Fossils from the day the dinosaurs died

[progressive hunter]

its called the law of gravity and theory of evolution,,

big difference

Wait... Einsteins General theory of Relativity which superseded Newton's Theory is a Law?

Are you just ignorant on the topics of what you speak?

Or are you choosing to intentionally lie to support your claim?

If you need to lie to support your claim, you are doing the opposite and actually debunking it yourself when you have to resort to using lies.

If you don't have even a basic grasp of the subject and are making your claims out of ignorance I think you should first choose to educate yourself on the subject before posting here.

And yes, it's a scientific theory. We aren't debating anymore that Evolution is real or it happens. We just don't have all the answers to exactly how it works yet in every single circumstance. Sure we have this great line of proof of how humans came from an ape ancestor. But we may not have that same great fossil record for an eel to pinpoint exactly where and when it evolved. We know humans evolved but maybe are unsure what function the appendix once was used for. Thus it's a scientific theory, evolution exists and is real, but not a law since we don't have 100% of the answers for everything about how it works.

But we've repeatedly tested and verified evolution in the real world, in accordance with the scientific method using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results.

Evolution is a SCIENTIFIC Theory.. Just like the scientific theory that living things are made of cells. Is some scientist going to come up someday and say "nope humans don't have cells, we are made up of small robots". Of course not, but that cell theory may be adjusted to how they are created or work together as more is learned.

There's a theory that says germs (pathogens) can lead to disease. Does that mean in 10 years they will discover that HIV isn't from a virus but rather the temperature of your blood? Of course not, but we still have more to learn on exactly how they work.

We might discover more about how atoms work, but that doesn't make Atomic Theory something that is wrong. We might discover a new tectonic plate under the earth which we thought was part of a different plate. It doesn't mean the theory of plate tectonics isn't real, and that instead the Earth is made up of a ball of cheese.

You do understand the basics of what a scientific theory is and how different that is from the use of the word theory in every day life don't you?

Just like evolution, while Einsteins theory on gravity is a scientific theory and not a law, what will happen if you jump off a building is known. That humans and other animals evolved from predecessors is known.

if its known then why dont we have proof???

Of what? Evolution? We do in the fossil record. We do with anatomical vestiges. We do with evolution occuring in front of our eyes in some cases even.

The question is why do people pop up youtube pages trying to say things that are debunked and not true and why do people believe them over actual facts used to support that scientific theory?

My guess is because people are willing to lie and ignore truth if that allows them to believe something they wish could be true instead.

we already established since the fossil record is based on the geo column its flawed since the ggeo column is flawed,,,

and the vestiges are not what are claimed which has been proven repeatedly,,,

and no facts for evo have been given,,
just speculation based on assumption,,,

While fun guys on youtube have CLAIMED without evidence and science that it is flawed, that is incorrect.

Sorry. I get it. Simple minds want simple answers. If someone makes a claim that's all you need, forget the evidence and reality. That's your choice.

your words not mine,,,

and what evidence???

 

[progressive hunter]

BUT HOW DO THEY KNOW IT WAS 60 MILLION YRS AGO???

there is no way known to man to accurately date that far back

Yes there is. We've got thousands of years of human impact in written history which has dated strata in the earth and been compared to more traditional carbon dating methods and proven their correlation. Glacier pacing based on how deep they cut and what they leave behind... Tree rings have been able to create a direct record heading back approximately 14000 years which guess what happened when compared to a carbon dating test of the same thing? A comparison of dates that confirmed each other multiple ways over and over.



The question is why would you believe someone like Dr Hovind? His work has been debunked from MULTIPLE angles by many scientific studies. He literally tied Evolution to Communism... and the IRS (when he didn't want to pay taxes).


Why decide not to believe the scientific evidence and instead believe the guy who says ""Not many folks realize it, but Obamacare Law HR3200, that NOBODY read before they voted for it, requires that everyone get an implanted micro-chip by March 23, 2013." and that "George W Bush is a Satanist".


No thanks. The guy with the tin foil hat is NOT where I am going to go for a science lecture when he can't even defend his own debunked claims.

