It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Grayelf2009
Originally posted by jfj123
Originally posted by Grayelf2009
reply to post by Sarkazmon
I hunt fossils for a living.....and I can tell you from my experience from what I have seen in the field that the like most things of importance that we have been lied too. The dinosaurs are only thousands of years old....died in the flood....and I don't use this info for gain on Christian views or beliefs.
And as a fossil collector , I am known as one of the best.... not bragging, just been told that by the people in that industry.
Anyone who actually believes this crap can't have much experience or education in the field of Paleontology.
There is no evidence to suggest a world wide flood let alone dinosaurs that are only a few thousand years old.
99% of all fossils are in sediment deposits.... what other proof due people need.
DENVER CITY - Investigators from the Texas Railroad Commission spent Tuesday trying to figure out why land at a Denver City oil company caved-in.
The sinkhole appeared just on the edge of Denver City on the Oxy site. Officials tell us no one was hurt and no water or power lines were damaged.
The hole drops 50 feet and is 60 feet around.
Sinkholes are all about water.
Water dissolved minerals in the rock, leaving residue and open spaces within the rock. (This is called "weathering".)
Water washes away the soil and residue from the voids in the rock.
Lowering of groundwater levels can cause a loss of support for the soft material in the rock spaces that can lead to collapse.
Changing groundwater gradients (due to removing or introducing water to the system) can cause loose material to flush out quicker from the voids and the surface to collapse in response.
Any change to the hydrologic system (putting more water in or taking it out) causes the system to become at least temporarily unstable and can lead to sinkholes.
Sinkholes can result from seasonal changes in the groundwater table, freeze and thaw of the ground, and extremes in precipitation (drought vs heavy rain).
Karst landscapes develop naturally through the weathering process so a sinkhole can be considered a natural occurence. But, human influence causes sinkholes to occur where they might not naturally have happened. Or, they may occur sooner or more abruptly than under natural conditions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A sinkhole is a large depression in the Earth's surface, often shaped like a well or a funnel, that can be up to several miles in diameter. Sinkholes are most common in limestone regions. Underground layers of limestone can be dissolved by groundwater or by seepage from above-ground streams. A crack in underground limestone is often the first step in the formation of a sinkhole. A sinkhole may also be caused by a dramatic event, such as the collapse of a cave roof.
Sources:TheEncyclopedia Americana, International Edition, p. 843; Magill, Frank N. Magill's Survey of Science, vol. 3, pp. 1310-17.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
Heya, bfft,
...mosey on over to "badastronomy" forums and start talking about possible Moon life. You will see exactly how open minded science, on the whole, actually is.
I'm not much of an expert regarding dinosaurs on the Moon...
Jus' teasin'.
Didn't want to stray the topic, so I had to throw that it as I ask: Wouldn't 'science' have a different attitude, even if you 'moseyed over' to badas....tronomy, if someone had some sort of evidence, of siad Moon 'life'?
I just realized, I fell for it...a thread about dinos, and you said "life", and I immediately jumped to a mental image of multi-cellular creatures. Oooops.
I'd think, though, the scientific community wouldn't be all that hostile to possible microbial life, even on the Moon, right?? Haven't some Cosmologists hypothesized possible life on comets? Life is tenacious, we see that in a multitude of forms, here on Earth, with 'extremophiles' and such.....
Originally posted by Militant1
Look i have one question that has bugged me for years concerning the Darwin/Creation debate. off topic but i am going to ask any way.
Forget carbon dating, floods,evoulotion ect..
At night when i gaze at the stars i wonder are all these stars only 6000 light years away? And shouldn't we be seeing more and more stars every day as the light reachs our only 6000 year old planet?
You see the problem is that we are seeing starlight that took millions to get here and that is not disputed by anyone i know of, and creationist say the universe is 6000 years old. How does that work? Either your math is flawed or the Creator chose to decieve everyone by making things seem much older than they are.
Not taking sides, just have never heard an explaination for this.
Originally posted by Militant1
Look i have one question that has bugged me for years concerning the Darwin/Creation debate. off topic but i am going to ask any way.
