Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-20-2019 1:44 AM
20 online now:
PaulK, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (2 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 857,118 Year: 12,154/19,786 Month: 1,935/2,641 Week: 444/708 Day: 3/135 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   'Bird-like' tracks 55 million years pre-birds in this week's Nature
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 14 (12815)
07-05-2002 3:11 AM


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list _uids=12087401&dopt=Abstract

quote:
"Here we describe well-preserved and abundant footprints with clearly avian characters"

This week's Nature has a paper on bird-like tracks 55 million years pre-birds. Clearly late Triassic.

The tracks fulfil 7 out of 7 primary fulfilments for bird tracks. They look like bird footprints and there are lots of them including track ways! No known Triassic organism could have left these tracks. The last line of the paper (from the hardcopy) of course states that there must be a non-bird which leaves tracks like this.

In the flood scenario we expect tracks at lower levels than fossils.

[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 07-05-2002]


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by mark24, posted 07-05-2002 6:10 AM Tranquility Base has responded
 Message 3 by gene90, posted 07-05-2002 9:44 AM Tranquility Base has responded
 Message 4 by Joe Meert, posted 07-05-2002 9:55 AM Tranquility Base has responded
 Message 5 by TrueCreation, posted 07-05-2002 3:50 PM Tranquility Base has responded

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 3391 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 2 of 14 (12818)
07-05-2002 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tranquility Base
07-05-2002 3:11 AM


TB,

Birds are supposed to have diverged from reptiles in the triassic, it's nice when fossil evidence bears out a prediction

Mark

------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-05-2002 3:11 AM Tranquility Base has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-07-2002 11:17 PM mark24 has not yet responded

    
gene90
Member (Idle past 2019 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 3 of 14 (12819)
07-05-2002 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tranquility Base
07-05-2002 3:11 AM


[QUOTE][b]In the flood scenario we expect tracks at lower levels than fossils.[/QUOTE]

[/b]

Does that mean you predict no bones from the Triassic?

(Tracks are fossils)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-05-2002 3:11 AM Tranquility Base has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-07-2002 11:59 PM gene90 has not yet responded

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 3876 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 4 of 14 (12820)
07-05-2002 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tranquility Base
07-05-2002 3:11 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&l ist _uids=12087401&dopt=Abstract

This week's Nature has a paper on bird-like tracks 55 million years pre-birds. Clearly late Triassic.

The tracks fulfil 7 out of 7 primary fulfilments for bird tracks. They look like bird footprints and there are lots of them including track ways! No known Triassic organism could have left these tracks. The last line of the paper (from the hardcopy) of course states that there must be a non-bird which leaves tracks like this.

In the flood scenario we expect tracks at lower levels than fossils.

[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 07-05-2002]


JM: But these tracks are found at higher levels than the cyclothems which were supposed to form as the flood raged. Once again, TB shows his naivete on things geological. Your desperate attempts to fit everything into a single flood result in your blindness to all other explanations. You'd have done much better in the 1700's. By the way, are you now redefining a 'fossil'. What is your definition of a 'fossil'?

Cheers

Joe Meert

[This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 07-05-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-05-2002 3:11 AM Tranquility Base has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-07-2002 11:14 PM Joe Meert has not yet responded

    
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 14 (12856)
07-05-2002 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tranquility Base
07-05-2002 3:11 AM


"In the flood scenario we expect tracks at lower levels than fossils."
--I'm curious as to your reasoning behind this, exactly. I would be to believe that various tracks would be found in virtually any sediment. However, there of course would be a diversity of mechanisms which would rightly predict that tracks or even specific types of tracks would be found in one area higher or lower than another. The event and its position in the fossil record would have to first be applied.