But simple minds want simple answers that they like.

the simple minds thing is true since evos think we came from a rock


now whos wearing the tin foil hat

This is from the guy literally opposing facts in order to buy into the person who believes "A drop of water can cover the entire planet if spread thinly enough"

lol. No. Just no.

no facts have been given and I made no such claim,,,

Just because you shove your head in the dirt and ignore reality, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Facts have been given. Thousands of times on this subject. You just CHOOSE to remain ignorant.

only speculation based on assumption have been given,,,no facts

and if its facts then why is it still the theory of evo???

 

[SandSquid]

we already established since the fossil record is based on the geo column its flawed since the ggeo column is flawed,,,QUOTE]
Wrong. Your understanding of the geo column is flawed but the science behind it is not. You can choose to ignore what is in front of you but can't rationally claim that the fossil record is flawed.

I just did,,,and there is no science behind it just speculation based on assumption,,,

Yes you did. Now there's hundreds of scientific documents on the fossil record, hundreds of peer reviewed studies using fact.

And on the flip side there is you. Saying "If I choose not to educate myself or look at those, I can say this instead".

It's your decision to remain ignorant to keep your stance.

 

[SandSquid]

Yes there is. We've got thousands of years of human impact in written history which has dated strata in the earth and been compared to more traditional carbon dating methods and proven their correlation. Glacier pacing based on how deep they cut and what they leave behind... Tree rings have been able to create a direct record heading back approximately 14000 years which guess what happened when compared to a carbon dating test of the same thing? A comparison of dates that confirmed each other multiple ways over and over.



The question is why would you believe someone like Dr Hovind? His work has been debunked from MULTIPLE angles by many scientific studies. He literally tied Evolution to Communism... and the IRS (when he didn't want to pay taxes).


Why decide not to believe the scientific evidence and instead believe the guy who says ""Not many folks realize it, but Obamacare Law HR3200, that NOBODY read before they voted for it, requires that everyone get an implanted micro-chip by March 23, 2013." and that "George W Bush is a Satanist".


No thanks. The guy with the tin foil hat is NOT where I am going to go for a science lecture when he can't even defend his own debunked claims.

But simple minds want simple answers that they like.

the simple minds thing is true since evos think we came from a rock


now whos wearing the tin foil hat

This is from the guy literally opposing facts in order to buy into the person who believes "A drop of water can cover the entire planet if spread thinly enough"

lol. No. Just no.

no facts have been given and I made no such claim,,,

Just because you shove your head in the dirt and ignore reality, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Facts have been given. Thousands of times on this subject. You just CHOOSE to remain ignorant.

only speculation based on assumption have been given,,,no facts

Yes, that is your position. We know that.

Luckily for us academia.edu has THOUSANDS of scientific studies on fossils using facts which support the Scientific theory of Evolution.

You can make the choice to ignore them, to not educate yourself with the facts available and instead rely on ignorance to fuel your claim. That is your decision

 

[progressive hunter]

we already established since the fossil record is based on the geo column its flawed since the ggeo column is flawed,,,QUOTE]
Wrong. Your understanding of the geo column is flawed but the science behind it is not. You can choose to ignore what is in front of you but can't rationally claim that the fossil record is flawed.

I just did,,,and there is no science behind it just speculation based on assumption,,,

Yes you did. Now there's hundreds of scientific documents on the fossil record, hundreds of peer reviewed studies using fact.

And on the flip side there is you. Saying "If I choose not to educate myself or look at those, I can say this instead".

It's your decision to remain ignorant to keep your stance.

if you say so,,,what I read is not stated as fact but speculation

 

[progressive hunter]

the simple minds thing is true since evos think we came from a rock


now whos wearing the tin foil hat

This is from the guy literally opposing facts in order to buy into the person who believes "A drop of water can cover the entire planet if spread thinly enough"

lol. No. Just no.

no facts have been given and I made no such claim,,,

Just because you shove your head in the dirt and ignore reality, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Facts have been given. Thousands of times on this subject. You just CHOOSE to remain ignorant.

only speculation based on assumption have been given,,,no facts

Yes, that is your position. We know that.

Luckily for us academia.edu has THOUSANDS of scientific studies on fossils using facts which support the Scientific theory of Evolution.

