har har har Jesus and dinosaurs har har har

it was 6000 years, you heathen!!!!

If you follow the trail of the story backwards, you find the dating estimates have something called "error" estimates to go with them and that the errors estimates are greater than the 700,000 years quoted in the popularized account.

So if I measure a basketball hoop at 9.7 feet high, +/- 0.4 feet, I'd be a fraud to claim it was proven to be shorter than the regulation 10 feet high. HTHHAND

jesus had a pet stegosaurus that he rode into jerusalem.

the man cleaned it up and changed it to a donkey in order to promulgate their lies and keep us down.

I can play that trolltastic, and totally wrong, game too subby.



/Yea I know. This is Fark. Headlines like that are par for the course.

Simplistic stories with lessons to teach its followers being taken literally makes baby Jesus cry.

Science: Holy shiat, there's some evidence that at least one species or group of dinosaur survived several hundred years after the KT boundary events.

Fark: OMGHOLYBBQWTFROFLMAO! Most dinosaurs lived after meteor explosion that we thought killed off all dinosaurs.


And we greenlight this bullshiat. That's what gets me.

Where do you get 'most'? The article says 'one'.

I want a jesusaurus.

FTFA: ...Larry Heaman from the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences..say there could be several reasons why the New Mexico hadrosaur came from a line of dinosaurs that survived the great mass extinction of the late Cretaceous period.

Dr. Heaman said it is possible that in some areas the vegetation wasn't wiped out and a number of hadrosaur species survived.

Thank God for scientific clarity.

Dr. Heaman said it is possible that in some areas the vegetation wasn't wiped out and a number of hadrosaur species survived.


So the meteor wasn't a Large Hadrosaur Collider?

Yeah, they are called birds.

It's the velocirapture.

Nakito

It's the velocirapture.


Well done, you.

Jesus did not ride on Dinos, he was around 2k years ago.

Dinosaurs surviving shortly after the meteor isn't all that new. Paleontologists have been bickering on what killed off the dinosaurs, and how long did they survive after the impact for quite some time now. The KT extinction and the climate changes most likely were driven by the formation of the Deccan Traps in India ~66mya and not a meteor impact. I worked on a paleo field trip digging up ammonites. We found them one meter "above" the KT boundary. The boundary that supposedly marks their extinction.

My psuedo nerd moment...

Crosshair: I can play that trolltastic, and totally wrong, game too subby.



/Yea I know. This is Fark. Headlines like that are par for the course.

Considering that atheism is purely a rejection of the concept that gods exist, and makes no claims at all regarding how the universe was created, this post doesn't even make any damn sense. I expect better from a theology with 2000 years of trolling at its back.

/Guess I could also add that calling particle physics, atomic chemistry, astronomy and astrophysics "magic" isn't entirely accurate.

You mean... maybe dinosaurs built Stonehenge after all?

Did the dinosaurs build stonehenge? (new window)

well, at least subby was a douche from the beginning rather than being one of those douches who has to bring religion hate into a science thread every freaken time.

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: It's almost as if these animals evolved some natural advantage that allowed them to survive.

Also? Weather isn't the same everywhere, even during meteor strikes

I would imagine, from what evidence I've encountered on the whole dino issue, that what happened was something like,

1) A Class of animals already declining due to climate shift and disease, 2)encounters a significant extinction event/population bottle neck, 3)which accentuates environmental factors already favoring smaller body size, greater mobility, and better heat conservation even further, 4)leading larger dino species to "die out" and smaller "birds" to proliferate.

And another case of "Making a correct assumption on events that we cannot observe or prove makes me better than you, and also negates whatever it is that you choose to believe, because I personally believe something else, though I take comfort and pride in the possibility that myself and the group of those who think like I do could possibly be have a theory that more closely resembles what may have actually happened than you and your group do."

/I take pride in my slapped-together run-on sentences.

Heron: Crosshair: I can play that trolltastic, and totally wrong, game too subby.



/Yea I know. This is Fark. Headlines like that are par for the course.

Considering that atheism is purely a rejection of the concept that gods exist, and makes no claims at all regarding how the universe was created, this post doesn't even make any damn sense. I expect better from a theology with 2000 years of trolling at its back.

