(June 6, 2025 at 6:01 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote:

(June 6, 2025 at 5:57 pm)Sheldon Wrote: Hmm, who to believe, science, or some Billy no name on the internet, peddling unevidenced archaic superstition.

search "blood in T-Rex bones"

Search t-Rex blood debunked

(June 6, 2025 at 6:01 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote:

(June 6, 2025 at 5:57 pm)Sheldon Wrote: Hmm, who to believe, science, or some Billy no name on the internet, peddling unevidenced archaic superstition.

search "blood in T-Rex bones"

"Non-Mineralized Tissues in Fossil T rex"

"The absolute ages of all fossils ultimately hinge on radiometric dating techniques, the validity and accuracy of which are beyond reasonable doubt."

"Multiple analyses using several independent radiometric techniques show that the rocks in which the MOR T rex was found are about 65 million years old. The age of this fossil is a settled fact."

"for the past few centuries “fossil” has had two distinct meanings: the remains or traces of ancient life (the time-based definition), and an object of biological origin that has undergone the process of “fossilization” (the process-based definition). The creationist challenge to the age of the MOR T rex is an equivocation based on this dual definition:

1. A fossil (time-defined) is old.

2. The MOR T rex is not a fossil (process-defined) because the presence of soft tissue demonstrates that it is not fossilized.

Therefore, the MOR T rex is not old.

The argument is invalid because each of the premises defines “fossil” in a different way. Few arguments used by creationists are as easily refuted as this, because most errors in creationists’ reasoning are not simple logical fallacies, and arise instead from misinterpretations of empirical evidence and hence requiring detailed refutation. But the equivocal use of “fossil” is not a creationist invention; it is a bad habit that they learned from palaeontologists themselves."

CITATION

This is quite an old creationist canard, well debunked by science. 

Here is another source debunking it, from TalkOrigins website, CITATION

^LOVE me some TalkOrigins!!

Boru

(June 6, 2025 at 6:34 pm)Sheldon Wrote:

(June 6, 2025 at 6:29 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: I PM the proofs link to you.

Feel free to challenge any of them.

just quote any "proof" you think you have?

You are allowed to quote the proofs, but I am not.

(June 6, 2025 at 7:18 pm)Angrboda Wrote: @SubtleVirtue

If I may ask, which came first, your belief in a god, or your proofs of the existence of a god?

I spoke to God when I was one and a half years old. He told me not to kill my brother and to go and tell my mother.

You can quote something, just try to not make it a wall of text, but don't "link" it.

(June 6, 2025 at 7:31 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(June 6, 2025 at 6:10 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: Are you claiming that they did not find what looks like T. Rex blood cells and blood vessels and connective tissue?

Not at all. I’m stating that these were found in fossils, not bones. This discovery does not change the timeline of dinosaur species, it simply showed that, under certain condition, some soft tissues can survive the fossilization process.

Boru

I wonder what would happen if they carbon dated the blood.

(June 6, 2025 at 8:26 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(June 6, 2025 at 6:07 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: (1) can energy be created? please prove that!

(2) is ZPE omnipresent?

(3) are you claiming that the transformation of energy is not power?

(4) how so?

(1) That isn't what I said. If you can't demonstrate eternity then you can't demonstrate that it's eternal, merely as old as the universe.

(2) No, under most conditions energy levels are way above the ZPE.

(3) No, power is energy over time. No transformation.

(4) If energy is eternal it can't be caused at all.

(1) there are two ways to reach eternity; A; "everywhere everything exists from prior states of the existence of things" and B; energy cannot be created nor destroyed which entails that it is eternal

(2) I asked if ZPE is omnipresent; here is what Max Planck proved; there is a certain amount of energy equal to 1 half h bar omega in every single point in space

(3) are you claiming that i.e. nuclear energy cannot transform to light energy?

(4)  "causal" is not in the same declension as "caused"; the latter refers to an event in time, the former refers to a process through time. eternal energy can be self-causal but not caused

(June 7, 2025 at 5:19 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote:

(June 6, 2025 at 7:31 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Not at all. I’m stating that these were found in fossils, not bones. This discovery does not change the timeline of dinosaur species, it simply showed that, under certain condition, some soft tissues can survive the fossilization process.

Boru

I wonder what would happen if they carbon dated the blood.

Radiocarbon dating wouldn’t work. The soft tissues are the same age as the fossils, roughly 75 million years. Carbon dating only world on organic matter less than about 50K years old.

In your intro thread, you said you were a scientist. I’m starting to become a little skeptical of that claim.

Boru

(June 6, 2025 at 8:36 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(June 6, 2025 at 5:58 pm)SubtleVirtue Wrote: (15) Synonyms; "self-causal", "self-deterministic", and "teleological"

Objection, assumes facts not in evidence.

Are you claiming that self-causal is not a synonym of self-deterministic?