Soft tissue in hadrosaur remains

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

The problem is that there is NO evidence that there were any worldwide floods of which gunga speaks. We have always had some portion of the planet high and dry. IF gunga can find any credible evidence as to how his "Flood" showed itself, Ill easily take it apart from mere stratigraphy.

Let the record indicate that I have not addressed the concept
of "worldwide floods", but there have been floods
probably including at least one in the area of Mt. Ararat.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

quote="farmerman"]

Quote:

Im not upset, this is an exercise in futility and I know it.
However, there are others reading this stuff.

I feel good too.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Many sequences of inundation of depressions and formation of seas in and around tectonic areas are in the stratigraphic record. What gunga is talking about is THE FLOOD, where the entire planet was underwater. > IF all these people were killed in that Flood, where are all the bodies?.

As far as dinosaurs are concerned, gunga keeps shifting his beliefs and he comes back and around every few months. I think hes still looking for evidence of mokele mbembe.

1 Reply

Hmmm, let's see, either everything science knows about the earth and biology is wrong, or Gunga's conclusions are wrong... which could it be, hmmmm, let me think... (but those baby-doodle petroglyphs are so convincing)

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Yeh, we have a veritable Appalachian chain of evidence, writings, experimental data,etc etc. What does gunga have? about a 2 page outline worth of dubious crap that he collected from some conspiracy sites ,the ICR, and Vine Deloria.

Did you get the "challenge" that gunga implied? He said that, you can be certain that the folks at the ICR are working on the "soft tissue " issue.
I heard that they may get a microscope next year, followed by a "Bible SCience Calendar of the Earth"

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Farmerman wrote:

Quote:

Many sequences of inundation of depressions and formation of seas in and around tectonic areas are in the stratigraphic record. What gunga is talking about is THE FLOOD, where the entire planet was underwater. >
IF all these people were killed in that Flood, where are all the bodies?

Well, it appears that the entire planet really WAS under water
for millions of years.
U think maybe the fish 8 all the bodies ?

http://www.eps.harvard.edu/people/faculty/hoffman/snowball_paper.html

Farmerman wrote:

Quote:

As far as dinosaurs are concerned,
gunga keeps shifting his beliefs
and he comes back and around every few months.
I think hes still looking for evidence of mokele mbembe.

That shows that he 's open minded and willing to consider new ideas.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

1. SNOWBALL EARTH is barely a good hypothesis because the evidence of glacial activity from about the planet is not continuous. Even so, Snowball earth was not a flood but a glacier and the planet was basically only 60+% covered by water (the ice sheets would "suck up free water" and leave a lot more dry land under the ice.
Snowball earth is a fairly recent hypothesis thats been made to explain several chemical conditions and the late preCambrian. It has very little reputable data, despite the HArvard pub. (I have several others on the subject and several more that call it preposterous) but somehow, the concept is a favorite of "Discovery Channels" in their quest to keep us entertained over being better informed. The Snowball earth terranes are pretty much areas covered by existing Continental Shields.These shilds show distinct glacial grooves and these grooves help us determine which way the Nuna and Rodinian continental collisons occured.

http://www.earthmagazine.org

(Remember that all the water ever on this planet , was, and is here. We only add a very small portion of a percent new connate water from igneous sources(and most of this is balanced by the water laving the system

Quote:

That shows that he 's open minded and willing to consider new ideas.

Hes never really considered anything beyond the myths of Creation or Planetary Floods so I think youre just trying to be a Mr Badger here.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Not to critique Hoffman, but my colleagues over at Columbia have a word to say about the "points " of his work

http://edgcm.columbia.edu/~mchandler/AOS_528/AOS_528_091807.ppt#276,35,Summary

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Quote:

1. SNOWBALL EARTH is barely a good hypothesis because the evidence of glacial activity
from about the planet is not continuous. Even so, Snowball earth
was not a flood but a glacier and the planet was basically only 60+% covered by water
(the ice sheets would "suck up free water" and leave a lot more dry land under the ice.

Well, I was responding to the concept
of the entire planet being covered by water.
I suspect that 700,000,000 years ago, the glaciers were made out of water.

I shoud apologize for being more facetious than I shoud have been.
Sometimes, I am inexorably drawn like a moth to a play on words.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

I shoud apologize for being more facetious than I shoud have been.
Sometimes, I am inexorably drawn like a moth to a play on words.

IN Other words, you crack you up.

WATER and ICE may be related by chemistry but, on earth, they are not related by physics. The formation of continental ice sheets is not by any mechanism that is similar to water bodies.

A planet covered by ice will actually have less area covered by actual water than an area inundated during a planetary "Wurm".

I suppose you know that we know of know fish that can swim around within an ice sheet.
------------------------------------

If you see information from Coumbia, the evidence of glaciation during the pre Cambrian is pretty widespread but not worldwide and ,if it was, we would expect several things to have happened (Isostacy of glaciated bodies would be seen in later deposists after "unweighting": or mass extinctions of Ediacaran life: a "source area"

The Columbia hypothesis uses the excess of CO2 and CH3 to form slushy clathrate (hydrate) deposits that could overwhelm the planet until a sunspot cycle or a more propitious axial alignment of the planets could present a larger face to the sun and cause warming.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Farmerman is correct that there has always been some dry land above the waters, no matter how much continents moved around. I'll look for some paleogeology pics.

