Evolution? How?

Hi Farmerman,

I think we may have been discussing this while you were gone , but I'd be interested to hear your take on it.

Soft tissue has been found in over a dozen dinosaur bone samples. I'm sure you've probably heard about it.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/02/0221_060221_dino_tissue.html

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Lightwizard wrote:
We observe the light spectrum outside our natural vision using scientific instruments. Make sure you later on lots of sun screen or you'll get burnt. Perhaps after your read about Kelvin measurements.

The entire spectrum has existed for the entire history of the Earth. But it has only been fairly recently that humans have been AWARE of anything much more than visible light and audible sound.

Does that mean x-rays, radio and TV waves, gamma rays, etc all recently came into existence? No. We learned where to look for it.

If you doubt the possibility of existence of anything we presently can't measure, then it's a good thing we're not relying on you for any type of progress, you'd have us all sitting still.

Many possibilities occupying the same space and time wouldn't you call that supernatural?

Science cannot be trusted...

I was taught (in high school) that atoms had "orbitals" that electrons orbited the nucleus of an atom in various patterns..

Well that would be all fine and dandy if it had been TRUE!

Yet electrons do not orbit a nucleus but they are a "cloud of possibility that surrounds the nucleus...

Cloud of possibility? That sounds like God. God IS a cloud of possibility our universe being one of them...

Science just releases (and teaches) it's theories/religion that often turn out wrong...

So are sciences guesses and assessments of the universe trustworthy? Absolutely not!

Science is itself born out of a cloud of possibility and right now it is clouded in it's own limited, wrong conclusions...

Science is still lost in the physical model of the universe and they cannot see the possibilities because they cannot comprehend matter occupying the the same place or space in time...

Until they understand possibility they will never understand physics or even God...

Everything within God's law is possible...

Science peddles to young minds it's theories that can over time become completely discredited... So what does this do to the integrity of science? Well it makes science an institution that sells speculation like a hot dog vendor...

Orbitals... Ha! This is just a supreme example of the fabricated laws of the physical being ERRONEOUSLY applied to dismiss the metaphysical or supernatural...

Also news flash... I heard on the news last night, the Bible is now being accepted in schools alone as a "text book". Due to it's popularity... This is how creationists have circumvented the debate. After all if the Bible is not taught in school children will grow up not knowing why religions are fighting each other... The Bible is a history text and should be treated as a text and not a religion in schools... This is how it has made it's way back into schools and several entire states through the courts. States have accepted it as a text with rules to not impose a particular interpretation accompanying it.

Smile

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

Yup, there are two things that work very well with people like RL:

The first is to give them humor
The second is to remind them of the better moralities of Jesus

How about some honest consideration where is that on the list?

0 Replies

Farmerman could you please again give your view on how the earth makes crude oil?

(This is not a sarcastic question.)

0 Replies

That Nat Geo story is actually 2 separate subjects artificially molded together.

1Weve known about osteocalcin for about 25 years and have used it to carry back genetic inquiries to almost a half million yearsBP. The osteocalcin is a reaction product that, like bone, is accomplished as a first step in fossilization of proteinaceous material. It allows us to track DNA back farther than its normal terminus of stability.

2The "soft tissue" in the T-Rex and other finds, is apparently some form of polymerization. While this is new to fossils , its not new to paleo. Coal, for example, often contains waxy 'adipose" substances where the polymerization is apparently involved with alkali chains and catalysis by humic acids. In the T-Rex, they seem to be leaning to a possibility that the polymerization enucleates around the haem group.

Finding flexible and pliant fossils is not an unknown to science. It is a "hot new banner" for a popular press however.
I hope that they are able to discern the sequencing of the polymerization because it could have some important applications in medicine.

Normal fossilization involves a chemical replacement of the natural material by its dissolution and replacement by either silica or carbonate based soilds. Another way, of course is to form "molds and casts" and infilling and decaying the soft parts with sediments that solidify and leave prints only of the animals shells or bones.
Coalification or the residue of pine sap, called "amber' is really an example of the "soft tissue" mechanism that was found in the T-Rex.

Theres going to be a small symposium of this stuff in the 2006 Geological Society meeting , which will be held in Philadelphia in October. It oughta be a really interesting section beause it involves so many different chemical processes.

0 Replies

I was taught in high school that Lincoln was an abolitionist. He was not.

You spout all these opinions as science and then offer no support. Try this on for support:

http://education.jlab.org/qa/atom_model.html

Clue me in again -- what university did you study physics, cosmology or paleoanthropology?

If you believe that semantics change and therefore, God must exist, you are grasping for straws. You are still trying to convince yourself because you are underwhelmingly convincing to anyone else but the choir.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

I was taught in high school that Lincoln was a abolitionist. He was not.

You spout all these opinions as science and then offer no support. Try this on for support:

http://education.jlab.org/qa/atom_model.html

If you believe that semantics change and therefore, God must exist, you are grasping for straws. You are still trying to convince yourself because you are underwhelmingly convincing to anyone else but the choir.

No it is you who are that are lost in a dated physical model of the atom.

Did you really read the article you just posted?

Sentences like these do not make this sound science. First it makes a model of electrons orbiting a nucleus then says they do not... But they teach young students that they do orbit...

Excerpt from the link you posted:
"This model depicts an earlier view of the structure of the atom, shortly after the nucleus was discovered. This model is typically taught to younger students as an introduction to atomic structure."

Comment:
Why is it taught to young students if the electrons do NOT circle the nucleus (or if it is unknown what the heck electrons are doing...) why teach it to especially YOUNG STUDENTS...

