http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061201/sc_nm/dinosaurs_impact_dc
guess what its been confrimed as a fact l0l not a theory
2006-11-30 16:38:36 · 20 answers · asked by Red Eye 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
65 million years ago :D
2006-11-30 16:39:40 · update #1
teh bible says 6000 the facts say 65 million or more LOL what say you now
2006-11-30 16:43:50 · update #2
I saw a show about this on the science channel.
A woman found sediment from an impact then about 10 feet of different types of sediment before coming to a second impact layer.
Some of the layers were limestone which takes alot of time to develop and some layers had fossils and worm tracks going across them.
The scientist that hold on to the single impact theory were saying all that could have happened in hours instead of thousands of years as she was saying, I don't see how myself.
She showed using evidence that there was a big space between two different strikes and the scientist that doesn't want to let go of the old theory of one strike just said she was wrong without using any evidence to back it up.
2006-11-30 16:50:58 · answer #1 · answered by Sean 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it were fact, not theory, then all scientists and researchers would be on board. For example, no one questions the "Law of Gravity". Because it is true all the time. But let's examine all of the article you've refered us too.
Toward the end of the article you get a different point of view from Princeton University.
"But a group of researchers led by Princeton University's Gerta Keller has advanced a competing theory that the impact that created the Chicxulub crater actually predated the end of the dinosaurs by 300,000 years and did not cause the mass extinction.
...
Keller said MacLeod's research does not settle the matter.
"Unfortunately, these claims are rather hyper-inflated and do not withstand close examination," Keller said by e-mail. "
It is my understanding that this "Keller" guy probably knows as much as the research group trying to push their on "Theory", because that's what it is, a theory.
Also, how did they date it at 65 million years? Radiometric dating? Geological Column? I'm not sure the artical stated how. Anyway, did they also check the rocks for carbon 14? Carbon 14 is only detectable for a maximum of about 60,000 - 100,000 years. Many rocks that are dated in the millions of years old still have significant amounts of carbon 14. This is simply impossible to explain in scientific circles. So, typically the researcher will only give the radiometric dates that support the story they are trying to tell, and leave the other information silent.
2006-12-01 00:48:52 · answer #2 · answered by SearchForTruth 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I'm not saying that scientists are wrong in all things but in this link which you say there is scientific proof of the theory being fact, ok so where is this proclaimed proof, another theory does not prove the first theory LOL is right nothing there shows the theory being a fact, or a confirmed fact, sorry to burst your bubble but I cannot find any proof whatsoever that makes your proclamation, of theory being confirmed fact at all, all I saw there is more theories of how scientists believe this or that since when is that a proven fact if I told you my beliefs would you take that as fact? well then excuse me, but, I require reall evidence as fact, if I am to believe it as truth not someones belief! be it scientists or anyone else! as for the 65 million years well how can a man come up with the exact time of say the 65million years ago and yet that man has not been alive that long ago are you not trying to get me to accept blind faith in what some man or woman say is their belief, how can I really trust that their belief could possibly be right?ok so you may believe it to but is the reality more important to you , well obviously not, but to me it is. can you tell me the size of the universe and where it begins and ends with accuracy? I doubt thatFor that answer too I guess you would believe the estimate of scientists who are but mere men that when they can't fathom something that happens just makeup a number never mind a million or ten! Yes they could be right about some things the may have estimated right I don't know but Not everything they believe is really factual , so,yes,about some things they are wrong and yet some things they may be right too. Mere men can only wourk out some things, there are manythings that they still haven't worked out yet and it baffles them, one of those things is the reason as to why we grow old and die. I know what that reason is and I'm no scientist, I know the answer through reading the Bible, that answer and many otheranswers are there for our instruction!
2006-12-01 02:41:31 · answer #3 · answered by I speak Truth 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did you read the whole article
--Keller said MacLeod's research does not settle the matter.
"Unfortunately, these claims are rather hyper-inflated and do not withstand close examination," Keller said by e-mail--
Apparently the scientist don't agree. Not that I particularly care how old the earth is, but the article you posted as fact is actually showing that scientist still can't even agree on what ended the dinosaurs!
2006-12-01 00:44:58 · answer #4 · answered by RYAN P C 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Ummm....not to ruffle feathers but did you happen to read the last two sentences of this "scientific proof?" Here, I copied and pasted them here for you:
Keller said MacLeod's research does not settle the matter.
"Unfortunately, these claims are rather hyper-inflated and do not withstand close examination," Keller said by e-mail.
The scientists themselves cannot even agree on this even and you want to offer it as fact? Sorry, I'm not that gullible.
2006-12-01 00:45:37 · answer #5 · answered by Pamela 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You really need to start being a bit cautious about that fact word. Since the general metaphysical state of reality suggests that each person defines reality within their own mind nothing can ever be proven to a full 100%. NOTHING. Lots of things get really close but nothing will ever quite make it. Think of it like absolute zero.
2006-12-01 00:41:03 · answer #6 · answered by Lion_Heart 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
So is this the Atheist version of the Bible? Science articles and books? I am not sure of what to make of it since it seems your scientist don't agree just about the same as Muslims, Buddhist, Christians, and Hindus.... I'll stick with God and what I feel in my heart and spirit. God Bless....
2006-12-01 01:05:31 · answer #7 · answered by Alicia S 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Red Eye, it's not IMPORTANT to know for a certainty how old the earth is...you're focusing on the wrong thing! What's important to know is that you have an eternal soul that is sinful, and you must decide ....are you going to come to Jesus, fully trusting that your sins were paid for by His death, burial and resurrection and repent of those sins, or do you want to spend eternity paying for them yourself? WHO cares how old this earth is? It makes NO eternal difference to your immortal soul! But your CHOICE does. Choose wisely!
2006-12-01 00:54:12 · answer #8 · answered by lookn2cjc 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
yep i can go with that still don't give me an explanation as to why man under went rapid evolutionary and processes and for some reason has now stopped or if anything is going through a deevolutionary process with all the weakness and disease we have spread through our race
2006-12-01 00:44:58 · answer #9 · answered by harro_06 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nice one. But I doubt those who believe in the Bible will change. They seem intent on staying ignorant to these facts.
2006-12-01 00:59:02 · answer #10 · answered by T Delfino 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