Did Giant Comet Help Hobbits Reach Flores?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by common_sense_seeker, Sep 16, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,644
    OilIsMastery is hereby officially warned that posting deliberate distortions of this kind again will result in a ban from sciforums.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Nice job Trippy. I am rapidly losing the will to fight OIMs inanity. I find tossing the occasional ad hominem at him is sufficient to ease my conscience.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. common_sense_seeker Bicho Voador & Bicho Sugador Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,623
    How long ago was this? Not 40,000 years ago.

    The link gives a review of very scientific and robust evidence to support the idea of Australian Aborigines arriving around 40,000 years ago to the American continent. This part I agree with. The article author then continues to give a minor piece of circumstancial evidence to support the notion of the use of ocean-going watercraft to facilitate the arrival. This part I don't agree with.

    I should have said "flexure of the lithosphere". BTW I have decided that the Geomagnetic Reversal idea in the other thread is bullsh*t.

    Such as?

    The article is a joke, being unbelievable unscientific. It's just a lot of words. Where are the photographs of the rock art which shows the use of ocean going boats 40,000 years ago?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    Trippy, thank you for posting these paleomaps of the Early Cretaceous from Northern Arizona University which prove plate tectonics is logically absurd and contradicts the theory of evolution.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    As you can see from the maps you have provided from Northern Arizona University, it's impossible for marsupials to have evolved in Northern China in the early Cretaceous and then magically and miraculously teleport to South America.

    "Biogeographic arguments for a closed Pacific (just like biogeographic arguments for a closed Atlantic and closed Indian) are based on evolutionary theory. Specifically, according to the theory of evolution, you can't have a host of closely-related, poor dispersing taxa suddenly appearing on opposite sides of an ocean -- when it is highly improbable for any of the ancestral taxa to cross oceans. So according to the referenced paper above, unless plate tectonic theorists want to rely on divine intervention, a slew of creation stories or a myriad of impossible trans-oceanic crossings of terrestrial taxa, their paleomaps are wrong. Panthalassa could not have existed between all of the hundred plus referenced taxa, which is to say, it didn't exist." -- Dennis D. McCarthy, geoscientist, October 2003

    What caused Pangea to break apart? Plate tectonics has no mechanism for the breakup of Pangea. More importantly, plate tectonics contradicts the fossil and evolutionary evidence for the migration route of marsupial fauna.

    Not according to the maps you have provided.

    Exactly: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3311911.stm

    Read it and weep...:bawl:

    You are lying again. See above.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2008
  8. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    They prove no such thing, only that you're lazy, ignorant, or a habitual liar.

    No they don't. They prove that these continents were seperated by, at most, narrow, shallow seas, therefore not impossible.

    That's funny, because there's also biogeographical arguments for continental drift.


    This is simple ignorance on your part, and a misrepresentation of the facts. The simple truth is that Plate tectonics does have a mechanism for the breakup of Pangea.

    Plate Tectonics (as it currently stands) posits that mantle convective cells, and plumes are mobile, rather than fixed, they can start and stop. It also posits that when you have a supercontinent, for example Pangea, the number of active spreading centers is at a minimum. Not only that, but because Continental crust is thicker, and less dense than Oceanic crust, has a lower temperature gradient, and is a better thermal insulator than oceanic crust, and so a super contintent provides more effective insulation to the mantle than a series of many small continents, so, heat builds up under the super continent, until it reaches a point sufficient to initiate rafting within if (again).

    No, again, you're lying, because part of Alfred Wegeners original evidence for plate tectonics included biogeographical evidence.

    Yes, according to the maps I provided.

    Aaah No. How does no sound. Is no Good for you?

    All you've done, is prove, yet again, that your grasp of the english language is questionable. Most people would, or should have questioned the use of the word China in that sentence, especially in regard to the context of the previous paragraph in which I discussed the lack of marsupials in India which at this time is seperated from the rest of pangea by deep ocean.

    This was a simple error on my part, that sentence was supposed to be a succint summary of the previous paragraph, as should have been readily apparent from it's context. I apologize for any confusion this may have caused you, and have corrected the error.

    So you're saying that rather than being a liar you're ignorant, and lazy, and don't bother doing even basic fact checking that was as simple as opening two wiki pages?
     
  9. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    Are you looking at the NAU maps? China and South America are seperated by a vast ocean.

    Trippy: How did marsupials get to South America from China? Witchcraft?

    Please provide either a logical response or else a scientific reference.
     
  10. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    :roflmao:
    You're lying about what i've said.

    I stated that currently it's believed they evolved in North America (not China).

    Your argument is a straw man one.

    You're arguing that i'm suggesting that the migration must have been across tethys or the paleo pacific, when, as shown above, this is a blatant misrepresentation of what I actually stated.

    Namely that Marsupials are believed to have evolved in North America.
    North America is seperated from Europe by a shallow, narrow sea (or land bridge).
    Europe is seperated from asia by a narro shallow sea (or Land bridge).
    North America is seperated from South america by a narrow shallow sea (or land bridge).
    South America is seperated from Antartica by a narrow shallow sea (or a land bridge).

    Europe, North America, South America, China, and Australia are all places we have found fossils of Marsupials.