/Guess I could also add that calling particle physics, atomic chemistry, astronomy and astrophysics "magic" isn't entirely accurate.

I love when atheists get worked out by a single troll.

Also, St. Nicholas was an actual person. He was a Christian Bishop in Myra (modern day Turkey). Some of the legends about him are probably hyperbole, but Nicholas di Bari, a.k.a. "Sinterklass" or the "Christkindl", is documented to have existed.

Thus, Santa Claus is real.

/deal with it
//Problem, guise?

Can science and religion co-exist? I don't know. Ask Dinosaur Jim.

On Fark, the struggle continues.

So, let me get this straight, because of what scientists say today about an event that occured hundreds of thousands of years ago, which really can't be proven, nor can the implications of that event (as it changes all the time) you believe this stuff straight out of hand simply because a scientist said it? Where is the scientific method here? Until you can recreate that meteor catastrophe (if it was meteors), then shut the fark up about god.

How about using your anti-religious zeal inwardly to disprove your own wacko theories that I haven't seen at all on this thread.

Submitted yesterday with a better article and better (though equally troll-tastic) headline.

Very interesting study which has some interesting implications for the nature of the K/T extinction event. Those of you who are dismissing it out of hand are missing out on some interesting debates.

1nsanilicious: So, let me get this straight, because of what scientists say today about an event that occured hundreds of thousands of years ago, which really can't be proven, nor can the implications of that event (as it changes all the time) you believe this stuff straight out of hand simply because a scientist said it? Where is the scientific method here? Until you can recreate that meteor catastrophe (if it was meteors), then shut the fark up about god.

How about using your anti-religious zeal inwardly to disprove your own wacko theories that I haven't seen at all on this thread.

It was 66.5 million years ago. And I'm pretty sure the implications have remained mostly the same since the impact event was discovered, that it killed off most of the dinosaurs. That some of the dinosaurs survived has been known for quite some time as well.

And people aren't attacking God, they are attacking creationism, which frankly is downright stupid and deserves to be attacked.

At any rate, if you believe a bunch of unlikely events because it written down a couple thousand years ago, you certainly don't have room to talk when scientists look at fossil records, meteor impacts and sediment deposits and come up with reasonable explanations towards our planet's history.

Nice explanation of fossil dating tho.

Now, if they'd only get home before midnight.

My ex and her family were hardcore fundamentalists and believed the "Earth was 6,000 years old". I would bring up the years of scientific data and evidence; they claimed it was a scientific conspiracy and carbon dating was incredibly inaccurate. It's just amazing to me that people really believe this shiat. We haven't been dating for 2 years and it still irritates me a little...

Gwyrddu: 1nsanilicious: So, let me get this straight, because of what scientists say today about an event that occured hundreds of thousands of years ago, which really can't be proven, nor can the implications of that event (as it changes all the time) you believe this stuff straight out of hand simply because a scientist said it? Where is the scientific method here? Until you can recreate that meteor catastrophe (if it was meteors), then shut the fark up about god.

How about using your anti-religious zeal inwardly to disprove your own wacko theories that I haven't seen at all on this thread.

It was 66.5 million years ago. And I'm pretty sure the implications have remained mostly the same since the impact event was discovered, that it killed off most of the dinosaurs. That some of the dinosaurs survived has been known for quite some time as well.

And people aren't attacking God, they are attacking creationism, which frankly is downright stupid and deserves to be attacked.

At any rate, if you believe a bunch of unlikely events because it written down a couple thousand years ago, you certainly don't have room to talk when scientists look at fossil records, meteor impacts and sediment deposits and come up with reasonable explanations towards our planet's history.

Gwyrddu: 1nsanilicious: So, let me get this straight, because of what scientists say today about an event that occured hundreds of thousands of years ago, which really can't be proven, nor can the implications of that event (as it changes all the time) you believe this stuff straight out of hand simply because a scientist said it? Where is the scientific method here? Until you can recreate that meteor catastrophe (if it was meteors), then shut the fark up about god.

How about using your anti-religious zeal inwardly to disprove your own wacko theories that I haven't seen at all on this thread.

It was 66.5 million years ago. And I'm pretty sure the implications have remained mostly the same since the impact event was discovered, that it killed off most of the dinosaurs. That some of the dinosaurs survived has been known for quite some time as well.