You can make the choice to ignore them, to not educate yourself with the facts available and instead rely on ignorance to fuel your claim. That is your decision

if they are facts why is it still a theory???

 

[Likkmee]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/carbon-dating-gets-reset/

 

[SandSquid]

Wait... Einsteins General theory of Relativity which superseded Newton's Theory is a Law?

Are you just ignorant on the topics of what you speak?

Or are you choosing to intentionally lie to support your claim?

If you need to lie to support your claim, you are doing the opposite and actually debunking it yourself when you have to resort to using lies.

If you don't have even a basic grasp of the subject and are making your claims out of ignorance I think you should first choose to educate yourself on the subject before posting here.

And yes, it's a scientific theory. We aren't debating anymore that Evolution is real or it happens. We just don't have all the answers to exactly how it works yet in every single circumstance. Sure we have this great line of proof of how humans came from an ape ancestor. But we may not have that same great fossil record for an eel to pinpoint exactly where and when it evolved. We know humans evolved but maybe are unsure what function the appendix once was used for. Thus it's a scientific theory, evolution exists and is real, but not a law since we don't have 100% of the answers for everything about how it works.

But we've repeatedly tested and verified evolution in the real world, in accordance with the scientific method using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results.

Evolution is a SCIENTIFIC Theory.. Just like the scientific theory that living things are made of cells. Is some scientist going to come up someday and say "nope humans don't have cells, we are made up of small robots". Of course not, but that cell theory may be adjusted to how they are created or work together as more is learned.

There's a theory that says germs (pathogens) can lead to disease. Does that mean in 10 years they will discover that HIV isn't from a virus but rather the temperature of your blood? Of course not, but we still have more to learn on exactly how they work.

We might discover more about how atoms work, but that doesn't make Atomic Theory something that is wrong. We might discover a new tectonic plate under the earth which we thought was part of a different plate. It doesn't mean the theory of plate tectonics isn't real, and that instead the Earth is made up of a ball of cheese.

You do understand the basics of what a scientific theory is and how different that is from the use of the word theory in every day life don't you?

Just like evolution, while Einsteins theory on gravity is a scientific theory and not a law, what will happen if you jump off a building is known. That humans and other animals evolved from predecessors is known.

if its known then why dont we have proof???

Of what? Evolution? We do in the fossil record. We do with anatomical vestiges. We do with evolution occuring in front of our eyes in some cases even.

The question is why do people pop up youtube pages trying to say things that are debunked and not true and why do people believe them over actual facts used to support that scientific theory?

My guess is because people are willing to lie and ignore truth if that allows them to believe something they wish could be true instead.

we already established since the fossil record is based on the geo column its flawed since the ggeo column is flawed,,,

and the vestiges are not what are claimed which has been proven repeatedly,,,

and no facts for evo have been given,,
just speculation based on assumption,,,

While fun guys on youtube have CLAIMED without evidence and science that it is flawed, that is incorrect.

Sorry. I get it. Simple minds want simple answers. If someone makes a claim that's all you need, forget the evidence and reality. That's your choice.

your words not mine,,,

and what evidence???

Exactly. You have none. That's the entire point. There's thousands of studies with evidence on evolution that fit the Theory of Evolution. Instead you want to believe the guy who has NO education in science, no doctoral dissertation for his "Degree" from Patriot College (not recognized by any University, association or gov't entity) and isn't in theology and divinity.

The guy still hanging onto cold blooded and featherless dinosaurs. (Called feathered dinosaurs "Baloney", but he says the Loch Ness Monster is real lol)

Sorry, I can't ignore science to believe the guy who likes the theory UFO's are piloted by Satan.

 

[SandSquid]

This is from the guy literally opposing facts in order to buy into the person who believes "A drop of water can cover the entire planet if spread thinly enough"

lol. No. Just no.

no facts have been given and I made no such claim,,,

Just because you shove your head in the dirt and ignore reality, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Facts have been given. Thousands of times on this subject. You just CHOOSE to remain ignorant.

only speculation based on assumption have been given,,,no facts

Yes, that is your position. We know that.

Luckily for us academia.edu has THOUSANDS of scientific studies on fossils using facts which support the Scientific theory of Evolution.

