Scientists Suggest That The Universe Knew

[alang1216]

If there is anything about the general fossil record is that clearly everything drowned.

Completely false. If you knew anything about the subject you'd be embarrassed. How many people and animals drowned in the eruption of Mt. St. Helens?

Creationists remind me of that old joke:

Me: I can speak any language except Greek​

You: Can you speak Spanish?​

Me: No, that's Greek to me.​

 

[james bond]

The K-T extinction was even the biggest extinction event (that would be the Permian). We find dinos and many other species below that boundary that we don't find in layers above them. You may claim that was Noah's flood but you'd still be left explaining how the same type of evidence is found in much older rock.

It is estimated that 95% of species went extinct in the Permian. Of the new species found just after that event, there were no dinos, they didn't come until later.

Stop it. Stop the atheist conjectures, i.e. lies. The Bible explained it first and the Earth evidence that we find back up the global flood.

The evidence that shows the impact from Chicxulub wasn't global is the lack of iridium around the globe. Wouldn't you say a global extinction event would have evidence around the world?

 

[james bond]

Once again scientists “discovering” what is explained clearly in the science text called the Bible. Would you like to point out the verse that provides a comprehensive description of radiocarbon dating?

C14 dating of dinosaur fossils, diamonds, rocks, other fossils, etc. back up a younger Earth of thousands of years than what the atheist scientists claim of billions of years with radiometric dating.

Again, the Bible doesn't care about the age of the Earth nor discusses it. However, you can knock yourself out and then suffer for eternity since you believe the lies -- What Does the Bible Say About The Age Of The Earth?.

 

[LittleNipper]

Why oh why do you make up such stupid lies and post them in the science section? Ridiculous behavior.

Are you the spokesman for the scientific community? You are the atheist without any proof that life simply developed all on its own -------- yet you cannot even fabricate the same with presently existing stepping stones of life. I would have to say that you and not I are "ridiculous". Ridiculous in you denial. Ridiculous in your religious atheistic fervor. Ridiculous in your hatred of other considerations. The Flood epic in Genesis say that the heavens opened and the fountains of the deep erupted. For 40 days and nights all the living things upon the land were systematically swept away. They suffocated, they drowned, they were buried.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The evidence that shows the impact from Chicxulub wasn't global is the lack of iridium around the globe.

Get out of the science section you embarrassing, pathetic liar.

Science | AAAS

advances.sciencemag.org

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Are you the spokesman for the scientific community?

Any child can read a 2 paragraph article and know you made up that stupid, pathetic lie. You can sit there all day and jerk off to thoughts of me., and your pathetic lie generated from your diseased brain will still be a pathetic lie. You are embarrassing yourself and your immoral religion with your behavior.

 

[alang1216]

Stop it. Stop the atheist conjectures, i.e. lies. The Bible explained it first and the Earth evidence that we find back up the global flood.

The evidence that shows the impact from Chicxulub wasn't global is the lack of iridium around the globe. Wouldn't you say a global extinction event would have evidence around the world?

You ignored the part about the clear geological evidence for multiple extinctions in different eras.

First off the impact from Chicxulub was global as iridium IS found around the globe. Also, after the K-T event there were no dinos anywhere on the planet, even marine animals went extinct (curious for a flood). Sounds global to me.

 

[Wuwei]

Why oh why do you make up such stupid lies and post them in the science section? Ridiculous behavior.

Why? It is imperative that creationists lie. They are pitiful pests that enjoy trolling science forums.

.

 

[danielpalos]

Unless you believe what the atheist scientists are saying with their mistaken belief of Chicxulub asteroid impact 65 M years ago. First, the impact was local and would not have scattered iridium around the globe. The atheist scientists are backing off this claim today. Second, 65 M yrs ago is based on erroneous radiometric dating done during the 50s.

But, nothing within the last six thousand years.

 

[james bond]

Get out of the science section you embarrassing, pathetic liar.

Science | AAAS

advances.sciencemag.org

Why should I trust an atheist science website, you worthless POS simpleton and liar? Where is the evidence for it being spread around the globe?

'Lack of an iridium anomaly
The secular model predicts a layer containing higher than crustal levels of iridium (a rare earth element) should spread out across the globe after a major impact hits the earth, but this is not necessarily the case. Much of the iridium produced in an impact stays in the debris at or near the impact site, and does not go up in a dust cloud to later settle globally (Taylor 2007).

Although higher levels of iridium have been found in rocks near the K-Pg boundary at many sites around the globe (Claeys, Kiessling, and Alvarez 2002), it is not universally distributed. In fact, Ir-anomalies are not always observed in adjacent locations within the same rock unit, as Clemens and Hartman (2014) found in the Hell Creek Formation in eastern Montana.

