Slashdot Mirror
Study Provides Compelling Evidence of Single Impact Extinction Theory
ectotherm writes to tell us that a new study at the University of Missouri-Columbia claims to provide compelling evidence that a single meteor impact was the cause of animal extinction 65 million years ago. From the article: "MacLeod and his co-investigators studied sediment recovered from the Demerara Rise in the Atlantic Ocean northeast of South America, about 4,500 km (approximately 2,800 miles) from the impact site on the Yucatan Peninsula. Sites closer to and farther from the impact site have been studied, but few intermediary sites such as this have been explored."
I suspect Wombats were somehow involved.
65 million years is crazy-talk, that's 64,994,000 years before God made the Earth!
Trolling is a art,
Dinosaurs were not killed off in a mass extinction 65 million years ago... many of them survived and are currently employed by the *AA and associated groups.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I was *not* a meteor impact that killed the dinosaurs, it was global warming. Let's examine the facts here, with nearly everybody driving around Bedrock in their souped up SUVs, you can imagine all the CO2 those things put out, not to mention the contributing factor of mass extinctions due to consumption of racks of ribs at drive-ins.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
Look at the film. You can see another meteor on the grassy knoll.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Hell, he's probably witnessed it himself.
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
65 million years ago...
Dino 1: Wii is the best dino console.
Dino 2: No. The Wii graphics suck. Xbox 360 is awesome.
Dino 3: Wii and Xbox 360 both suck. Playstation 3 with Cell processor rules. Plus we have BluRay.
Dino 1: PS3 is too expensive and there aren't enough blue diodes. All dinosaurs can afford Wii though. It great!
Dino 2: Meh, PS3 is expensive and Wii doesn't do hidef. Xbox 360 sits right in the middle and saves the day. Go 360, go!
God: Ok, that does it. No more dinosaurs.
God has a sense of humor. When he created everything, he figured that there would be some idiots (we call them scientists but not all fall into the idiots class) that wouldn't believe the truth so He created a past that they could track down and say "see, there is no creation, just evolution" just to keep them busy.
--
Liberalisim is an absurd ideology that displays the lack of knowledge of history.
Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
I have heard it said that when God cast out Satan from heaven that his impact on the earth is the same meteoric impact that scientists believe wiped out the dinosaurs.
Where's the 0xBEEF
If you ask the wrong questions, you'll get the wrong answers.
People should be asking how it is possible that dinosaur birds of the past could have been as large as 747's. We don't have birds today on the entire planet that are larger than about 50 lbs. And this clearly pushes the limits of what's possible with bird mass because these 50-lb birds practically kill themselves when they land. The Mongolians have tried to breed bigger falcons for thousands of years with no luck. So, how is it possible that birds were once as big as 747's?
People should be asking exactly *which* animals survived, and why?
People should be asking if the land-walking dinosaurs were alive today, would they survive? Check out http://www.bearfabrique.org/Catastrophism/sauropod s/biganims.html.
Ask those questions *WITH* the questions about the impact, and suddenly the bigger picture changes. Is the Big Bang Theory still just a theory, or are there alternative cosmologies that people will consider? What about the electrical force? In a theory of everything based upon electricity, gravity would be a function of electrical charge accumulation and the Theory of Relativity could be very easily explained using aether concepts that contrary to popular belief, have never actually been disproven. The aether explanation for Relativity is actually much simpler to understand than Relativity.
Do planets accumulate and transfer charge? According to astrophysicists and NASA, the answer is a vehement "NO!". But have you ever actually looked at the Aristarchus crater on the Moon? That "debris field" has *negative depth*. They are trenches! That looks a hell of a lot more like a lightning strike to me than a debris field: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/image06/060 309hubble.jpg. Should we just assume that it is pure coincidence that the Aristarchus and Tycho craters occur on naturally high spots on the Moon's surface?
We know that metals can accumulate charge and we know that the Earth has a hell of a lot of metals. So, why can't the Earth accumulate and transfer charge with nearby planets or bodies? Because we've never seen it happen? But we can see large-scale electrical activity all over the universe with our telescopes. We've gathered enough data by now on comets to suspect that the tail and coma of a comet are in fact lightning bolts. Check it out: http://www.thunderbolts.info/pdf/ElectricComet.pdf . If we're seeing large magnetic fields and temperatures of 100 million Kelvin inside of nebulae, then that means that nebulae are almost certainly *not* forming by gravitational collapse and that electricity is the dominant force in creating stars. If we're seeing large-scale electrical forces elsewhere in the universe, why should our solar system be so special as to not have these?
