|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: dinosaur and human co-existence | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Hyroglyphx writes: Your thesis starts with the assumption that the Genesis account is true and then you seek out ways to make it seem plausible. That's not true, Hyro. As it is with evolutionists, corroborating data is assembled some related to this particular topic and some not, which supports the credibility of the premise, being the Biblical record. The more, the better and the better things jive (as I believe is the case here) the more evidence based the thesis becomes. That you and your evolutionist friends have an obvious bias to your premise does not mean that mine is blind faith based. Not at all. I've cited a whole lot over the years, including fulfilled prophecy, Exodus evidence, ID evidence, etc which builds upon my premise, just as you people calim relative to evolution. You people have your unknowns and iffies as well, do not forget, such as the first and early stages of biogenesis and evolution, not to mention the problems with the singularity event of the BB etc, so don't come down so hard on creationists because we don't have all of the answers to suit your biased intillects. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: What is it about that real world evidence that says the extinction event was caused by a curse, or anything supernatural for that matter. Though I've debated other topics relative to the existence of higher intelligence than that of humans, I have avoided doing that here, other than to say that the Satan would have been involved with the curse. I'm trying to keep on topic here. Need I explain it again, Percy? It is the fact that by and large, one group, the dinos became extinct rather suddenly and that the other did not by and large. I've cited in responses to others, corroborating reasons why the Genesis record of the curse is my premise. You do not believe evolution because you believe it. You cite what you interpret of the observed evidence to build your thesis on your belief. I do the same. I don't understand why you keep needling me on this same ole. If you want me out of this thread, just say the word or close the blamed thing and I'll do something else. Edited by Admin, : Fix quote. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
ZenMonkey writes: 1. Are you saying that the K-T extinction event, which took place 65 million years ago and is the one in which the large majority of the dinosaurs became extinct, is the same event as the Fall, which by most creationist calculations took place less than 10,000 years ago? If so, which date is wrong - 65 million years or 10 thousand years? No, Zen. My position has always been throughout this thread and elsewhere that the dinos became extinct at the commencement of the alleged ww flood. which allegedly took place about 4350 years ago or so.
2. If the K-T event does represent the Fall, what was the cause of the many other mass extinction events our planet has undergone, such as the Triassic-Jurrasic (205 ma, 23% of all families extinct), or the Permian-Triassic (251 ma, 97% of all marine species and 70% or all land species extinct)? Did God have to curse all of the non-mamalian Theraspids in some previous Fall? Was the the Lemorosaurus the most subtle beast of the Permian Garden of Eden 250 million years ago? 1) Zen, the fall, according to the Genesis curse account, i.e. non-dino types would not have existed until the time of the curse when the existing dinos laid their eggs. All embryos from then on would be non-dino types. All the account establishes is that a serpent/reptile beguiled the woman. It doesn't say or imply snake, serpent being the word depicting all reptiles.
3. How do you explain all of the other non-dinosaur families and genera that also died off in the K-T event? Did all the molluscs that went extinct get caught in some general curse fall-out, or can we assume that they did something naughty too? Did the molluscs all die off 65 million years ago in the K-T event with the dinos? I don't think so.
4. How do you explain the evidence that indicates that mass extinction events extend over thousands or even millions of years? To my knowledge none of these was as abrupt or extensive an event as the K-T event. The focus of this thread is suppose to be the dinos so to go in depth on other groups would lead off topic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Catholic Scientist writes: Just so you know... that's impossible. For a relative uniformist, yes but that would not be the case with the flood.
In that case, then neither did the dinos... they're birds now. Have you been following closely, CS? This does not apply to other than the actual reptile dino K-T group. If birds were included, they would be among the survival group which survived and thrived. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: What is your evidence that dinosaurs lived as recently as 4350 years ago? That would have to fall back on flood evidence which would be another topic to explain, in that it would involved discussion of reliability of radiometric dates relative to the possibility of a flood.
Percy writes: Since the curse is off-topic, what you meant to say is that at around the time of the flood dinosaurs, which were reptiles of the orders Ornithischia and Saurischia, laid eggs from which sprang lizards and snakes of the order Squamata. What is your evidence that anything like this ever happened? Now we're back to square one which again goes into how the observed evidence of the by and large extinction of dinos and the survival of the others is interpreted. I have no other direct evidence. If my understanding is correct, you have no direct evidence that an asteroid wiped out the dinos or whatever event you attribute their extinction to. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
I think you're getting into another topic, DC. No comment.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: Let's assume for the sake of discussion that radiometric had never been invented. What is your evidence that dinosaurs still lived 4350 years ago? The evidence remains being what is observed; fossils showing that long legged repiles have become extinct and that a large array of close to earth reptiles thrive abundantly. This coupled with physical evidence attributed to the flood (another topic) and recorded history becomes inclusive in the thesis. applying the 4350 or so date .