Forget carbon dating, floods,evoulotion ect..
At night when i gaze at the stars i wonder are all these stars only 6000 light years away? And shouldn't we be seeing more and more stars every day as the light reachs our only 6000 year old planet?
You see the problem is that we are seeing starlight that took millions to get here and that is not disputed by anyone i know of, and creationist say the universe is 6000 years old. How does that work? Either your math is flawed or the Creator chose to decieve everyone by making things seem much older than they are.
Not taking sides, just have never heard an explaination for this.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
I fully concur.
I know plasma cosmology hasn't been fully fleshed out yet, simply due to the fact not enough people are studying it. As more scientists get involved, I'm sure more answers to the questions of the universe will come forward.
However I am willing to flatly reject standard theory. I think it has been fully falsified.
It has turned into nothing more than wild speculation backed up by hypothetical theories based on no tangible evidence.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
It is not logical that sauropods evolved to be massive creatures with huge necks if they couldn't lift those necks above their waists.
Originally posted by rnaa
You really have to pick up on how scientific models are accepted and rejected. For a new theory to replace an accepted theory, the new theory has to explain more than the accepted theory and make better predictions.
Your assertion that the "standard theory" has been fully falsified, is fully false and is fully hogwash. The accepted theory is the most useful cosmological explanation we have. Its predictions continue to be confirmed. And yes there is always something new to figure out. There is no such thing as an absolute.
Originally posted by rnaa
The plasma model was interesting back in the 60's, but it never got to anywhere near explaining the cosmological phenomena successfully explained by the standard model. But most importantly, its most central prediction, an explanation of the missing blackbody spectrum in the cosmic microwave background, has proved to be incorrect. That is pretty disheartening to researchers who like to work on things that produce results.
Originally posted by rnaa
If the plasma model is ever to supplant the accepted model, it will have to do so by demonstrating that it is better than the accepted model. It has to explain everything the accepted model does. And it must make predictions that are actually confirmed. It must solve problems that the accepted model does not. Notice that doesn't FALSIFY the current model, it just says that the replacement is BETTER.
Why are you on about FALSIFICATION of the entire model? You say the Plasma model still has holes in it, but that's OK? The standard model doesn't explain everything in the universe to your satisfaction so its completely false, and those who pursue it are frauds?
It just doesn't make sense.
[edit on 2/8/2009 by rnaa]
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Prediction of the submillimeter spectrum of the cosmic background radiation by a plasma model
Lerner E, Plasma Science, IEEE Transactions on Volume 18, Issue 1, Feb 1990 Page(s):43 - 48
Predictions?
Correct prediction of the CMB by steady state as far back as 1896
The Temperature of Space
C.H. Guillame 1896
Numerous prediction of the Deep Impact mission
www.thunderbolts.info...
Predictions of the aurora being powered by field aligned electric fields as far back as 1908
The Norwegian aurora polaris expedition, 1902-1903 (1908)
Kristian Birkeland
In fact as far as predictions go, plasma cosmology has a loooooong and distinguished history of correct and accurate predictions.
The Plasma Cosmology model was advanced only in the 1960's, so those old data are not predictions, but observations that the Plasma model seeks to explain.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by jfj123
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Saying "I'm wrong" doesn't make you right
No but proving you're wrong does
Which I have done over and over
Your failure to respond even adds to the validity of my arguments
Seriously, I don't know who convinced you this nonsense is real but please do yourself a favor and pull yourself away from this science fiction and get back to reality. My guess is you found a book that had some neat idea's and you just glommed onto it like a moth to a flame. Then once you got hooked, you found another and another and before you knew it, you belonged to the cult.
Please do yourself a favor and find a good deprogrammer.
I think if anyone needs a good "deprogrammer", its you.
I don't think you realize just how much current theory is backed up by nothing but wild speculation.
Originally posted by fixer1967
Originally posted by Militant1
Look i have one question that has bugged me for years concerning the Darwin/Creation debate. off topic but i am going to ask any way.
Forget carbon dating, floods,evoulotion ect..
