• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Does believing in Evolution say a lot about you

Status
Not open for further replies.
I answered that..

Here's more that you again, didn't bother to read

Searching for soft tissue

Dinosaurs' iron-rich blood, combined with a good environment for fossilization, may explain the amazing existence of soft tissue from the Cretaceous (a period that lasted from about 65.5 million to 145.5 million years ago) and even earlier. The specimens Schweitzer works with, including skin, show evidence of excellent preservation. The bones of these various specimens are articulated, not scattered, suggesting they were buried quickly. They're also buried in sandstone, which is porous and may wick away bacteria and reactive enzymes that would otherwise degrade the bone.

Schweitzer is set to search for more dinosaur soft tissue this summer. "I'd like to find a honking big T. rex that's completely articulated that's still in the ground, or something similar," she said. To preserve the chemistry of potential soft tissue, the specimens must not be treated with preservatives or glue, as most fossil bones are, she said. And they need to be tested quickly, as soft tissue could degrade once exposed to modern air and humidity.

Importantly, Schweitzer and her colleagues have figured out how to remove the iron from their samples, which enables them to analyze the original proteins. They've even found chemicals consistent with being DNA, though Schweitzer is quick to note that she hasn't proven they really are DNA. The iron-removing techniques should allow paleontologists to search more effectively for soft tissue, and to test it when they find it.

"Once we can get the chemistry behind some of these soft tissues, there's all sorts of questions we can ask of ancient organisms," Schweitzer said.

tl;dr

Chemistry / your source is assuming things that aren't true.
 
1 - 0

Care to ask another?

Btw.. welcome to bluelight <3
I have gave ample evidence and questions that haven't been answered other than saying the answer is I cant answer them either.
great logic
and I have stood alone defending my premise

You can act like you have d isproven all my points if u want to, but an honest reading of thread will show you haven't
The god of "time" and tiny invisible steps fails miserably as answers
someone who has admitting said chicken and egg had to evolve at same time but doesn't see the paradox that this kicks off i can not help
thx nice to b here
 
Last edited:
So.. next question?

I'm pretty sure I answered your questions but if i missed any.. what are they?

I believe I've stood alone answering them* so.. fair game.

*Not ignoring the many decent posts by others.
 
You see, im not asking someone to explain the theory to me ( im glad as others have admitted they need help to do that) I thoroughly understand its premise. You ( not necessarily you) assume because I reject the idea that a mutation could produce all the diversity I can observe that I am ignorant to theory.
I assure you I am not. As I stated in the beginning of thread living fossils contradict what evolution proposes.
That along i
That alone would be enough to cause me to at least rethink theory cause its not what evolution predicts. As well as Cambrian explosions not what evolution predicts.
Im sorry to challenge your faith,
but its hard to believe in something that's changes ideas like water changes states, and is as thin as water to boot
 
Last edited:
No.. I state you are ignorant because of your lack of understanding AND knowledge..

I now state you are wilfully ignorant for ignoring information presented to you.

Living fossils does not contradict evolution.. again.. this statement suggests ignorance of what evolution is.

And again.. you are ignoring everything contradicting your belief and then asking another question you are under the delusional belief is a sufficient rebutal.
 
Ok the ignorant comment is not fair.
I could easily apply to u cause you seem ignorant to logic

Let my slow my dumb mind down , ease it down, and dumb it down for you ( yeah you rope a doped me into verbal attack but just for humor) and ask u a question
Based on your profound mastery and self proclaimed wisdom of theory,
What would evolution predict?
That we humans from point we are now would change into new species over the next million of years or just stay pretty much the same ( even maybe a bit smaller)

Now light bearer, cast tho light upon me
 
I don't mean it as a personal attack..

I am massively ignorant when it comes to geography.. but to be fair.. i don't go around trying to claim that peru is part of the british isles :p

Yes.. a million years from now i find it highly unlikely that our offspring will be able to produce fertile offspring with anyone alive today (definition of species)
 
Ok the ignorant comment is not fair.
I could easily apply to u cause you seem ignorant to logic

Let my slow my dumb mind down , ease it down, and dumb it down for you ( yeah you rope a doped me into verbal attack but just for humor) and ask u a question
Based on your profound mastery and self proclaimed wisdom of theory,
What would evolution predict?
That we humans from point we are now would change into new species over the next million of years or just stay pretty much the same ( even maybe a bit smaller)

Now light bearer, cast tho light upon me

Enough said!! Good:\
 
I don't mean it as a personal attack..

I am massively ignorant when it comes to geography.. but to be fair.. i don't go around trying to claim that peru is part of the british isles :p
Hey buddy, you could be my neighbor for all I know I dont take things personal.
I see you didnt answer the question I gave.
Not to be confused with not answering the one wants as you suggest
I mean you totally dodged the question
Stay the same for most part or become new species
 
I answered that..

But understand that my answer has nothing to do with science and your question is yet again side stepping the information provided.
 
You dont even know what your faith predicts

Guys dont you get a boner, I know creationist use the checkmark atheist line
That was the joke
Btw, see. That video years a d years ago
cringed when I seen it. I know about genetically engineered bananas.
Kirk Cameron and ray comfort are like your Richard Dawkins
 
Last edited:
Edit- Fuck that.

I'm giving you the opportunity to not come off like a...

Answer or at least acknowledge what has been provided for you, contrary to your belief, in this thread.
 
With all the millions of species we have today we should have found intermediate fossils

"why, if species have descended from another species by fine graduations, why do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?"

I've answered your intermediate question more than once but here's a recap:

Before I spoon feed you information.. first understand how unlikely it is that we would find a fossil of any kind.. you understand what conditions it takes for a fossil to form, right?? And then, being the mathematical probability graduate that you are, you understand the likelihood of finding formed fossils, yeah?

The aetiocetus (25 million years ago) is the transitional form between pakicetus (50 million years ago) and the present day gray Whale..

Your rebuttal please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top