--BTW, sorry about my absence here for the past few days, my parents are seemingly trying to conjure up some weird format for what computers and when these computers will have internet access in my house. I have not had internet access since then and I would predict another episode like this soon. Hopefully we will get this worked out though.... well, whatever.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-05-2002 3:11 AM Tranquility Base has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-07-2002 11:20 PM TrueCreation has not yet responded

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 14 (12996)
07-07-2002 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Joe Meert
07-05-2002 9:55 AM


Joe

Standard intros to fossils indicate that impressions are fossils of a type.

The cyclothems surges were just a stage of the flood as I 've stated many times!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Joe Meert, posted 07-05-2002 9:55 AM Joe Meert has not yet responded

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 14 (12997)
07-07-2002 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by mark24
07-05-2002 6:10 AM


Mark

These tracks fit 7 out of 7 criteria - these Triassic birds were . . . birds . . in one go. Just another sudden appearance.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by mark24, posted 07-05-2002 6:10 AM mark24 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Joe Meert, posted 07-07-2002 11:48 PM Tranquility Base has responded
 Message 14 by Peter, posted 07-08-2002 3:53 AM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 14 (12998)
07-07-2002 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by TrueCreation
07-05-2002 3:50 PM


TC

My only point was that we systematically expect tracks lower than skeletons due to escape from flood waters.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by TrueCreation, posted 07-05-2002 3:50 PM TrueCreation has not yet responded

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 3876 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 9 of 14 (13000)
07-07-2002 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Tranquility Base
07-07-2002 11:17 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
Mark

These tracks fit 7 out of 7 criteria - these Triassic birds were . . . birds . . in one go. Just another sudden appearance.


JM: So, sudden creation or extinction? Of course, your conclusion is ludicrous to begin with.
Cheers

Joe Meert

[This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 07-07-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-07-2002 11:17 PM Tranquility Base has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-08-2002 12:03 AM Joe Meert has not yet responded

    
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 14 (13005)
07-07-2002 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by gene90
07-05-2002 9:44 AM


We predict almost no bones. However, we suspect that many 'folded in' or 'washed in' fossils are out of seqeunce fossils.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by gene90, posted 07-05-2002 9:44 AM gene90 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Joe Meert, posted 07-08-2002 12:02 AM Tranquility Base has responded

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 3876 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 11 of 14 (13006)
07-08-2002 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Tranquility Base
07-07-2002 11:59 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
We predict almost no bones. However, we suspect that many 'folded in' or 'washed in' fossils are out of seqeunce fossils.

JM: This is false. Creationists have held forth 'the many fossils' as evidence of animals that died in the flood. Or do you mean actual 'bones'? We simply don't see all that many out of sequence fossils. In fact, in a chaotic global flood (where surges are localized), the global flood should produce very little, if any regularity! The regularity observed in the fossil record is exactly what caused the flood geologists of old to abandon the Sumerian epic.

Cheers

Joe Meert


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-07-2002 11:59 PM Tranquility Base has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-08-2002 12:04 AM Joe Meert has not yet responded

    
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 14 (13007)
07-08-2002 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Joe Meert
07-07-2002 11:48 PM


I think you know the answer Joe. Neither of the above!

I know you hate what we're doing. I feel the same about those people that pretend the lunar landings were faked. I know how you feel - OK. But I am convincd that the data is scientifically better explained by the flood. We are providing a scenario that is so different that it does mean that every piece of data can be looked at in two ways.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Joe Meert, posted 07-07-2002 11:48 PM Joe Meert has not yet responded

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 14 (13009)
07-08-2002 12:04 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Joe Meert
07-08-2002 12:02 AM


Joe

In context I meant 'we predict almost no bones before tracks'. Of course we predict lots of bones!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Joe Meert, posted 07-08-2002 12:02 AM Joe Meert has not yet responded

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 2119 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 14 of 14 (13024)
07-08-2002 3:53 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Tranquility Base
07-07-2002 11:17 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
Mark

These tracks fit 7 out of 7 criteria - these Triassic birds were . . . birds . . in one go. Just another sudden appearance.


Well, their feet were anyhow

[This message has been edited by Peter, 07-08-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-07-2002 11:17 PM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019