At night when i gaze at the stars i wonder are all these stars only 6000 light years away? And shouldn't we be seeing more and more stars every day as the light reachs our only 6000 year old planet?
You see the problem is that we are seeing starlight that took millions to get here and that is not disputed by anyone i know of, and creationist say the universe is 6000 years old. How does that work? Either your math is flawed or the Creator chose to decieve everyone by making things seem much older than they are.
Not taking sides, just have never heard an explaination for this.
6000 years? Well if you check the net, depending on the site you pick the age of the universe is between 12 and 20 billion years old with most sites giving a 13 to 15 billion year age. Some people even think it is as old as 21 TRILLION YEARS OLD. As for me I have a feeling it is far older than even that. I think it may infact be 100's of trillions of years old. Why do I think that you ask. I have no answer for you, it is just a feeling I have.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
The Plasma Cosmology model was advanced only in the 1960's, so those old data are not predictions, but observations that the Plasma model seeks to explain.
I'm not sure what you mean by the "plasma cosmology model was advanced only in the 1960's".
I have papers being put forth from every time period from the early 1900's to today.
The model is put forth by plasma physicists and electrical engineers. Many of the papers put forth do not appear in the ApJ or MNRAS because they are put forth in the electrical engineering journals and plasma physics journals instead. Notably the IEEE recognizes plasma cosmology and puts forth many of its papers.
My limited collection of papers so far.
So your continued insistence that this is something that was only put forth in the 1960's doesn't make much sense to me.
As to Lerner debating Ned Wright, new evidence showing the WMAP data to be completely invalid has ended that debate.
Lerner is correct.
Originally posted by rnaa
I can find no evidence that WMAP data has been invalidated
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Some more fuel to the fire.
If you look into giraffes, you'll find they are some very special creatures.
They have a built in "g-suit" that preasurizes their legs to keep their blood from pooling there.
This natural "g-suit" is required because without it, the giraffe would pass out any time it lifted its head above its waist.
Gravity would pull all its blood into its legs and its heart would not be strong enough to pump it into its brain all the way up its neck.
The amount of force required to pump that blood up the giraffes neck can be calculated.
It turns out that the giraffe is at the maximum limit of height a land mammal can achieve. Beyond its current height, either the heart would have to be so large it wouldn't fit or its blood vessels would burst from over-pressure.
A creature taller than the giraffe would not be able to survive in our current gravity field.
The average ambient air pressure is 1013 mb, do you know what the pressure average would have been at that time, gravity is not always the deciding factor.
[edit on 2-8-2009 by mnemeth1]
Champion of humankind
According to Sumerian mythology, Enki also assisted humanity to survive the Deluge designed to kill them. In the Legend of Atrahasis, Enlil, the king of the gods, sets out to eliminate humanity, the noise of whose mating is offensive to his ears. He successively sends drought, famine and plague to eliminate humanity, but Enki thwarts his half-brother's plans by teaching Atrahasis about irrigation, granaries and medicine. Humans again proliferate a fourth time. Enraged, Enlil convenes a Council of Deities and gets them to promise not to tell humankind that he plans their total annihilation. Enki does not tell Atrahasis, but instead tells the walls of Atrahasis' (a.k.a. Utnapishtim or Ziusudra) reed hut of Enlil's plan, thus covertly rescuing Atrahasis by either instructing him to build some kind of a boat for his family, or by bringing him into the heavens in a magic boat. After the seven day Deluge, the flood hero frees a swallow, a raven and a dove in an effort to find if the flood waters have receded. On the boat landing, a sacrifice is organized to the gods. Enlil is angry his will has been thwarted yet again, and Enki is named as the culprit. As the god of what we would call ecology, Enki explains that Enlil is unfair to punish the guiltless Atrahasis for the sins of his fellows, and secures a promise that the gods will not eliminate humankind if they practice birth control and live within the means of the natural world. The threat is made, however, that if humans do not honor their side of the covenant the gods will be free to wreak havoc once again. This is apparently the oldest surviving Middle Eastern Deluge myths.