Btw - Gunga, is this dinosaur-dating theory of yours also a theory against continental drift? No offense meant, I genuinely don't know.

1 Reply

@High Seas,

Not to put wors in gungas mouth. I believe that he does accept global tectonics. He just feels that, with a shorter time to accomplish it, continentaldrift would have to have occured at a much faster rate. Since we have evidence of at least 3 major sequences of continental collisions (Nunan;Rodinian;Gondwanan). There may have been more in the early earth but weve lost the records in the smear of rocks.
Now maybe gunga needs to consider the speeds at which his timeline would require to accomplish the same bit of drifting landmasses.
Or he can speak for himself.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Tks, Farmerman. Speaking of paleogeology, isn't it established that the Moon split off the Earth about 4 billion years ago? I've a vague recollection involving rock samples and satellite surveys having confirmed this - how does astronomy fit into the universe-is-a-few-millenia-old theory?

http://www.nineplanets.org/moons/Luna3.jpg

1 Reply

@High Seas,

heres a PSI site that goes into it. Im not really well versed on the origins of the moon but the lack of a metallic core and the lunar density has always been an argument for a separation after girth of the earth. I recall seeing the rock samples and thin section analyses of the lunar rocks and it looked a lot like ocean basalt. However, the composition is very different for lunar basalts, (They are highly alkaline magnesian). SO Im n ot really sure that , without a volcanic component of the moons crust and mantle, its kinda hard to compare the two bodies as being 100% convincingly related. Like I said, I get data from all sides and , since I have no dog in the fight, I wait till someone writes the definitive paper

http://www.psi.edu/projects/moon/moon.html

1 Reply

@farmerman,

ahhhh, I wait too long to edit. In the first sentence its "After birth" not girth, although someone may try to make sense out of that.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

We're all in after birth mode effemm.

0 Replies

An interesting outcome , if it can happen, is to see what remains of cellular DNA sequences remain. DNA supposedly degrades after about 50K years into substances like osteocalcin. IF, however, the "keeping" of soft tissue has been permitted by the environment of fossilization, then maybe we can create a "Jurassic Park" bunch of animals by cloning with T Rex DNA or duckbill DNA. According to SChweitzers noted from NC, its been reported that other fossils from a similar environment have been identified from several old collections .

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Quote:
I shoud apologize for being more facetious than I shoud have been.
Sometimes, I am inexorably drawn like a moth to a play on words.

Quote:
IN Other words, you crack you up.

WATER and ICE may be related by chemistry but, on earth,
they are not related by physics. The formation of continental ice sheets
is not by any mechanism that is similar to water bodies.

A planet covered by ice will actually have less area covered by actual
water than an area inundated during a planetary "Wurm".

I suppose you know that we know of know fish that can swim around
within an ice sheet.
------------------------------------
Well, that remark may not be fair to the fish in queston,
since it appears that thay may not have evolved
as far back as 700,000,000 years ago.
If that is true, then it is hardly fair to expect them to swim around within an ice sheet.

Quote:
If you see information from Coumbia, the evidence of glaciation during the pre Cambrian is pretty widespread but not worldwide and ,if it was, we would expect several things to have happened (Isostacy of glaciated bodies would be seen in later deposists after "unweighting":
or mass extinctions of Ediacaran life: a "source area"

The Columbia hypothesis uses the excess of CO2 and CH3 to form slushy clathrate (hydrate) deposits that could overwhelm the planet until a sunspot cycle or a more propitious axial alignment of the planets could present a larger face to the sun and cause warming.

There might also be the possibility of defrosting from
falling extraterrestrial objects during those years.

`

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

An interesting outcome , if it can happen, is to see what remains of cellular DNA sequences remain. DNA supposedly degrades after about 50K years into substances like osteocalcin. IF, however, the "keeping" of soft tissue has been permitted by the environment of fossilization, then maybe we can create a "Jurassic Park" bunch of animals by cloning with T Rex DNA or duckbill DNA. According to SChweitzers noted from NC, its been reported that other fossils from a similar environment have been identified from several old collections .

Let 's hope . . . .

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

There might also be the possibility of defrosting from
falling extraterrestrial objects during those years

Not to have gotten too geeky about it, there was evidence of one big mother bolide collision in the Area off what is now S Africa. It was , perhaps, based upon its crater footprint, the largest bolide ever to have hit the planet.
Its timig was at the end of the "cryogenian " period (named for the evidence of glaciers) which also had a low sea stand that continued through the Ediacaran and into the Basal Cambrian.

The geologic time scale has been renamed in 2004 by the ICS (International Commission on Stratigraphy), the initials ICS is , kind of, an embarrassment but the commission is made up of guys mostly from Sweden and Russia and Australia who dont give a **** about the Creation SCience guys over here.
SO, the ICS had added the Ediacaran and the Cryogenian based on evidence of glaciation AND, from the appearance of the more complex EDiacaran fauna that was clearly from the Pre Cambrian .

2 Replies

Soft tissue in hadrosaur remains

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know