You can make the choice to ignore them, to not educate yourself with the facts available and instead rely on ignorance to fuel your claim. That is your decision

if they are facts why is it still a theory???

I remember asking that question of my 5th grade elementary teacher in science class, which was where I learned the difference between a scientific theory and the other use of theory in the English language.

facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts.

 

[progressive hunter]

if its known then why dont we have proof???

Of what? Evolution? We do in the fossil record. We do with anatomical vestiges. We do with evolution occuring in front of our eyes in some cases even.

The question is why do people pop up youtube pages trying to say things that are debunked and not true and why do people believe them over actual facts used to support that scientific theory?

My guess is because people are willing to lie and ignore truth if that allows them to believe something they wish could be true instead.

we already established since the fossil record is based on the geo column its flawed since the ggeo column is flawed,,,

and the vestiges are not what are claimed which has been proven repeatedly,,,

and no facts for evo have been given,,
just speculation based on assumption,,,

While fun guys on youtube have CLAIMED without evidence and science that it is flawed, that is incorrect.

Sorry. I get it. Simple minds want simple answers. If someone makes a claim that's all you need, forget the evidence and reality. That's your choice.

your words not mine,,,

and what evidence???

Exactly. You have none. That's the entire point. There's thousands of studies with evidence on evolution that fit the Theory of Evolution. Instead you want to believe the guy who has NO education in science, no doctoral dissertation for his "Degree" from Patriot College (not recognized by any University, association or gov't entity) and isn't in theology and divinity.

The guy still hanging onto cold blooded and featherless dinosaurs. (Called feathered dinosaurs "Baloney", but he says the Loch Ness Monster is real lol)

Sorry, I can't ignore science to believe the guy who likes the theory UFO's are piloted by Satan.

so when you cant debunk it you attack the messenger,,,

sorry but he is one of many of my sources

you are severely brainwashed and refuse to hear anything other than what youve been taught by you government teachers, while I'm still looking for answers and willing to listen to other facts when they are given,,,and the geo column isnt one of them since its based on assumption thats easily proven wrong

 

[progressive hunter]

if its known then why dont we have proof???

Of what? Evolution? We do in the fossil record. We do with anatomical vestiges. We do with evolution occuring in front of our eyes in some cases even.

The question is why do people pop up youtube pages trying to say things that are debunked and not true and why do people believe them over actual facts used to support that scientific theory?

My guess is because people are willing to lie and ignore truth if that allows them to believe something they wish could be true instead.

we already established since the fossil record is based on the geo column its flawed since the ggeo column is flawed,,,

and the vestiges are not what are claimed which has been proven repeatedly,,,

and no facts for evo have been given,,
just speculation based on assumption,,,

While fun guys on youtube have CLAIMED without evidence and science that it is flawed, that is incorrect.

Sorry. I get it. Simple minds want simple answers. If someone makes a claim that's all you need, forget the evidence and reality. That's your choice.

your words not mine,,,

and what evidence???

Exactly. You have none. That's the entire point. There's thousands of studies with evidence on evolution that fit the Theory of Evolution. Instead you want to believe the guy who has NO education in science, no doctoral dissertation for his "Degree" from Patriot College (not recognized by any University, association or gov't entity) and isn't in theology and divinity.

The guy still hanging onto cold blooded and featherless dinosaurs. (Called feathered dinosaurs "Baloney", but he says the Loch Ness Monster is real lol)

Sorry, I can't ignore science to believe the guy who likes the theory UFO's are piloted by Satan.

and when did I say UFOs are satan???

 

[hunarcy]

BUT HOW DO THEY KNOW IT WAS 60 MILLION YRS AGO???

there is no way known to man to accurately date that far back

You mean no way known to you. Can you explain radioisotope dating you your own words?

I know enough to say its based on assumption and not provable facts

Just like the bible, eh?

I never said that,,,,,,

but the bible people never claimed anything other than faith,,,

they both are after all just religions,and only one claims fact without proof

No. The Bible people claim the Bibles as absolutely authoritative.


When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted its data.

Henry M. Morris

The Bible people think that interpretations are allowable because they can't KNOW the mind of God...and that you misinterpret lots of stuff so you're not to be taken seriously with your fringe "young Earth creationist" quotes.

