|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 06/21/2007 : 23:28:02 [Permalink]
|
http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/40/4/687
Scroll down to ARCHAEOPTERYX.
.jpeg of the SEM.
| Details of the primary feathers of the Berlin specimen of Archaeopteryx. A. section of the counterslab showing asymmetry, rachis, and barbs. B. scanning electron microscope photograph showing a rachis, barbs, and barbules |
Now, retract your imbecilic claim that the Archaeopteryx fossil does not show clear evidence of feather. As if your eyes, those of a person who doesn't even know what "cladistics" is, are in any way able to credibly evaluate a fossil.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2007 : 23:32:24 [Permalink]
|
Nice pictures Dude. Unfortunately, and probably for the sake of an argument, I doubt they will not turn on any lights for Jerome. He will just suggest that a scientist that seeks “glory” could have etched the feathers in the stone.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2007 : 23:52:10 [Permalink]
|
To bad you can't etch details capable of fooling an electron microscope. Tool marks would be obvious.
But yeah, I don't think Jerome will admit error here either.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2007 : 23:54:02 [Permalink]
|
I
Doubt that either
I
Or
The rest of you
Think it
Realistic that
Our friend here will ever truly
Look at (or understand, even if he did) any of the
Links we provide him.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 00:01:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
To bad you can't etch details capable of fooling an electron microscope. Tool marks would be obvious.
But yeah, I don't think Jerome will admit error here either.
|
The finer carving could have been done with UV lasers in a microchip lab, Dude.
 |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 00:05:07 [Permalink]
|
It would still be detectable.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 00:11:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
It would still be detectable.
|
Ah, but those who could detect such a fraud would all be scientists. Leaving the poor layman (and dumb-ass bastards in general) only the option of either accepting their priestly pronouncements, or being excommunicated.
"No evolution for you, heretic!"
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 06/22/2007 : 04:22:30 [Permalink]
|
Ok Jerome, at this link -- you make a point of opening them, yes? -- you will find a fish fossil. It shows a little of what it takes to prepare a fossil for study and/or exibition. Every bit of the matrix must be cleaned from each bone without damaging those bones. Now compared to feathers, these are pretty coarse, but the techniques are the same for each.
Here's another, this one a flying fish.
And another with no bones at all save a single spine.
And here is a single, fossil feather, species unknown, that was found here.
This feather was probably moulted and probably a body feather, rather than from a wing or tail. It is too symetrical to be the former and too wide to be the latter. It fell from the bird on to what would become it's matrix and was quickly and gently buried, to become this rather remarkable specimen.
Of the six complete fossils of Archaeoptryx, I chose the one I did because it quite clearly shows the impressions of the wings as well as the skeleton. It too, had a gentle burial as is obvious from the minimal contortion in the body and wings.
Now, I do not have a fossil of this animal ready to hand. I have done no studies of an actual specimen, nor indeed, even seen one. Therefore, I must rely upon others who do have the specimen, and have dedicated their lives to the study of paleontology, and have passed their conclusions on. This means that I must decide who's anynalisis best suits the situation. It's an easy decsion to make as AiG, et al., have nothing but blather & bullshit, and science accepts nothing that is not subjected to rigorus peer review.
D'you know what peer review is, Jerome? I'll tell you: it is a cut-throat examination of someone elses work by persons highly qualified in that particular field of research. All of the Archaeopteryx findings have been subjected to it numerous times, and might well be so again.
Do you really think that there is some sort of conspiracy among scientists? Really? I assure you that there is not. Research science is as competitive as a knife fight. The jobs these people hold depend upon their ability to publish accurately, and, as I believe you mentioned, there is only so much grant money to go around. "Publish or perish" is quite literal, and if one's research fails review on a too-regular basis, that scientist might find himself driving truck for his keep. Or hiring on with ICR, or some other six-day dog & pony show who will love him for his PhD alone, because they think that it will give them some badly-needed credability.
Really Jerome, whose word would you rely on?
Edit: How are you coming on that paper on feathers? It's due tomorrow, you know. You can just drop it off at my office, then go and enjoy your weekend.
|
"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 06/22/2007 05:10:25 |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 05:27:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I have faith(an assured expectation) that the sun will rise tomorrow.
|
Funny, I don't have faith that the sun will rise. Why do you use that word?