And people aren't attacking God, they are attacking creationism, which frankly is downright stupid and deserves to be attacked.

At any rate, if you believe a bunch of unlikely events because it written down a couple thousand years ago, you certainly don't have room to talk when scientists look at fossil records, meteor impacts and sediment deposits and come up with reasonable explanations towards our planet's history.


I expect the same amount of first hand proof that you expect. Evidence of the existence of an event isn't proof that the event actually occured. Athiests taught me that.

TigerStar,

Theism/Deism are metaphysical beliefs outside the limits of empiricism, just like some forms of atheism. Unless you like to turn science and atheism into religions, your argument is a false dichotomy stuffed up the back-end of a your strawman.




Yay, another one of these threads I see....


/Drew must be hurtin for his for hits. Time to greenlight another atheist troll bait headline.

Heron: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: It's almost as if these animals evolved some natural advantage that allowed them to survive.

Also? Weather isn't the same everywhere, even during meteor strikes

I would imagine, from what evidence I've encountered on the whole dino issue, that what happened was something like,

1) A Class of animals already declining due to climate shift and disease, 2)encounters a significant extinction event/population bottle neck, 3)which accentuates environmental factors already favoring smaller body size, greater mobility, and better heat conservation even further, 4)leading larger dino species to "die out" and smaller "birds" to proliferate.

Evidence? Reason? A calmly stated, rational argument? This is Fark. We have no use for those things here.

Atheism is a Religion

So birds don't count?

brantgoose: There has been a minority report on the mass extinction 65 million years ago for some time. Some scientists have claimed that some dinosaurs may have survived as much as 250,000 years after the disappearance of the dinosaurs from the general fossil record at the KT boundary.

It is hard to deny that the asteroid which made the crater in the Yucatan peninsula (and the Gulf of Mexico--it's a big crater) was a killer on a global scale. The layer of iridium (common in asteroids, rare on Earth) is found world-wide.

But it is not impossible that some pockets of dinosaurs survived, just as pockets of cooling show up in the most reliable climate maps of past, present or future global warming.

One of the strongest competitors for the asteroid theory is the volcanic eruption theory. The Deccan Traps, an enormous area of lava laid down in India at the time the dinosaurs went extinct, could have caused longer term climate change and slowly killed off the dinosaurs in a few million years.

We know for sure that the dinosaurs were already declining when the asteroid hit.

What is less clear is if any survived the hit.

I'm going to play the good scientist and sit on the fence because I don't know conclusively which of these alternative histories is true.

750,000 years is not a lot of time in geological history, but this "direct" Uranium-Plutonium method is said to be more accurate, which makes the partial survivor theory stronger but not infallible.

The history books are full of "living fossils", some as old or older than the dinosaurs.

It's possible that the dinosaurs survived the asteroid in smaller numbers and then were finished by the double whammy of climate change due to volcanic eruptions on a massive scale. Science is not either/or. It's possible that both theories are right and that both causes combined to wipe out a lot of species over the relatively brief period of a million years or two.

Global warming scientists acknowledge a lot of different natural inputs to the current climate change. They just find anthropogenic contributions larger and more alarming, as well as within the power of man to control, unlike volcanic eruptions or shifts in solar irradience. We can do nothing about the big natural inputs, but we can do everything about our own actions, including abandoning fossil fuels or reforesting large areas of land. And many of these changes are "low-hanging fruit" that would be profitable and easy.

So it's perfectly OK to be a scientific mugwump. It is not indecision, it is intellectual honesty. In politics and that branch of politics called religion, indecision can get you killed, but scientists prefer to talk you to death. They're a bunch of wimps. But they are honest wimps for the most part.


Ha! Tell that to the scientists who refute the idea of global warming. How long does their funding last again? Truth? All I need to say is climate gate.

The difference between science and religion on the big questions is that religion looks outwardly for answers while science looks inwardly. When religion can't find an answer right away it's not the end of the world; but when science can't find an answer to something it attacks religion to feel better at it's own inadequacies. Just like in this thread.

1nsanilicious:
The difference between science and religion on the big questions is that religion looks outwardly for answers while science looks inwardly. When religion can't find an answer right away it's not the end of the world; but when science can't find an answer to something it attacks religion to feel better at it's own inadequacies. Just like in this thread.