 

[SandSquid]

Carbon Dating Gets a Reset

And thus why it's a THEORY. Carbon dating is being adjusted about 10% older. We aren't talking about 5 billion years ago being 4000 years ago all of a sudden. We aren't disproving science but getting even more exacting using other proven data sources to dial that in. Impressive that we are finding sediment levels, tree rings, coral growth and all are pointing to this long time frame along with Carbon 14 dating.

But you have to throw all that evidence away to believe a literal biblical sense of the age of the planet. Much like years ago you had to throw all the evidence of astronomy away to believe the literal biblical belief the earth went around the sun. And yes, we have dialed in and adjusted the measurements of orbits and distance from the sun over time. But it hasn't debunked heliocentric theory

 

[hunarcy]

Hell Creek Formation yields fossils from the day the dinosaurs died.

Fossils show worldwide catastrophe on the day the dinosaurs died

Sixty-six million years ago, a massive asteroid crashed into a shallow sea near Mexico. The impact carved out a 90-mile-wide crater and flung mountains of earth into space. Earthbound debris fell to the planet in droplets of molten rock and glass.

Ancient fish caught glass blobs in their gills as they swam, gape-mouthed, beneath the strange rain. Large, sloshing waves threw animals onto dry land, then more waves buried them in silt. Scientists working in North Dakota recently dug up fossils of these fish: They died within the first minutes or hours after the asteroid hit, according to a paper published Friday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, a discovery that has sparked tremendous excitement among paleontologists.

Jesus.....all this time I thought Socialism killed the Dinosaurs.

Of course you did.

Playing dumb is your forte.

He's not playing.

 

[progressive hunter]

Carbon Dating Gets a Reset

And thus why it's a THEORY. Carbon dating is being adjusted about 10% older. We aren't talking about 5 billion years ago being 4000 years ago all of a sudden. We aren't disproving science but getting even more exacting using other proven data sources to dial that in. Impressive that we are finding sediment levels, tree rings, coral growth and all are pointing to this long time frame along with Carbon 14 dating.

But you have to throw all that evidence away to believe a literal biblical sense of the age of the planet. Much like years ago you had to throw all the evidence of astronomy away to believe the literal biblical belief the earth went around the sun. And yes, we have dialed in and adjusted the measurements of orbits and distance from the sun over time. But it hasn't debunked heliocentric theory

its you thats stuck on the bible not me,,,

and just wait cause they change the dating several times until now and will most likely change it again later

 

[SandSquid]

Of what? Evolution? We do in the fossil record. We do with anatomical vestiges. We do with evolution occuring in front of our eyes in some cases even.

The question is why do people pop up youtube pages trying to say things that are debunked and not true and why do people believe them over actual facts used to support that scientific theory?

My guess is because people are willing to lie and ignore truth if that allows them to believe something they wish could be true instead.

we already established since the fossil record is based on the geo column its flawed since the ggeo column is flawed,,,

and the vestiges are not what are claimed which has been proven repeatedly,,,

and no facts for evo have been given,,
just speculation based on assumption,,,

While fun guys on youtube have CLAIMED without evidence and science that it is flawed, that is incorrect.

Sorry. I get it. Simple minds want simple answers. If someone makes a claim that's all you need, forget the evidence and reality. That's your choice.

your words not mine,,,

and what evidence???

Exactly. You have none. That's the entire point. There's thousands of studies with evidence on evolution that fit the Theory of Evolution. Instead you want to believe the guy who has NO education in science, no doctoral dissertation for his "Degree" from Patriot College (not recognized by any University, association or gov't entity) and isn't in theology and divinity.

The guy still hanging onto cold blooded and featherless dinosaurs. (Called feathered dinosaurs "Baloney", but he says the Loch Ness Monster is real lol)

Sorry, I can't ignore science to believe the guy who likes the theory UFO's are piloted by Satan.

and when did I say UFOs are satan???

Not you, but the source you choose. Dr Hovind. It's your choice to believe him and his crazy beliefs. I'll take actual science from scientists.