Sarjeant and Currie (2001) further reported that the original site in Gubbio, Italy, made famous by the Alvarez et al. paper (1980), was reanalyzed by Crocket et al. (1988) and Rocchia et al. (1990). These authors found that the reported iridium anomaly was not a single spike in value as claimed by Alvarez et al. (1980), but a series of iridium-rich layers spread across a 4 m thick interval. Sarjeant and Currie (2001) concluded that this is hardly the type of data that support a single impact.

And what was found at the Chicxulub site in all the cores and drilling results to date? Although a few traces of iridium were identified in melt rocks in wells C-1 and Y-5 (Fig. 1) (Schuraytz et al. 1996; Sharpton et al. 1992) no significant amounts of iridium have been found in any of the ejecta material or impactite layers across the Chicxulub site (Keller et al. 2004b). The amount found in the melt-rich rocks in C-1 and Y-6 ranged from none detected to 13.5 ppb, reportedly “well above typical crustal concentrations” (Sharpton et al. 1992, 820). Finally, there was no trace of an iridium spike in the top of the impactite in the Yaxcopoil-1 (Yax-1) core and no iridium reported to date within the M0077A core drilled in 2016.

In addition to the less than expected iridium, Paquay et al. (2008) found that the osmium residue in marine sediments at the K-Pg was insufficient for a large impactor the size of what has been claimed for Chicxulub.

Ironically, an iridium-rich layer is often used to identify the K-Pg boundary, where it is found (Claeys, Kiessling, and Alvarez 2002), and yet there is virtually no iridium in the impactite material at the very site claimed to be the “smoking gun.”'

Do Data Support Large Meteorite Impact at Chicxulub?

The evidence for a large impact at Chicxulub may not be as strong as generally believed. A case can also be made that there was no impact.

answersingenesis.org

ETA: You just want me out of S&T because I am right most of the time and destroy arguments by other atheists. Envy is one of the deadly sins.

 

[james bond]

You ignored the part about the clear geological evidence for multiple extinctions in different eras.

First off the impact from Chicxulub was global as iridium IS found around the globe. Also, after the K-T event there were no dinos anywhere on the planet, even marine animals went extinct (curious for a flood). Sounds global to me.

The creation scientists know that the global flood was the grandaddy of all extinctions.

The impact from Chicxulub was not global. The big deal is there isn't enough iridium at the site. The atheist scientists claim that it caused iridium found around the globe, but it is too random from what the atheists claim. Furthermore, can you actually prove that it was a large meteor or asteroid impact there? The other way a crater can form is a volcano.

 

[MisterBeale]

If anything the universe is custom made for the Coronavirus. There are many times more of them than there are of us on this planet.

 

[james bond]

Why? It is imperative that creationists lie. They are pitiful pests that enjoy trolling science forums.

.

How can a creationist lie if he goes by God's word in the Bible? Science backs up the Bible even though it isn't a science book. That should make you turn red with embarrassment for being so wrong about your competition such as your age of the Earth fiasco and posting under the wrong topic. At least if I don't know about what atheist scientists are doing and have come up with, then I can go to evolution.berkeley.edu done by my secular alma mater.

If secular scientists didn't lie, then it would be in the Bible but evolution, evolutionary thinking, and abiogenesis aren't there. Singularity is there, but God created that and the atheist scientists stole it for their own. Initially, God was and still is infinite, but atheists took that and came up with an infinite universe. They were proven wrong. The Bible is still correct stating God is infinite, but now the lying scientists have made up a billion of years old universe.

 

[Colin norris]

The atheist scientific consensus. They don't believe a global flood happened despite the mid-Atlantic ridge circling the planet, the oceans found below the seafloor, and the theory of plate tectonics.

Can you name some of these atheist scientists?

Exactly what year was this global flood in regard to the scriptures?

 

[alang1216]

The creation scientists know that the global flood was the grandaddy of all extinctions.

The impact from Chicxulub was not global. The big deal is there isn't enough iridium at the site. The atheist scientists claim that it caused iridium found around the globe, but it is too random from what the atheists claim. Furthermore, can you actually prove that it was a large meteor or asteroid impact there? The other way a crater can form is a volcano.

So what caused the other extinctions?

And yes, the Chicxulub crater is an impact crater. Scientists (it was a big team so probably atheists, jews, christians, and muslims) have drilled into the crater and taken samples. It is not volcanic.

 

[alang1216]

The creation scientists know that the global flood was the grandaddy of all extinctions.

The impact from Chicxulub was not global. The big deal is there isn't enough iridium at the site. The atheist scientists claim that it caused iridium found around the globe, but it is too random from what the atheists claim. Furthermore, can you actually prove that it was a large meteor or asteroid impact there? The other way a crater can form is a volcano.