Percy writes: How is the physiological and genetic evidence interpreted to reach the conclusion that snakes and lizards are the descendants of dinosaurs? The most significant of this I've repeatedly repeated already, such as the fact that both are reptillian, similarities of visible appearance such as the two examples of the respective types.So far as the genes, that they would be different is extrapolated from the thesis as cause and effect. Any change in genetically physiology would necessarily be effected by genes. The change in egg embryo genes, in this case, involves the old debate of ID, which is again, another topic. This thread topic has a lot to do with the ID debate. To address all of the ramifications of the evidence cited, would be impossible in this one thread. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
DrAdequate writes: As something that you've made up in your head which is known for certain to be false. No comment on blind assertions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
ZenMonkey writes: Rocks take time to form under natural conditions. (And yes, I know that you're going to claim that the Flood created exactly those magical, unrepeatable conditions, the same ones that apparently make radiometric dating completely unreliable from your point of view. This claim is also utterly unsupported by evidence.) Your evidence is observed data interpreted on the basis of relative uniformativity for the last 20,000 years or so. If there was a flood, the same data would not necessarily calculate the same from a non-uniformative premise. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
A tad shaped like this little guy. Brookesia peyrierasi chameleon on leaf
Edited by Buzsaw, : add photo BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: The one on top is a Dimetrodon, which is in the class Synapsida, and so is neither a reptile nor a dinosaur, though its legs and movement are thought to have resembled a lizard's. But apparently the Synapsids are closer to mammals than to reptiles.The chameleon on the bottom *is* a reptile. I was going by Dr Adequates message, designating them asreptiles. I checked Wiki and it appears that that site supports your assertion, though that assertion assumes a relative uniformitarian. Percy writes: Since you have dinosaurs undergoing a complete genetic makeover in a single generation, why do you care how much they look like each other, and where is the evidence for your hypothesis of a genetic makeover? It would seem that imilarities in features and appearance somewhat corrorates the fact that both are classified as reptiles.
Percy writes: As others are pointing out, if your sole evidence for relatedness is vague resemblances then you're bound to arrive at all kinds of weird and wrong conclusions. General shape and appearance are molded by the environment, and similar environments and ecological niches will produce similar external appearances. It's the internal details that reveal actual evolutionary relationships, which in the case of fossils is usually just bones, though sometimes more, like skin impressions and so forth. Again, appearance, classification and the relative sudden disappearance of the dinos, all three become supportive to corroborating the hypothesis.
Percy writes: But let's get back to a more basic issue. Pretend you're preparing me for a debate on the flood where I'm to take the position that the dinosaurs still roamed the Earth 4350 years ago. What information are you going to give me so I can win the debate? Relative to the dino topic here, a ww flood would have wiped them all out since only the non-dino types would have been on the ark. The flood debate, as I've alluded to in past threads, involves a significantly pre-flood non-uniformative planet and atmosphere. For decades I've been considering all of the ramifications of this concept. Preparing one for such a debate , like ToE, involves a lot more than one message on one topic thread. --Percy BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Peepul writes: Buz, that is not correct. A flood would have no effect on any fundamental physical process. Radioactive decay rates would be completely unaffected by it. You're repeating this falacy that my position implies a change in decay rates. Again, that is not my position.
If you're saying that the flood could have affected the composition of all the rocks we can now study, then I don't believe there's any evidence to support you. Even if it did, the isochron dating methods we often use can detect this. So we can say for certain, based on our current understanding of physics, that the flood would not invalidate dating That's the kicker; our current understanding, which is solely relative uniformitarian. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: Now, Buz, what do I say next? What's this evidence? The evidence is all that I have produced on this thread. That's it. Must I repeat it all, including the pictures from the link of the similarities? Some of it is the same evidence you cite for an alleged astroid wiping out one type of the reptiles while leaving the others to survive and thrive, i.e. that we observe the extinction of the dinosaurs. The evidence here at EvC, involves corroborating evidence for the credibility of the Biblical Genesis record, including the Exodus, prophecy and other, for that background foundational stuff becomes supportive to the premise of my thesis, just as you apply your entire education on evolution as supportive to each aspect of the theory. What you're are requiring of me is like me asking you for evidence of an astroid wiping out the dinos 60 or so million years ago, factoring in a ww flood, i.e. providing evidence that fits my creationist science world view. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Zen Monkey writes: What do you mean by relative uniformitarianism? The way you're using this phrase, all I can think is that you mean "thinking that the world is understandable and consistant" as opposed to "believing that reality can change at random anytime God wants it to so who knows what anything means." I figured readers could figure that out for themselves; i.e. my alluding to a pre-flood atmosphere and planet surface in this and other threads, significantly different than post flood. Factoring out a ww flood the planet and atmosphere for the last 20,000 years, as per ToE would be relatively uniform. Savvy? BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Coragyps writes: For Chixulub, we have a crater, shocked quartz in Nebraska, tectites, iridium, tsunami deposits.... That's debatable. Gerta Keller of Princeton University argues that recent core samples from Chicxulub prove the impact occurred about 300,000 years before the mass extinction, and thus could not have been the causal factor. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024