I do know that the earth rotates on it's axis, and that by this rotation the position I am on the earth will bring the sun into view, thus lighting the surface and bringing about what we humans call a "new day." The only way for this not to happen would be:
a) the earth stops rotating
b) the sun explodes
c) jesus comes back
And all of these have a current probability pretty much close to zero, with a) and b) probability becoming 100% in the very distant future. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 06/22/2007 05:31:44 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 08:25:42 [Permalink]
|
Jerome:
Its O.K. to have faith. |
One synonym for faith is confidence. I will admit that science has earned my confidence in many ways, unlike the religious faith has. Science, for one, is not a dogma, much as you would like to portray it that way, Jerome, because science resides in a realm that is falsifiable and all of its conclusions are tentative.
Unlike you Jerome I can't know everything. So I must sometimes rely on experts in a given field. The sci method and peer review has shown itself to be astonishingly reliable. I see it as the best game in town for describing how nature works. Nothing else comes close.
Does science get everything right all of the time? No. But at least it has built in self-correction as part of the process. Comparing confidence in science to the dogma implied in a religious kind of faith is both wrong and silly.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 09:20:55 [Permalink]
|
Dude said "those of a person who doesn't even know what "cladistics" is, are in any way able to credibly evaluate a fossil."
For the record, I said I did not know the word. I did and do understand the concept.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 09:27:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by pleco
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
I have faith(an assured expectation) that the sun will rise tomorrow.
|
Funny, I don't have faith that the sun will rise. Why do you use that word?
I do know that the earth rotates on it's axis, and that by this rotation the position I am on the earth will bring the sun into view, thus lighting the surface and bringing about what we humans call a "new day." The only way for this not to happen would be:
a) the earth stops rotating
b) the sun explodes
c) jesus comes back
And all of these have a current probability pretty much close to zero, with a) and b) probability becoming 100% in the very distant future.
|
I also had faith(assured expectation based on past experience) that someone would point out that the sun does not "rise". Thanks for realizing that faith.
 |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 09:44:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/40/4/687
Scroll down to ARCHAEOPTERYX.
.jpeg of the SEM.
| Details of the primary feathers of the Berlin specimen of Archaeopteryx. A. section of the counterslab showing asymmetry, rachis, and barbs. B. scanning electron microscope photograph showing a rachis, barbs, and barbules |
Now, retract your imbecilic claim that the Archaeopteryx fossil does not show clear evidence of feather. As if your eyes, those of a person who doesn't even know what "cladistics" is, are in any way able to credibly evaluate a fossil.
|
SYNOPSIS
"Examples of feathered dinosaurs result from erroneous identification of internal structures as part of the skin covering, and from the confusion of flightless birds from the Early Cretaceous of China with dinosaurs."
"One of us (Martin) was shown this specimen as an example of cross-sections of feather quills, but that interpretation is unlikely to be correct."
"An imbricating pattern of tuberculated scales does not provide a likely starting point for the complex musculature associated with feathers (see Homberger, 2000), and we should search for other fossil models."
"There are several isolated feathers and a remarkable clump of tail feathers preserved with the skeleton of Protarchaeopteryx. Unfortunately, none of these are directly associated with the skeleton."
I will continue to review the words and give comment. So far the science is on my side.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 09:50:58 [Permalink]
|
"The fossil record of feathers presently yields no evidence on the origin of feathers that cannot be better obtained from living birds. The known dinosaur integument provides a poor model for a feather progenitor. The so-called feathered dinosaurs, Protarchaeopteryx and Caudipteryx are flightless birds."
Once again this is on my side of the argument.
"The oldest known feathers are modern even to the level of microscopic detail, and all the basic features of feathers must have been in place before a basic dichotomy into Sauriurae and the Ornithurae occured."
Seems the need for a transitioning feather has not been met. This was not even my initial point.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 06/22/2007 : 10:04:20 [Permalink]
|
Filthy, your links the fossilmuseum.net are not opening.
It sure took a lot of argument to present the evidence that the cartoon cutout wings are indeed feathers. Thanks for the information.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Xing Xu, Big Bird and the Six Day Shuffle
