|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 04/23/2004 : 20:07:07 [Permalink]
|
filthy wrote:quote:
...or peridonitis.
Ugh. If the damage from a spear up the butt was only enough to give an infection, it could take weeks before the animal died. I would hope that ancient people were bright enough to realize that if they didn't have a blood trail to follow, then that particular animal was probably going to be more work than it was worth, and finding another meal would be a better option. Then again, I'm not subsisting on tubers, so what do I know? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2004 : 02:42:59 [Permalink]
|
Ever see a Clovis point? They are beautifully made by master craftsmen and when fresh, would have been close to razor sharp. The damage done to the bowel by one of these would have been extensive and the more the animal moved, the deeper it was likely to work in. Death would have been a matter of days at most, rather than weeks.
And, knowing the local range of the animal, tracking something that large would have been little problem. And, whilst awaiting of the demise of the first, some of the village could go off and hunt another.
The article I read on the African pygmis -- this was back in the '60s -- stated that they were using steel points, and these were precious. The top priority, after the elephant collasped, was to get the point back. Understandable, and I'd think that the same held for Clovis. Hard flint and obsidian was not found everywhere and was valuable. I have found points (recent American Indian) that had been broken and knapped into scrapers and cutters, and cut down into smaller points.
The best way to go arrowhead hunting is to make an arraingment with a farmer, and get out in his freshly-plowed fields after a rain. Just thought I'd pass that along.
Edited to add, these elephant-killer points were quite large and in the case of Clovis are thought to have been used on a spear with a detachable head, and cast with an atlatl. Ouch!!
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 04/24/2004 02:58:09 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2004 : 09:58:12 [Permalink]
|
A note to creation88:
When discussing particulars of science that are not generally accepted and present those ideas as fact, it is incumbent upon you to provide sources. In science, evidence rules. You do not get to say dating methods do not work unless you can demonstrate, or lead us to a source that has demonstrated that methods of dating do not work. Speculation on the part of creationists on why a particular method or accepted science might be bogus means nothing. Unless there was good science involved supporting the assertion that dating methods don't work, all you have is an unsupported claim.
Now you might say that scientists have a bias on the matter of evolution. That it is just one bias vs. another, and that evolution and creationism are equal in that way. Wrong! It really doesn't matter what a scientist thinks unless there is support for his claims. Just because a scientist believes something, a hypothesis, doesn't mean he can make a statement of fact about his belief. He must subject his hypothesis to the rigors of science. There are rules (the scientific method) that are there to separate the wheat from the chaff. Creationists sidestep even the most basic of those rules. That is, they have formed a conclusion before they have done the science. Therefor, any accepted science that is in conflict with the creationist conclusion must be wrong. And to that end they have set out to prove evolution a bad theory, not by doing the science necessary to do that, but by attacking evolution in books and debates. You know what? If a "creation scientists' ever had a smoking gun, anything at all that would cast real doubt on any area of support for evolution, they would publish for peer review. Lacking that, they publish in-house. You would think, after all the years they have been trying to knock evolution down, they would have come up with something if there was something to come up with. So what we are left with is their junk science, written for those who are ignorant of how science works. Some have even tried to redefine science. Kent Hovind says if you can't personally witness an event, it isn't science. In that way he blows all the supporting evidence for the event away. (Of course, he is a whack job. Even AIG has distanced itself from him.)
Creation88, that is why I keep asking you to support your claims. The very idea that a dinosaur skull has holes consistent with what might be found if the animal had been attacked by a hunting party does not remove the many problems with that idea. Again, speculation, not science. If dating methods are as bad as you say, ("ridiculous" was how you put it) support that claim. Otherwise you have nothing but a skull with interesting holes in it, and not a refutation of evolution. You have nothing.
If, like many creationists, you are satisfied with wild speculation masquerading as science, then all we have to talk about is how creationism is a great example of an extraordinary claim lacking in supporting evidence. One of many... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2004 : 12:59:51 [Permalink]
|
Dating, eh?
John Woodmorappe, AKA Jan Peczkis, of AiG fame, has a lot to say about radiometric dating.
quote:
The use of radiometric dating in geology involves a very selective acceptance of data. Most discrepant dates are not published. This selective reporting may account for consistencies in the data; internal consistencies, mineral-pair concordances, and agreements between differing dating methods may be illusory.
Woodmorappe, John, 1979. Radiometric dating reappraised. Creation Research Society Quarterly 16 (Sept.)
For a lot more, do a Google on Woodmorappe. He's mind-boggling.
And from Hank Morris of the ICR:
quote:
Radiometric dating assumes radioisotope decay rates are constant, but this assumption is not supported. All processes in nature vary according to different factors, and we should not expect radioactivity to be different.
Source:
Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Arkansas: Master Books, p. 139.
These are old quotes, but neither of the quotees have backed off on their claims even though they have been refuted, every mumblin' word, ad nauseum. Here's one at Morris:
quote:
The constancy of radioactive decay is not an assumption, but is supported by evidence.
· The radioactive decay rates of nucleotides used in radiometric dating have not been observed to vary since their rates were directly measurable, at least within limits of accuracy. This is despite experiments which attempt to change decay rates [Emery 1972]. Extreme pressure can cause electron capture decay rates to increase slightly (less than 0.2%), but the change is small enough that it has no detectable effect on dates.