 

[progressive hunter]

we already established since the fossil record is based on the geo column its flawed since the ggeo column is flawed,,,

and the vestiges are not what are claimed which has been proven repeatedly,,,

and no facts for evo have been given,,
just speculation based on assumption,,,

While fun guys on youtube have CLAIMED without evidence and science that it is flawed, that is incorrect.

Sorry. I get it. Simple minds want simple answers. If someone makes a claim that's all you need, forget the evidence and reality. That's your choice.

your words not mine,,,

and what evidence???

Exactly. You have none. That's the entire point. There's thousands of studies with evidence on evolution that fit the Theory of Evolution. Instead you want to believe the guy who has NO education in science, no doctoral dissertation for his "Degree" from Patriot College (not recognized by any University, association or gov't entity) and isn't in theology and divinity.

The guy still hanging onto cold blooded and featherless dinosaurs. (Called feathered dinosaurs "Baloney", but he says the Loch Ness Monster is real lol)

Sorry, I can't ignore science to believe the guy who likes the theory UFO's are piloted by Satan.

and when did I say UFOs are satan???

Not you, but the source you choose. Dr Hovind. It's your choice to believe him and his crazy beliefs. I'll take actual science from scientists.

first you have to know what a scientist is,,,

I look at the message not the messenger

 

[SandSquid]

Carbon Dating Gets a Reset

And thus why it's a THEORY. Carbon dating is being adjusted about 10% older. We aren't talking about 5 billion years ago being 4000 years ago all of a sudden. We aren't disproving science but getting even more exacting using other proven data sources to dial that in. Impressive that we are finding sediment levels, tree rings, coral growth and all are pointing to this long time frame along with Carbon 14 dating.

But you have to throw all that evidence away to believe a literal biblical sense of the age of the planet. Much like years ago you had to throw all the evidence of astronomy away to believe the literal biblical belief the earth went around the sun. And yes, we have dialed in and adjusted the measurements of orbits and distance from the sun over time. But it hasn't debunked heliocentric theory

its you thats stuck on the bible not me,,,

and just wait cause they change the dating several times until now and will most likely change it again later

Exactly. Just like Earths orbit has been changed multiple times as we've gotten better and better at it. Doesn't mean that Heliocentric theory (the earth revolves around the sun) is debunked in any way.

What we have now is yet another completely different time measurement proving within 10% of Carbon 14, and putting it within 10% of coral growth, tree ring, and glacial movement records.


The ONLY outlier is the young earth creationism, which this new method once again debunks completely.

 

[progressive hunter]

Carbon Dating Gets a Reset

And thus why it's a THEORY. Carbon dating is being adjusted about 10% older. We aren't talking about 5 billion years ago being 4000 years ago all of a sudden. We aren't disproving science but getting even more exacting using other proven data sources to dial that in. Impressive that we are finding sediment levels, tree rings, coral growth and all are pointing to this long time frame along with Carbon 14 dating.

But you have to throw all that evidence away to believe a literal biblical sense of the age of the planet. Much like years ago you had to throw all the evidence of astronomy away to believe the literal biblical belief the earth went around the sun. And yes, we have dialed in and adjusted the measurements of orbits and distance from the sun over time. But it hasn't debunked heliocentric theory

its you thats stuck on the bible not me,,,

and just wait cause they change the dating several times until now and will most likely change it again later

Exactly. Just like Earths orbit has been changed multiple times as we've gotten better and better at it. Doesn't mean that Heliocentric theory (the earth revolves around the sun) is debunked in any way.

What we have now is yet another completely different time measurement proving within 10% of Carbon 14, and putting it within 10% of coral growth, tree ring, and glacial movement records.


The ONLY outlier is the young earth creationism, which this new method once again debunks completely.

tree ring dating is more flawed than the geo column

 

[alang1216]

I'm still looking for answers and willing to listen to other facts when they are given,,,and the geo column isnt one of them since its based on assumption thats easily proven wrong

The assumption is "what you see is what you get". The science of geology is based on many intersecting lines of evidence. Radio-isotope dating is only one of them and is only a very recent addition to geology. Geology was firmly established before anyone ever heard of radio-isotope dating so if that is NOT the only "assumption thats easily proven wrong", I'm curious about the others. Please explain.