Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Godlimations. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Pastafarianism; The atheist religion
Topic Started: 23 Jul 2009, 08:03 PM (3,245 Views)
Luemas
Member Avatar
DELICIOUS!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
What I think Arazec is saying, is that many people have used evolution for a justification of Racism. The aboriginese, or however it's spelled etc.
But then again. Let's think about this.
I'm sure you heard a while ago about a find of blood cells in the bones of a T-Rex. Now we know Dinosaurs died out millions of years ago, and the soft tissue went bye-bye a few thousand years after that.
So what am I getting at? If Dinosours were not extinct at that time, which is the only explanation for having blood cells and tissue visible, or maybe, the Earth is younger than we think. But for whatever reason, we found less than 100,000 year old cells in a several million year old specimen.
Anyone else find this perplexing?
Your thoughts.
Posted Image
I think I'm Crazzzy. I think your crazy. I think your crazzzy... probably.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Concolor
Member Avatar
Barabbas
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Interesting. Do you have a source we could investigate?
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through.

Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy! Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luemas
Member Avatar
DELICIOUS!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sure, here.
Notice how they give no explanation, because they can't.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/
Posted Image
I think I'm Crazzzy. I think your crazy. I think your crazzzy... probably.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

well no ARAZEC understands ppl use whatever justification for whatever they want to do

Which brings us back to the choice to accept Gods living word as truth
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Concolor
Member Avatar
Barabbas
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I find it strange that only this group has published results such as these. And that there are so few articles on this topic. And nothing from 2009. But I don't know paleontologists publishing rates, maybe they're really slow and this group is far ahead of everyone else.

Anyway, why are you saying that the cells are less than 100,000 year old? The article you cite says "70 million-year-old soft tissue, including what may be blood vessels and cells".

My thoughts on this are: "Cool, why don't more paleontologists dissolve bones to look for soft tissue?"
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through.

Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy! Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luemas
Member Avatar
DELICIOUS!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Because, they're shouldn't be any. Here's another link, I must've used the wrong one :P
http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/7363

This is where the Blood Cells < 100,000
I'm in geometry.
And Arazec, as much as I wish people would just do that, sometimes you need to meet them on their level.
Posted Image
I think I'm Crazzzy. I think your crazy. I think your crazzzy... probably.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

yeah suppose
cant we rendezvous on the way?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luemas
Member Avatar
DELICIOUS!
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Only if the Spirit moves on their heart.
Or we give them amnesia so they're forced to accept our illogical theology.
What? Nobody ever said brain-washing was illegal...
Posted Image
I think I'm Crazzzy. I think your crazy. I think your crazzzy... probably.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dragonshardz
Member Avatar
Troll
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Hoo, boy, what a can of worms I opened!
Posted Image
Posted Image

I lurk a lot on this forum, and am very busy in real life, so don't be surprised if I take a couple days, or even weeks, to reply to your post or PM.

GENERATION 11: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any other forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

worms and blobs -but thankyou :)
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Concolor
Member Avatar
Barabbas
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
@Luemas: "Current theories about fossil preservation hold that organic molecules should not preserve beyond 100,000 years" Well, then these new findings show us that the current theories about fossil preservation are not correct and needs improvement. Yay! Science moves forward :)
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through.

Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy! Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

its welcoming that you seem so flexable and accomedating to new information
its also a bit scary when the information is where you base your eternity
Quote Post Goto Top
 
conradw
Goliath
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Am I right in thinking that they peeled away stone and found the marrow and other soft tissue inside?

because as I understand it, fossils aren't bones, they're stones. Apparently stones with organic tissue left inside...


oh oh oh:
Check it out. the Lady who discovered soft tissue in the fossils speaks
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/10021606.html

Speaking about creationists, Dr Schweitzer said: “They twist your words and they manipulate your data.”

hmmmm :huh:
Edited by conradw, 10 Nov 2009, 02:32 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Concolor
Member Avatar
Barabbas
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
@conradw: Sounds like you got the gist of it. Basically, the process of fossilization replaces the organic materials in the bones with minerals. As a result you get a rock with the same shape as the bone that used to be there.

Previously one had only found bones that (apparently) had been completely mineralized and so one thought that the organic tissue would always be fossilized. These new results show that the mineralization does not necessarily penetrate through the entire structure, and that in rare cases this leads to a fossilization of the outer parts, and merely a preservation of the inner parts. Which is supercool (if correct) as we can now study the biology of dinosaurs a lot closer than previously :D
Life is beautiful, love heals, people come through.

Reason, compassion and love comes first. Everything else is secondary. Except for Skittles. - And emperor Cheezy! Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
conradw
Goliath
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I found the paper, here, if you want to read it.
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/274/1607/183

It appears actually that the fossilisation process replaces the bone with mineral, but leaves the fibrous soft tissue intact. By slowly dissolving the minerals the fossil is formed from, she was able to expose the cartilaginous matrix that was left behind.
The reason why we didn't know this before was because scientists don't go around destroying 70 million year old fossils. I think she even suggests that this is more common than we anticipated.

And this is why science works. I'll admit I don't often read studies that are as cool as this, but just about every study reveals insights we didn't have before and expands our knowledge, possibly even breaking down long held assumptions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Debate · Next Topic »
Add Reply