When you consider the size of our planet and the difficulty in finding anything that small, it is pretty neat when they do stumble upon a fossil remains that have never been seen before.
Dinosaurs remains
Dinosaurs remains
Chinese Fossil May Link Birds and Dinosaurs
- Thread starter Garfield1966
- Start date
Seatacus
Veteran
OP
- Thread Starter
- #3
Wow. You had the opportunity to study the bone structures and compare them to other fossil records that have been found? Impressive. Do you have a link to your findings? I'd like to read them.
Tug McGroin
Senior
Seatacus
Veteran
Hey Gar, the burden of proof that says it is a link falls on those that support this theory, not on me to prove it isn't. Similarities in bone structures means nothing to me except that we have bones thart are similar. I am surprised that you can put so much faith in this theory but do not have faith in God.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #6
I think you misunderstand science. A scientist does not 'support' any theory. A scientist looks at data and formulates a hypothesis. Should data come along at a later point that refutes the original hypothesis, so be it, formulate a new hypothesis. Scientists around the world will try to test the hypothesis will all known data to either disprove or substantiate the hypothesis. This is how knowledge grows.
Religion does not seek to prove or disprove it's self. Religion uses the the same 'reasoning' that a parent who is frustrated with a child. When asked one to many times, the parent will just say "because I said so". That method does not work for science.
If you cannot see the difference between this and religion I understand why you do not understand the relevance of similar bone structures, DNA or other facets of science have on our history. As an example, it is hypothesized that whales and other sea mammals were once land based mammals due to certain bone structures. Their flukes have five digits which are thought to be remnants of hands/paws that evolved into flukes when the animals evolved into sea based creatures. There are also fossil records that show remnants of rear legs as well which have all but disappeared on to days creatures. Looking at similar bone structures is quite important in determining their relation to other creatures that existed before and after the existence of the creature in question. This is how times lines and genealogies are determined.
Religion does not seek to prove or disprove it's self. Religion uses the the same 'reasoning' that a parent who is frustrated with a child. When asked one to many times, the parent will just say "because I said so". That method does not work for science.
If you cannot see the difference between this and religion I understand why you do not understand the relevance of similar bone structures, DNA or other facets of science have on our history. As an example, it is hypothesized that whales and other sea mammals were once land based mammals due to certain bone structures. Their flukes have five digits which are thought to be remnants of hands/paws that evolved into flukes when the animals evolved into sea based creatures. There are also fossil records that show remnants of rear legs as well which have all but disappeared on to days creatures. Looking at similar bone structures is quite important in determining their relation to other creatures that existed before and after the existence of the creature in question. This is how times lines and genealogies are determined.
Seatacus
Veteran
I spent several years getting a degree in Biology so I think I understand it a little bit.
My belief does not require proof just faith. But there is evidence everywhere.
My point was that what you believe about evolution requires faith because I believe the proof is not there.
Ed Norton
Veteran
Someone had a party eons ago and had some chicken wings!
BFD!
Still waiting to see the "missing link" walking around. Wait,,,no,,,that's probably Saquatch!
OP
- Thread Starter
- #9
Funny how people will accept science in nearly every facet of their life with this one exception. Science develops the drugs that save lives every day. Science developed the very computer technology that you are using right now. We fly in planes that science says will stay in the air, cook food in Microwaves, wear clothing with fabric developed by science. When this same science says that the world is several billion years old ..... nah. We ain't going to believe that foolishness.
But hey, if you want to go around believing man walked with dinosaurs, knock your self out.
Ed Norton
Veteran
Archeologists find ancient chicken bones! Along with ancient cigarette butts!
Proof that ancient man enjoyed a smoke after a good meal!
OP
- Thread Starter
- #11
Another ancestor found.
Ardipithecus ramidus, aka "Ardi"
She is estimated to be about 4.4 million years old, which is over 1 million years older than Lucy. According to the article, Ardi is changing the way we look at our ancestry.
Ardipithecus ramidus, aka "Ardi"
She is estimated to be about 4.4 million years old, which is over 1 million years older than Lucy. According to the article, Ardi is changing the way we look at our ancestry.
Ed Norton
Veteran
OP
- Thread Starter
- #13
Just curious. Are the fossils fake? Is the technology used to carbon date them faulty? How old do you think the world is? I just want to know if it is even worth having a discussion or if I should just ignore your posts here like I do on other threads.
delldude
Veteran
The world is pretty friggin' old.......
Carbon dating technology works on PFM just like black boxes in the EE bay on a heavy...
Fossils bought on ebay most likely....
OP