Why are all craters round? Sure, astrophysicists will tell you that it's because an object going fast enough will create an explosion upon impact, but then why is the sedimentary layer at the bottom of Meteor Crater undisturbed? Would a comparable nuclear explosion leave no trace of itself in the ground beneath it?
How To Kill A Planet of Dinosaurs:
What motivated Einstein to say that space is modified by gravity? Imagine that a planet is orbiting around the sun. Then imagine that suddenly the Sun disappears, and the source of gravitational attraction is gone. What happens to the planet? Does it instantly go off the orbit? Or does the disappearance of gravity require some time to reach the orbiting planet's position? Einstein's answer is that it stays in the orbit for a time R/c before going off. It is as though gravitation continues to operate on the planet at its location even though the Sun is gone. Something wa
"A man cannot begin to learn that which he thinks he already knows." --Epictetus, 1st Century A.D.
I think God put you here to test my faith, dude. You believe that?
'Uh huh.'
Does that trouble anyone here? The idea that God might be fuckin' with our heads? Anyone have trouble sleeping restfully with that thought in their heads?
God's running around, burying fossils: 'Hu hu ho. We'll see who believes in me now, ha HA. I'm a prankster god. I am killing me. Ho ho ho ho.'
You know, you die, you go to St. Peter, 'Did you you believe in dinosaurs?'
Well, you know, there was fossils everywhere. [Bill makes sound effects with his mic] KOOM Aaaahhhh. 'What are you, an idiot? God was FUCKING with you! Giant flying lizards, you moron! That's one of God's easiest jokes!'
'It seemed so plausibleeeee! Ahhhhhhhh!' Bound for the lake of fire. . . . "
We miss you Bill . . . please tell the flying saucers to drop you off for another show.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
40 responses and not a single noodly appendage in sight. Is everyone OK?
Look, we know the mice paid for it to be built around 2 million years ago - it says so in The Book.
But, lets look at both theories anyway.
1. the mice, 2m years ago, pay for the planet to be built to look like it is billions of years old, with fake fossils etc. buried as part of the construction process
2. God makes the planet 6k years ago, with dinosaurs and everything, then floods it when Noah's got two of everything into the ark. Except Noah forgot about all the dinosaurs, because they were small and easy to miss, especially the sauropods (behemoth) which Noah thought were on board but were hiding behind some reeds. Oh, sorry that was Job:40. Oops, Job was after the flood. Guess the dinosaurs maybe made it onto the ark after all. Seems that even the ID guys can't agree on that one.
Anyhow, lets look at the supporting evidence, ie. the fossil record:
Could it be fakes buried by the (far more advanced than us) builders of the planet to look millions of years old ? Difficult to disprove that one.
Could it be the victims of the flood buried in the sediments from the flood ? Hmmm, yep could fit too.
Ah, teeny weeny problem with the second one. People - lack of. According to the biblical accounts, lots of people should have perished in the flood alongside the dinosaurs. So, people bones should be common in the fossil record alongside the dinosaurs. Nope.
Since that just about wraps it up for the flood, we're left with the super advanced Magratheans building it all 2million years ago for the mice. All cleverly faked to look millions of years older.
QED - it was the mice.
Now try to disprove the mice / Magratheans theory you crazy Darwinists.
Emerill "Bang! Creatures everywhere... don't worry about getting some in the lakes and rivers, only enriches things later...okay folks now stay tuned, after the commercial we'll whip up Man in less that 24 hours."
This is often referred to as "Last Tuesdayism." The idea that the universe was created last Tuesday with the appearance of being 15 billion years old is logically impossible to falsify. Since it cannot be falsified, it is not science, but that doesn't stop the creationists from bringing up the idea. They never seem to understand that a corollary of it is that God is a liar.
There are also constant Usenet flamewars, religious jihads, and university campus riots between the Last Tuesdayists and the Last Mondayists. They're all heretics, of course. All right-thinking, intelligent people know that the universe was created by my cat Marvin three weeks ago Thursday.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.