🧵 >Line up smaller horse fossil to larger horse fossil
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 22:24:23 UTC No. 16147480
This is le… evolution?
I can't believe people have just arbitrarily lined up different fossilized animals in a row, always (no exceptions) with massive gaps, claim they turned into one another, and the vast majority of the general public accepts this garbage as science.
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 22:34:31 UTC No. 16147492
>>16147480
You got a better explanation for why all animal species didn’t exist at the same time?
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 22:45:45 UTC No. 16147507
>>16147480
>he thinks it’s based on size and not when they show up in the fossil record and how derived each one is
Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself like this
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 22:45:48 UTC No. 16147508
>>16147492
This is fundamentally based on the belief that lower geologic strata is significantly older than it really is.
Old Earth dates are based solely on radiometric dating, which is the assumption that radioactive materials in decay can be used like a clock (they can't, rocks of known age give extremely inflated dates)
PhD geologist just finalized a major study on Grand Canyon rocks proving they can't be millions of years old:
https://youtu.be/Tma__c-jFSM
They had to sue the park just to collect samples, the lawsuit took years.
The rock layers are bent in such a way that could have only been done when they were soft. If they were hardened they wouldn't bend, they'd fracture.
Just one of many evidences of young Earth you ignore:
1. Very Little Sediment on the Seafloor
2. Bent Rock Layers
3. Soft Tissue in Fossils
4. Faint Sun Paradox
5. Rapidly Decaying Magnetic Field
6. Helium in Radioactive Rocks
7. Carbon-14 in Fossils, Coal, and Diamonds
8. Short-Lived Comets
9. Very Little Salt in the Sea
10. DNA in “Ancient” Bacteria
https://answersingenesis.org/eviden
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 22:51:57 UTC No. 16147513
>>16147508
>answers in genesis
>noahs flood made the Grand Canyon
>radiometric dating is fake
Back to /x/ with you
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 22:55:18 UTC No. 16147517
>>16147513
It is legitimate science, not /x/.
e.g. you have zero explanation for why we find so much helium in zircon crystals that should have been gone millions of years ago, if you assume their age according to their uranium->lead decay rate.
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:09:26 UTC No. 16147532
>>16147517
>you have zero explanation
Helium easily diffuses through the crystal lattice of zircon with the right conditions while lead does not. The only real way for lead to get there is for it to come from decaying uranium whereas helium can continually diffuse into the zircon over time depending on temperature. Instead of stopping to think how the helium could get there you people instead immediately latch onto this single strand of evidence because it aligns with your pre existing beliefs, regardless of the overwhelming amount of evidence to the contrary.
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:10:05 UTC No. 16147533
>>16147513
I fucking hate that /x/ started purging all the flat earth faggots and they came over here or even sneak onto /his/ or /lit/. These used to be the smartest boards on the site and now even /g/ and /k/ have overtaken them.
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:15:05 UTC No. 16147546
>>16147532
....
Helium is produced when uranium decays to lead
It's not a question of how it's in there, the question is why is there still so much left when it easily diffuses out of the crystal, far more than there should be if it's millions/billions of years old
>>16147533
The Earth is round.
Please stop confusing us with flat Earthers. There is PhD scientists who work at Answers in Genesis and ICR.
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:17:18 UTC No. 16147553
>>16147546
>the question is why is there still so much left when it easily diffuses out of the crystal, far more than there should be if it's millions/billions of years old
That’s the point dipshit, it just as easily diffuses INTO the crystal. At least do some reading on the topic before arguing about it
>There is PhD scientists who work at Answers in Genesis and ICR
lol
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:21:40 UTC No. 16147568
>>16147553
>it just as easily diffuses INTO the crystal
Gases always diffuse from areas of higher concentration to surrounding areas of lower concentration. They wouldn't diffuse into a zircon crystal.
Source: well-established diffusion law of physics
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:25:10 UTC No. 16147573
>>16147480
Look at their feet
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:44:42 UTC No. 16147618
>>16147508
Look my guy. The methods and assumptions being used are working in terms of finding oil/gas/mineral deposits. Come up with a model that’s equally useful, and not just in a philosophical absolute truth sense, and then we can talk.
Even if evolution as a theory is completely wrong, it’s still useful. We still use the hard shell model of the atom even though we “know” atoms aren’t hard shells. We still use geocentric methods of celestial navigation just because it’s been so well refined that using heliocentric ones aren’t worth it.
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:51:22 UTC No. 16147631
>>16147480
Natural selection has major issues when you take combinatorics into account.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrY
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:52:22 UTC No. 16147635
>>16147568
>Gases always diffuse from areas of higher concentration to surrounding areas of lower concentration. They wouldn't diffuse into a zircon crystal.
Except you don't know the relative concentrations of helium in the Zircon's environment
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:54:01 UTC No. 16147643
>>16147635
If you want to read the actual source of the argument:
https://answersingenesis.org/age-of
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 23:56:19 UTC No. 16147650
>>16147643
No thanks
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 03:37:58 UTC No. 16147944
>>16147568
>Gases always diffuse from areas of higher concentration to surrounding areas of lower concentration. They wouldn't diffuse into a zircon crystal.
That is unless the surrounding area has more helium in it, I’m not sure how much more simply I can explain it. If the helium is constantly diffusing out until the point where there’s none left as you say should happen, then ANY amount of helium in the surrounding rock will diffuse back into the crystal since a zirconium with no helium left in it is as low a concentration as it gets. Hence why even if a crystal is at the age where all the original helium has diffused out it can still have helium in it, as more diffuses in from an environment with high helium levels and high temperatures. An environment like I don’t know, maybe the magma where zirconium usually forms
>>16147643
>answers in genesis again
Take this garbage elsewhere
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 03:45:00 UTC No. 16147951
>>16147480
Don’t let these horses distract you from the real menace that are whales with legs
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 04:02:47 UTC No. 16147961
>>16147480
>arbitrarily lined up different fossilized animals in a row
How about: lined up the same fossilized animal in a row. These people have absolutely no idea what they’re doing
>btw they have feathers now
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 04:06:19 UTC No. 16147962
>>16147961
Based and duck-billed velociraptor
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 04:35:34 UTC No. 16147984
>>16147961
>picks an unusual animal that was for the longest time only known from fragmentary remains which were destroyed during WW2 during a bombing
Why are paleofags so insufferable
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 07:17:18 UTC No. 16148103
>>16147984
your nose-cone is showing
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 09:43:21 UTC No. 16148218
>>16147508
Trying to find evidence for noahs flood is retarded. If the event happened as described it would have destroyed all plant life and made the earth unihabitable. So even if the event happened the evidence/destruction would have had to be undone.
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 10:38:41 UTC No. 16148266
>>16147480
It is Vatican fabrication, after all.
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 11:42:37 UTC No. 16148330
>>16148103
The second is basically the same as the third it’s just standing up and the first isn’t even that far off considering when it was discovered
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 14:25:45 UTC No. 16148502
>>16148330
>nose horn vs thumb spike
Oh its retarted..
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 23:58:19 UTC No. 16149225
>>16148502
>this single tiny bone being in the wrong spot means that it’s wildly different
>ignore the second and third being the same thing in different postures
Consider suicide
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 03:41:34 UTC No. 16149446
>>16149225
>single tiny bone
>it’s a fucking nose-spike
castrate yourself or turn gay
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 10:20:53 UTC No. 16149671
>>16149446
>implying a nose spike isn’t a single tiny bone and is inconsequential to how the rest of the animal is depicted
>ignoring the fact that it’s literally the first dinosaur ever discovered so they had no basis on how to reconstruct it
Take your gender reaffirming pills and waste away