0/10

Nakito: It's the velocirapture.

*golf clap*

1nsanilicious: The difference between science and religion on the big questions is that religion looks outwardly for answers while science looks inwardly. When religion can't find an answer right away it's not the end of the world; but when science can't find an answer to something it attacks religion to feel better at it's own inadequacies. Just like in this thread.


The guy who corrected Einstein's Static Universe Model asks "not sure if serious".




Science is the study of nature. Theism is the beleif in at least one deity.

theism ≠ science, so you can stop with the comparisons....
atheism ≠ science, so you can pitch that strawman until the cows come home too

But since you seem thoroughly confused on the topic, I'll just leave this here....

Science is based on methodological naturalism. The philosophical doctrine of methodological naturalism holds that, for any study of the world to qualify as "scientific," it cannot refer to supernatural activity (or any sort of deistic activity). Scientific method (normative, Hypothetico-deductive and Deductive-nomological and other models of scientific method) does not allow for (even if the latter are true) any reference to the supernatual in the hypothesis process; and theistic or religious beliefs therefore cannot influence scientific explanation or theory justification.

Simply put,
If you are a scientist you have to be a methodological naturalist (i.e., assume for operative purposes that nature and natural laws are all that there is); but this doesn't commit you to the stronger position of philosophical naturalism (i.e., to the claim that there really isn't anything outside of nature and its laws). That (including atheism) requires a philosophical position based on philosophical naturalism.

And, that does not mean that science does not have philosophical implications (including theistic views, i.e. the belief in at least one deity) outside of science.

you get 0/10 for the troll

brantgoose: There has been a minority report on the mass extinction 65 million years ago for some time. Some scientists have claimed that some dinosaurs may have survived as much as 250,000 years after the disappearance of the dinosaurs from the general fossil record at the KT boundary.

It is hard to deny that the asteroid which made the crater in the Yucatan peninsula (and the Gulf of Mexico--it's a big crater) was a killer on a global scale. The layer of iridium (common in asteroids, rare on Earth) is found world-wide.

But it is not impossible that some pockets of dinosaurs survived, just as pockets of cooling show up in the most reliable climate maps of past, present or future global warming.

One of the strongest competitors for the asteroid theory is the volcanic eruption theory. The Deccan Traps, an enormous area of lava laid down in India at the time the dinosaurs went extinct, could have caused longer term climate change and slowly killed off the dinosaurs in a few million years.

We know for sure that the dinosaurs were already declining when the asteroid hit.

What is less clear is if any survived the hit.

I'm going to play the good scientist and sit on the fence because I don't know conclusively which of these alternative histories is true.

750,000 years is not a lot of time in geological history, but this "direct" Uranium-Plutonium method is said to be more accurate, which makes the partial survivor theory stronger but not infallible.

The history books are full of "living fossils", some as old or older than the dinosaurs.

It's possible that the dinosaurs survived the asteroid in smaller numbers and then were finished by the double whammy of climate change due to volcanic eruptions on a massive scale. Science is not either/or. It's possible that both theories are right and that both causes combined to wipe out a lot of species over the relatively brief period of a million years or two.

Global warming scientists acknowledge a lot of different natural inputs to the current climate change. They just find anthropogenic contributions larger and more alarming, as well as within the power of man to control, unlike volcanic eruptions or shifts in solar irradience. We can do nothing about the big natural inputs, but we can do everything about our own actions, including abandoning fossil fuels or reforesting large areas of land. And many of these changes are "low-hanging fruit" that would be profitable and easy.

So it's perfectly OK to be a scientific mugwump. It is not indecision, it is intellectual honesty. In politics and that branch of politics called religion, indecision can get you killed, but scientists prefer to talk you to death. They're a bunch of wimps. But they are honest wimps for the most part.

abstract (new window)

where in ...The second dinosaur bone sample from Paleocene strata just above the Cretaceous-Paleogene interface yielded a Paleocene U-Pb date of 64.8 ± 0.9 Ma ...

Now, follow my math carefully.
64.8 + 0.9 = 65.7 upper limit
64.8 - 0.9 = 63.9 lower limit
65.7 > 65.5 > 63.9

The real key is finding the bone above the interface but reburial is not unknown and would readily account for the finding.