeth, and jaw reconstructions based on the great white.there was actually debate for some time as to whether it was a big shark, or just a small with disproportionately large teeth.

you are aware that it was no bigger than the biggest shark still alive today, right? fish do get large even today, you know. we've found no such thing, though. and if we did, it would certainly be an aberation, as the rest of the geologic column is in perfect order with evolutionary theory.and some people of the time genesis was written thought eden wasn't on earth, but was a level of heaven. just so you know, i didn't make that up. no. evidence. not speculation. evidence to back speculation. some prediction the hydroplate HYPOTHESIS predicts that can be tested or be looked for. in the second instance, they'd still leave evidence of their existance. a lot of stuff we know about dinosaurs comes from their footprints. why no mammal footprints in cambrian strata?and as far as not globally spread... well. things still spread out to occupy an area. by your thoughts, the cambrian period must have lasted about a day (in the creation days) and have still piled a few hundred feet of soil into rock, while killing more trilobites than it would take to cover the earth's entire landmass. that's a heck of a day. so we're in for another flood, before the second-coming?

quote:

---

Gen 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart [is] evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
Gen 8:22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.

---

well, i guess god's a liar then, right? jesus goes on to say:

quote:

---

Mat 24:40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
Mat 24:41 Two [women shall be] grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
Mat 24:42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

---

oh, and look, another metaphor right after that!

quote:

---

Mat 24:43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
Mat 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.

---

is it possible he's being figurative? like he normally is? no, just this once he HAS to be talking literally....i read my bible. do you? do you ever, you know, think about it? no, especially not since it was a FISH, not a whale. but you seem to have caught that one. good job. actually, the shark was about the same size as another modern shark, which is ironically named the whale shark. so, where's the mystery?btw, you're looking at the wrong end of the cambrian period. that's at the beginning, the boundary between precambrian and cambrian. it coincides nicely with volcanic ash. no mystery here.

at least he's making a prediction.you know, that is if we knew where eden was. any guesses? i've heard everything from iraq, to antarctica, to outer space.

wow.go out and buy a book on the modern shark, and do some reading. the modern great white has 3000 some teeth at any given time. that's a lot more than two rows. it sheds them periodically, but the mechanism is there because teeth break, fall out, and get stuck in prey. it needs as many teeth as possible, and needs to replace them as quickly as possible.in strata that have sharks in them, shark teeth are the single most abundant fossil you can find. hell, i have a BOX of them somewhere. however, they exist only in a certain range, from somewhere in the mesozoic to modern times. saying they are no abundant is the most idiotic thing you could possibly say. it proves, without a doubt, that you've never even attempted to learn anything about paleontology. two? or seven? sorry, couldn't resist. that's not something that's falsifiable. especially if you're of the sect that believes eden was in heaven. for the last time, evolution and the big bang have absolutely nothing to do with each other, other than the fact that creationists equally dispise both for some reason. god made a promise to noah that no matter how bad mankind got, he wouldn't kill us all, again. fine, explain to me how both can be literally true, and we're due for a THIRD flood, and not have god be a liar? you realise that that implication is blasphemy, right? saying that god breaks his promises. ok, i guess you didn't catch it. jonah says it was a fish. not a whale. and i never said rodent. i said rodent-like. all mammals come from small rodent-LIKE animals, including whales. we even have a good number of the transitional forms required. and it didn't happen overnight, it took more than 50 million years.

actually, i did too, in this post in this very thread: http://EvC Forum: cambrian death cause -->EvC Forum: cambrian death causeand more importantly, so does the bible. the word used for deep in genesis 7:11, as in "fountains of the great deep" is the same deep in genesis 1:2 (which i posted in the above link). it's also the same deep as in exodus 15:5, which says what pharoah's army was buried under. i could continue this. that's the problem.

sort of supports our view point, doesn't it?

I've been trying to get an answer to that since this thread began. LOLMayhaps you will get more information out of him than I have so far.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

i wasn't aware of any examples of megaladon, other than teeth.

---

I once found a picture of a whole jaw, but I can't seem to find it again. I thought I posted it in another thread, but who knows. Anyway, megalodon vertebrae have also been found which supports a large body to go with the teeth.

If one looks at the comparison between GW and Meg and look at the arrangement of teeth of extant GW then logically Megladon would have the same proportions just much much larger. I do not believe that Megladon would have disproportionate teeth to body size.

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

interesting.

quote:

---

It slowly becomes a bit clearer (and more silly). You are saying that the layers are because some forms didn't die for the 1500 years (or so) before the flood but others did.

---

What are you talking about? Can you tell me some critter that lived longer than man (almost a thousand years)?

quote:

---

You seem to be suggesting that some forms took a turn at dieing and then another form did. Is that it?

---

Did I suggest some trilobites were immortal, or something?

quote:

---

Different creatures appearing at one level and others at levels above them. Small (slightly) different from nearby levels and larger differences from levels further apart. More like current speces at higher levels, less like them at lower levels.

---

Nice sentence. Can you ask someone to try to help you and make it sound cohesive, and pertinent?

quote:

---

No explain why these patters exist.

---

I'd be happy to give it a shot, if you can get it together to communicate.

quote:

---

Who is the one claiming longer shark lifespans that have never been observed?

---

Longer than what? A trilobite? As I said most of the sites I pulled up in a search claimed we didn't really even know much now about the lifespan of sharks. So what is it you think you know about them back then?
Just because no teeth were found in the cambrian, (I think you are saying), does not it seems to me mean sharks did not exist on earth. They evolved, you say, ah, yes, maybe something of that nature happened, only quickly, if at all. Another fairly obvious point comes to mind about sharks in the cambrian. Just because it is assumed most cambrian life was sea life, was it really? The earth's super saturated soil, as one might expect from it 'standing in the water, and out of it'- very well may have had a different type of widespread enviroment, where trillies and such would thrive? As well as, or in stead of as the case may have been, in the seas. In other words, could cambrian life have been living outside of a strict 'sea' condition?