    I don't imagine that there has been much in the way of fossil anything found in antartica because with it's current climate it doesn't exactly lend itself to that sort of expedition.

    So, to recap, you're lying about what i've said, and what the scientific literature claims.

    You're claiming that because the palopacific and Tethys exist, there can not have been any migration, while completely ignoring three simple facts.

    One of the maps I posted clearly shows a series of island chains between what is now Southeast Asia, and Australia.
    On all of the maps that I have posted, all of the continents where we have found fossil marsupials were, in the cretacous linked by a series of narrow, shallow seas.
    The scientific literature holds that Marsupials evolved in North America, not China.
     
  11. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    Believed by whom? By you? Why do you believe that marsupials evolved in North America when the fossil evidence demonstrates they evolved in China 125 mya?

    Rincon, P., Oldest Marsupial Ancestor Found, BBC, Dec 2003

    Pickrell, J., Oldest Marsupial Fossil Found in China, National Geographic, Dec 2003

    There is only one marsupial living in North America and it migrated from South America.
     
  12. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Ugh, again, your distorting what i've said.

    We have found a fossil in china that's 125 million years old. That alone doesn't prove they evolved there, it may simply prove that Marsupials evolved earlier than currently believed.

    And no, not believed by me, as you would know if you had actually bothered doing any fact checking for yourself before you started making these unsubstantiated claims.
     
  13. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    If you don't believe marsupials evolved in North America then why are you using it as your argument?

    What is the mechanism that allowed marsupials to travel across the Pacific Ocean?
     
  14. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Your distorting my argument, and lying about what i've said.

    I've already addressed this point.

    Be honest, or go away.
     
  15. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    :roflmao:

    You can't answer any simple questions and the cause is obvious.

    Plate tectonics is absurd unless you think marsupials magically and miraculously evolved in North America and then via divine intervention or witchcraft teleported across the Pacific Ocean to China and Australia in spite of all geological and fossil evidence.

    Here's another dose of reality for you to ignore:

    Harrison, L., The Migration Route of the Australian Marsupial Fauna, Australian Zoologist, Volume 3, Pages 247-263, 1924
     
  16. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Lies, Damned Lies and OIM posts.
     
  17. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    So which is it? Divine intervention or witchcraft?
     
  18. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Either you're a liar or an idiot.

    I frame no Hypothesis, because no hypothesis is neccessary.

    My Hypothesis, seeing as how you insist on either lying about what i've said, or are too stupid to figure it out for yourself, is that, to my knowledge, the migration didn't take place via the pacific ocean, but either through the continental land masses that made up the western margin of the Tethys sea, or through the island chains that formed the eastern margin of the tethys sea (or by both routes).
     
  19. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    Allow me to increase your knowledge.

    McCarthy, D.D., The Transpacific Zipper Effect: Disjunct Sister Taxa and Matching Geological Outlines That Link the Pacific Margins, Journal of Biogeography, Volume 30, Issue 10, Pages 1545-1561, 2003

    McCarthy, D.D., Biogeographical and Geological Evidence for a Smaller, Completely-Enclosed Pacific Basin in the Late Cretaceous, Journal of Biogeography, Volume 32, Issue 12, Pages 2161 - 2177, 2005

    McCarthy, D.D., Biogeography and Scientific Revolutions, The Systematist, Number 25, Pages 3-12, 2005

    What continental land masses would those be? Please provide scientific references to support your religious claims.

    What island chains connected China with South America? Please provide scientific references to support your religious claims.
     
  20. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    The only person here making religous claims is you.

    The land masses I would be referring to are the ones indicated by this map:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Which was included as part of this post:

    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2106801&postcount=100

    Which successfully demonstrated that you are a liar.
     
  21. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    The NAU maps you have provided show no land bridges or island chains linking Northern China and South America in the Early Cretaceous.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Again, please provide scientific references for your religious claims.
     
  22. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Again. You're being dishonest, about both the NAU maps, and about my posts.

    At no poiint have I claimed that there were land bridges of Island chains linking south america and china.

    What I did say, was that there is an island chain between South east asia and Australia, along the eastern margin of the Tethys sea, this is quite clearly indicated both in your map, and in the map I have already provided.

    I also stated that:

    Australia is connected to Antartica
    Antartica is connected to South America by either a narrow, shallow sea, or a land bridge.
    South America is connected to North America by either a narrow shallow sea, or a land bridge.
    North America is conencted to Europe by either a narrow shallow sea, or a land bridge.
    Europe is connected to Northern China by either a narrow shallow sea, or a land bridge.

    My proposed route would then be:
    China -> Europe -> Nth America -> Sth America ->Antarctica ->Australia
    Or:
    China -> Sth East Asia -> Island Chain -> Australia.

    So, i'm suggesting that the migration could have happened along the eastern, or western edges of the Thethys ocean.

    You on the other hand are being blatantly deceitful and dishonest and misrepresenting my statements.
     
  23. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    Great. So I guess we're all happy then.

    What island chain? The invisible one?

    How did marsupials migrate from China to Europe without leaving any fossil evidence? How did marsupials migrate from Europe to North America without leaving any fossil evidence?

    Please provide scientific references for your ad hoc religious claims.

    Once again totally ignoring South America...:roflmao:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page