1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Creation or evolution?

Discussion in 'Personal' started by lexus300, Apr 23, 2020.

  1. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    Interesting research:

    Made me think.
    omar_mukhtar likes this.
  2. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    An insult to a person's intelligence.
  3. Ivartheboneless

    Ivartheboneless Star commenter

    All this bible thumper stuff starts with a mistaken assumption, then goes on for hours or pages based on that trying to weave real fact in with their own self-motivated bull. It fails every time.
  4. Jolly_Roger15

    Jolly_Roger15 Star commenter

    As Captain Blackadder might say, "There is a tiny flaw in the argument; it's boll.ocks!"
    Nanny Ogg, ajrowing, knitone and 5 others like this.
  5. shakes1616

    shakes1616 Established commenter

    I don't get what he's trying to say. Something magical preserved the tissue. I can't see why tissue shouldn't last millions of years if it's fossilised.
  6. Stiltskin

    Stiltskin Star commenter

    The bit at the end where he says that iron is key to preservation of the soft tissue and then rejects it, he was so close. The soft tissues are not the original proteins they have been chemically transformed into polymers (AGEs and ALEs). Which is why you can not do any protein sequencing on them, however their structures remain.

    Also finding soft tissue structures in dinosaur bones is extremely rare which is why it was only recently found and only a few such samples exist. To get it out is a lot harder than he allegedly shows in the trike horn fossil (which I doubt is even that) and you don't get huge structures like he demonstrated in the video.

    I am guessing this video was produced before 2018 though.
    Bill8899, lanokia and lexus300 like this.
  7. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    Thanks, I will treat with caution.
    Kandahar and Stiltskin like this.
  8. physicsfanboy

    physicsfanboy Occasional commenter

    Just so you know, creationism in all it's forms is a combination of stupidity, mythology and a large dose of wishful thinking by people suffering from religion.
    It's quite sad seeing folk demanding that reality bend, because they can't cope with the universe not being about them.
  9. jubilee

    jubilee Star commenter

    It's a very confused explanation. It's not bone, he says. It's horn (that's keratin, isn't it?). Later, when showing a sample under a special microscope, he starts talking about the properties of bone that are being seen.
  10. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    Not interesting research - lunacy.
    Nanny Ogg and physicsfanboy like this.
  11. Ivartheboneless

    Ivartheboneless Star commenter

    I thought I saw a date of 2012 on it.
  12. Kandahar

    Kandahar Star commenter


    That explains where Darwin went wrong.
  13. Burndenpark

    Burndenpark Star commenter

    It certainly explains why he sat on his theory for so long.
    Mangleworzle, Jamvic and Stiltskin like this.
  14. Burndenpark

    Burndenpark Star commenter

    The act of fossilisation replaces the original tissues with something more durable- usually rock. or as Stiltskin explains:
  15. NoseyMatronType

    NoseyMatronType Star commenter

    For me, the most interesting aspect of this issue is the mystery of consciousness. For materialists, the mind is the product of the brain and therefore a product of the evolutionary process.

    The most hardline variant of this position that I know of is probably eliminative materialism.


    But authors like Philip Goff take a different line. This is what he says about his latest book (Galileo's Error):

    'I argue that the traditional approaches of materialism (consciousness can be explained in terms of physical processes in the brain) and dualism (consciousness is separate from the body and brain) face insuperable difficulties. On the basis of this I defend a form of panpsychism, the view that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of the physical world. It sounds a bit crazy, but I try to show that it avoids the difficulties faced by its rivals.'

    More here:


    Haven't had time to delve into this myself recently. A few years ago I read Susan Blackmore's textbook on Consciousness but that's all.
  16. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    MMM! You would rather it bend reality towards your belief:rolleyes: I see.
    Kandahar likes this.
  17. physicsfanboy

    physicsfanboy Occasional commenter

    That's just one of the elements of confusion in that video.
    And yes, horn is keratin. Same stuff hair and nails are made of.
  18. physicsfanboy

    physicsfanboy Occasional commenter

    Not so much, I bend my views to fit with reality. It's called being rational.
    Bill8899 and Burndenpark like this.
  19. physicsfanboy

    physicsfanboy Occasional commenter

    It's sounds like the author is a stoner laying out his ideas about what it's really about, man.
    Bill8899 likes this.
  20. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    Define your reality.
    DrLinus and Kandahar like this.

Share This Page