@proper-knob saidWell that is the thing, I know what I'm saying I'm not sure about what you are?
This is correct, i have no idea where the universe came from. I don't know how many times you want me to say this, i don't think i can be any clearer on this issue.
If you could be so kind, could you answer the question I've asked numerous times now which for some reason you don't seem to want to answer. Isn't your belief that humans lived with dinosaurs baed on an assumption?
Sound familiar?
You have no idea about things you are passing judgment on, isn't logical, or reasonable since in order to say something isn't true you need to have some idea of what is true. Cannot really address your questions when I don't know what you are asking for, or thinking on the topic, you seem to be hiding that.
@proper-knob saidWhy don't you think I can make a contribution to the discussion? I am curious.
@Philokalia
Thanks for the input. But, frankly i couldn't give a hoot what you think.
1 edit
@philokalia saidInterrogations are easier than conversations and debates, if you don’t offer up your side, you don’t have to defend it.
Why don't you think I can make a contribution to the discussion? I am curious.
@philokalia saidOf course you can. I have the flu, i woke up grouchy, please feel free to contribute.
Why don't you think I can make a contribution to the discussion? I am curious.
@kellyjay saidYou don't know what i'm asking? I see. Let's recap.
Cannot really address your questions when I don't know what you are asking for, or thinking on the topic, you seem to be hiding that.
1. Humans living with dinosaurs. Surely that's an assumption on your part?
2. Now back to my question, isn’t humans living with dinosaurs an assumption on your part?
3. Are you not making assumptions when you claim humans lived with dinosaurs?
4. Isn't your belief that humans lived with dinosaurs baed on an assumption?
I'm not sure how i could make the question any clearer.
1 edit
@proper-knob saidAssuming history and fossils are what I think yes.
@KellyJay
You're having trouble understanding a one sentence question? I found that hard to believe. This is really simple Kelly. I'm not 'passing judgement' or any other such thing.
Isn't your belief that humans lived with dinosaurs based on an assumption?
2 edits
@proper-knob saidFor the benefit of those who didn't look it up...
The issue of soft tissue in fossils has been solved by the person who discovered it. I suggest you do some research. It took me 5mins to find it.
What usually happens is that soft tissues are consumed (for example by bacteria, erosion, animal predators, etc.) before the mineralization process completely replaces them. There are, however, exceptional cases in which soft issues are preserved in environments inimical to bacteria and other degrading processes (such as wind and animal predators) long enough for mineralization (fossilization) to occur, thereby preserving the structure of soft tissues in stone (of course, the tissues themselves are not preserved). See for example, the following article:
https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/soft-tissue-dinosaur.htm
@proper-knob saidHope you feel better
Of course you can. I have the flu, i woke up grouchy, please feel free to contribute.
@kellyjay saidRight, i'm back and i'm much better thanks.
Assuming history and fossils are what I think yes.
Let's walk this back. On the one hand we have you and your beliefs that humans lived with dinosaurs, which you claim is a 'truth'. On the other hand we have the scientific field of palaeontology, and other associated scientific fields, which state that the huge body of evidence tells us something completely different.
How come your assumptions have led you to the 'truth', and the countless scientists assumptions are wrong. What did you do that they didn't?
@moonbus saidQuite right, this is how 'petrified wood' is created, for instance.
For the benefit of those who didn't look it up...
What usually happens is that soft tissues are consumed (for example by bacteria, erosion, animal predators, etc.) before the mineralization process completely replaces them. There are, however, exceptional cases in which soft issues are preserved in environments inimical to bacteria and other degrading processes (suc ...[text shortened]... g article:
https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/soft-tissue-dinosaur.htm
@sonship
Those truly ancient bones with 'soft tissue' inside has no DNA to analyze so it is just leftover collagen, which, while it is soft but not useful in an analysis sense. DNA can last thousands of years but so far nothing we have found lasts millions of years as far as DNA goes.
@philokalia saidWhy ask permission? I am interested what you think.
Why don't you think I can make a contribution to the discussion? I am curious.
1 edit
@proper-knob saidSorry I missed this I will answer this soon.
Right, i'm back and i'm much better thanks.
Let's walk this back. On the one hand we have you and your beliefs that humans lived with dinosaurs, which you claim is a 'truth'. On the other hand we have the scientific field of palaeontology, and other associated scientific fields, which state that the huge body of evidence tells us something completely different.
How ...[text shortened]... o the 'truth', and the countless scientists assumptions are wrong. What did you do that they didn't?