Answer:
Well students might infer something supernatural if taught the TRUTH! Otherwise they end up "hard headed" like the lot of you...

Another Excerpt:

Electrons do not Orbit the Nucleus
In the drawings above, we have drawn nice circles showing where the electrons go around the atom. In reality, scientists cannot tell exactly where an electron is at a given moment or where it is going.

Comment: What?

Maybe I do know a bit about this stuff... I was one of the poor young students taught a this lie and this is my revenge...

Smile

0 Replies

When did you go to school? You still haven't addressed what credentials you have to even discuss the subjects you are so diligently devouring.

Comment: What?

High school curricula teaches a lot of stuff, especially American history, that are so overly simplified that they could be considered lies. Teachers can really only teach one how to teach themselves. You're failing.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

I was taught in high school that Lincoln was an abolitionist. He was not.

You spout all these opinions as science and then offer no support. Try this on for support:

http://education.jlab.org/qa/atom_model.html

Clue me in again -- what university did you study physics, cosmology or paleoanthropology?

If you believe that semantics change and therefore, God must exist, you are grasping for straws. You are still trying to convince yourself because you are underwhelmingly convincing to anyone else but the choir.

Towards the end of Lincoln's second term he WAS an abolitionist.. People change so are you saying that he did not "become" an abolitionist?

He may have not started out as an abolitionist but he became one and succeeded at his cause. So to call him an abolitionist is true... He even met with black abolitionists which was unheard of.

Who is to say this emancipation had not been his own personal intent all along? His political speeches were toned down to please a seemingly racist society but that does not mean that his own personal views did not lean in another direction.

But how that compares to electrons that do NOT orbit the nucleus I don't know..

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

When did you go to school? You still haven't addressed what credentials you have to even discuss the subjects you are so diligently devouring.

Comment: What?

High school curricula teaches a lot of stuff, especially American history, that are so overly simplified that they could be considered lies. Teachers can really only teach one how to teach themselves. You're failing.

This does not excuse science from fabricating physical "realities" that do not exist...

You don't need a university degree to find holes in this stuff. Sad...

0 Replies

Here is the logic...

We are going to teach you that electrons orbit the nucleus because we do not really know what they do.

But we "reason" orbitals are logical based upon observation in the physical world... Yet orbitals don't explain much of the atom at all...

Hmmm

We don't know if God orbits the globe but we will say he does based on observation in the physical world...

Apples and oranges...

0 Replies

Lincoln was never a moral abolitionist, but he became more of a "political abolitionist" by the end of his life. He would have just as preferred that the slaves all return to Africa but that, of course, was not possible. It was his nature -- he was a politician and straddled the fence, tipping it over to punish the South for the war. Better read up on history before you make declarations you have no backing for and learned in high school. This was to illustrate that many of the things one learns in high school are tipped over by the actual facts in depth when one studies at a university.

0 Replies

Then why would God teach you how the electrons "rotate" around the nucleus? Has he been on vacation?

0 Replies

Rex. Your question would take some time. Instead let me give you a key word that will no doubt lead you to many sites about petroleum (and other hydrocarbo formation)

Google up the word "kerogen". Its the precursor to most all classes of hydrocarbon fossil fuels.

Your discussion regarding "orbitals" being a lie is rather disengenuous. Science allows itself the comfort of displacing theories as soon as something better comes along. Unlike the religious point of view. The Creationists have never deviated from a single belief, even though no evidence has ever been found to support it. If that doesnt bother you at all, then we have different setpoints regarding what truth is.

0 Replies

They're following the study proceedures they learned in high school, farmerman. Don't expect too much.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

Then why would God teach you how the electrons "rotate" around the nucleus? Has he been on vacation?

I think God has been here all along and it is you who have been the one circling the globe on vacation...

Smile

If God is not here who left? God has not left... It is people who leave God...

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

They're following the study proceedures they learned in high school, farmerman. Don't expect too much.

Yes, we learned it in high school from text books written by scientists... Now we learn that, well, they were giving us theories the essence of "energy" and matter (creation) that today do not stand the weight of scrutiny.

It was these very scientific views of the universe that inordinately slanted the view of infinite possibility all possible...

It encased us within a "dead" godless finite physical world...

And it is you my friend who are stuck in high school I have chosen to go beyond...

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

Rex. Your question would take some time. Instead let me give you a key word that will no doubt lead you to many sites about petroleum (and other hydrocarbo formation)

Google up the word "kerogen". Its the precursor to most all classes of hydrocarbon fossil fuels.

Your discussion regarding "orbitals" being a lie is rather disengenuous. Science allows itself the comfort of displacing theories as soon as something better comes along. Unlike the religious point of view. The Creationists have never deviated from a single belief, even though no evidence has ever been found to support it. If that doesnt bother you at all, then we have different setpoints regarding what truth is.

I thank you for the key words for searching the subject of crude oil.

I may slightly differ with some of your views on how science "guesses" then covers their tracks...

0 Replies

Not clever -- you're still stuck in Sunday School/High School. What university did you attent if you have "gone beyond." Or does this really mean you have literally gone beyond and are addressing us from The Twilight Zone?

You're preaching again on a thread about Evolution. Are you also a cleric?

0 Replies

Science doesn't "guess" and then cover their tracks. If that is the "scientists" you are reading, you need to verify their credentials. Scientists are skeptics by nature what might be characterized as "guesses" to you are hypothesis and are labeled so on their publication. If you are criticizing your high school science teacher and the text, go for it. Back when you went to school, it was likely even more simplified for the average student. I'm not sure in the US that this has changed all that much -- I run into high school students all the time in the art gallery that are interested in art but know nothing about it because art courses have been slashed in high schools.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know