· Supernovae produce a large, and calculable, quantity of radioactive isotopes [Nomoto et al. 1997; Theilemann et al. 1998]. The decay of these isotopes produces a fading rate and characteristic gamma ray frequencies which are predictable if decay rates are constant. Both of these have been observed for SN1987A, which is 169,000 light years away [Knudlseder 1998]. Therefore, radioactive decay rates were not significantly different 169,000 years ago. Furthermore, the fading rate and gamma rays have been observed for supernova SN1991T, which is 60 million light years away [Prantzos 1999]. The fading rate is also consistent with observations of supernovae billions of light years away [Perlmutter et al. 1997].
· The Oklo reactor was the site of a natural nuclear reaction 1800 million years ago. The fine structure constant affects neutron capture rates, which can be measured from the reactor's products. These measurements show no detectable change in the fine structure constant and neutron capture for almost 2 billion years. [Shlyakhter 1976; Fujii et al. 2000].
Radioactive decay at a rate fast enough to permit a young earth would have noticeable consequences. Namely, the extra radiation would have produced enough heat to melt the earth. [Meert 1996]
Different radioisotopes decay in different ways. It is unlikely that a variable rate would affect all the different mechanisms in the same way and to the same extent. Yet different radiometric dating techniques give consistent dates. Furthermore, radiometric dating techniques are consistent with other dating techniques such as dendrochronology, ice core dating, and historical records [e.g. Renne et al. 1997].
The half-lives of radioisotopes can be predicted from first principles through quantum mechanics. Not only does QM predict decay |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2004 : 22:49:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
The Flintstons is a cartoon...
Not so!!! I saw it on TV. Fred Flintstone was a real person. And he had an uncanny resemblance to John Goodman.
Haven't seen that show but do know about it. Love Miss Taylor too.
But seriously, what about 'The Lost World'? Not only did dinosaurs live with Man but according to Doyle they even existed as late as the 20th century. There have been many movies made about that very book.
So as Mab says, it's on film, it must be true.
Come on guys, don't be so nasty to the Creationists.
|
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 04/25/2004 : 09:20:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Woody D
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
The Flintstons is a cartoon...
Not so!!! I saw it on TV. Fred Flintstone was a real person. And he had an uncanny resemblance to John Goodman.
Haven't seen that show but do know about it. Love Miss Taylor too.
But seriously, what about 'The Lost World'? Not only did dinosaurs live with Man but according to Doyle they even existed as late as the 20th century. There have been many movies made about that very book.
So as Mab says, it's on film, it must be true.
Come on guys, don't be so nasty to the Creationists.
The Lost World has long been a favorite of mine since I first read it as a kid. Marvelous piece of fiction!
One thing that must be remembered about Doyle: he was another of the 'spiritualists', for lack of a better word. He was easily duped by the Cottingsly Fairies photos and was into a lot of other, supernatural stuff. I dunno, perhaps this is what made him such a great author.
Insisting on independant, supporting evidences for outrageous Creationist claims is not at all being nasty. I am only nasty to those Creationists who are nasty to me. Like 'Socratise', AKA Dr. Jon Sarfati of AiG, at TheologyWeb, fer 'xample. Sure wish I could get him in here and out from under the protection of TWeb's moderators.
It's been quite a while since we've had a really obnoxious Creationist here in our happy, little hive. For some reason, those don't last long, can't think why . Our current crop are of the good sort, and I hope they'll stay with us, whether they begin to accept science or not.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 04/25/2004 : 13:03:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
The Lost World has long been a favorite of mine since I first read it as a kid. Marvelous piece of fiction!
Filthy, isn't it funny how we seem to keep having so much in common. Although I've never read the book, just seen the movies.
quote:
One thing that must be remembered about Doyle: he was another of the 'spiritualists', for lack of a better word.
Would have to check Doyles' biography but I think it was in his later life that he.....at least talked about his spirtualism.
Isn't it strange...ironic, that one who wrote so logicly and dry (about evidence), could be so gullable with something that couldn't be proved.
(well, maybe because we have technical equipment...cameras, sound, labs, etc. that's so much more advanced today we 'see' that things can be manipulated, it's easier for us to know how it's done. But still he should have been more skeptical.)
Which kind of brings us back to the point of this folder, that we should observe (study the evidence) before we believe. |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 04/25/2004 : 20:54:40 [Permalink]
|
Woody wrote:quote:
Would have to check Doyles' biography but I think it was in his later life that he.....at least talked about his spirtualism.
Oh, he did much more than talk. From an online biography,...When his son Kingsley died from wounds incurred in World War I, the author dedicated himself in spiritualistic studies. An example of these is THE COMING OF FAIRIES (1922). But he had already showed interest in occult fantasy before publishing Holmes stories. In his early novel, THE MYSTERY OF CLOOMBER (1888), a retired general finds himself under assault by Indian magic.
Doyle supported the existence of "little people" and spent more than a million dollars on their cause. The so-called "fairy photographs" caused an international sensation when Doyle published a favorable account of them in 1920. The photographs showed fairies dancing in the air. A year after, the Star newspaper reported that the faries were from a poster. Doyle became president of several important spiritualist organizations. In 1925 he opened the Psychic Bookshop in London. Among his friends was the legendary American magician and escape artist Harry Houdini (1874-1926). He believed that Houdini possessed supernatural powers, which the magician himself denied... And from James Randi,In the early part of this century, Arthur Conan Doyle endorsed these photos as genuine evidence of fairy folk... What was he thinking? Conan Doyle's first letter to the girls was in 1920, about 10 years before his death, but it seems pretty clear that he'd believed in this sort of thing for years before that. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 04/25/2004 : 23:34:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Oh, he did much more than talk.
By 'talk', I meant, come out publicly and make others awear of his thoughts, either in writings or speaking.
But think you for posting.
nlm |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