FYI, "creation scientists" is an oxymoron while "atheist scientists" is redundant. Science is, by definition, a study of the natural world. If a "scientist" invokes supernatural forces or events to explain something, they are no longer a scientist and have become a theologian. Just sayin'.

 

[Hollie]

C14 dating of dinosaur fossils, diamonds, rocks, other fossils, etc. back up a younger Earth of thousands of years than what the atheist scientists claim of billions of years with radiometric dating.

Again, the Bible doesn't care about the age of the Earth nor discusses it. However, you can knock yourself out and then suffer for eternity since you believe the lies -- What Does the Bible Say About The Age Of The Earth?.

Your opinions about C14 dating are erroneous because they reflect misinformation from the various creationer ministries.

It’s odd that you describe the Bible as a caring entity. You give the Bible feelings, emotions and personality as you do your gods.

 

[Hollie]

How can a creationist lie if he goes by God's word in the Bible? Science backs up the Bible even though it isn't a science book. That should make you turn red with embarrassment for being so wrong about your competition such as your age of the Earth fiasco and posting under the wrong topic. At least if I don't know about what atheist scientists are doing and have come up with, then I can go to evolution.berkeley.edu done by my secular alma mater.

If secular scientists didn't lie, then it would be in the Bible but evolution, evolutionary thinking, and abiogenesis aren't there. Singularity is there, but God created that and the atheist scientists stole it for their own. Initially, God was and still is infinite, but atheists took that and came up with an infinite universe. They were proven wrong. The Bible is still correct stating God is infinite, but now the lying scientists have made up a billion of years old universe.

Science does not “back up” the Bible. Please show us where science “backs up” a flat earth, talking snakes, dead people becoming undead, etc., etc.

 

[Hollie]

Why should I trust an atheist science website, you worthless POS simpleton and liar? Where is the evidence for it being spread around the globe?

'Lack of an iridium anomaly
The secular model predicts a layer containing higher than crustal levels of iridium (a rare earth element) should spread out across the globe after a major impact hits the earth, but this is not necessarily the case. Much of the iridium produced in an impact stays in the debris at or near the impact site, and does not go up in a dust cloud to later settle globally (Taylor 2007).

Although higher levels of iridium have been found in rocks near the K-Pg boundary at many sites around the globe (Claeys, Kiessling, and Alvarez 2002), it is not universally distributed. In fact, Ir-anomalies are not always observed in adjacent locations within the same rock unit, as Clemens and Hartman (2014) found in the Hell Creek Formation in eastern Montana.

Sarjeant and Currie (2001) further reported that the original site in Gubbio, Italy, made famous by the Alvarez et al. paper (1980), was reanalyzed by Crocket et al. (1988) and Rocchia et al. (1990). These authors found that the reported iridium anomaly was not a single spike in value as claimed by Alvarez et al. (1980), but a series of iridium-rich layers spread across a 4 m thick interval. Sarjeant and Currie (2001) concluded that this is hardly the type of data that support a single impact.

And what was found at the Chicxulub site in all the cores and drilling results to date? Although a few traces of iridium were identified in melt rocks in wells C-1 and Y-5 (Fig. 1) (Schuraytz et al. 1996; Sharpton et al. 1992) no significant amounts of iridium have been found in any of the ejecta material or impactite layers across the Chicxulub site (Keller et al. 2004b). The amount found in the melt-rich rocks in C-1 and Y-6 ranged from none detected to 13.5 ppb, reportedly “well above typical crustal concentrations” (Sharpton et al. 1992, 820). Finally, there was no trace of an iridium spike in the top of the impactite in the Yaxcopoil-1 (Yax-1) core and no iridium reported to date within the M0077A core drilled in 2016.

In addition to the less than expected iridium, Paquay et al. (2008) found that the osmium residue in marine sediments at the K-Pg was insufficient for a large impactor the size of what has been claimed for Chicxulub.

Ironically, an iridium-rich layer is often used to identify the K-Pg boundary, where it is found (Claeys, Kiessling, and Alvarez 2002), and yet there is virtually no iridium in the impactite material at the very site claimed to be the “smoking gun.”'

Do Data Support Large Meteorite Impact at Chicxulub?

The evidence for a large impact at Chicxulub may not be as strong as generally believed. A case can also be made that there was no impact.

answersingenesis.org

ETA: You just want me out of S&T because I am right most of the time and destroy arguments by other atheists. Envy is one of the deadly sins.

When your source is charlatans at AIG, you immediately lose credibility.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Catastrophic smothering...

Why? It is imperative that creationists lie. They are pitiful pests that enjoy trolling science forums.

.

Why don't you give everyone your own original science lecture. Don't cut and paste. Use your own words and *scientific* acumen. We can't wait to learn the terrific *science* you will teach everyone.

Do you even KNOW the etiology of "science"?