Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (139)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • si una vez estudiabamos la patela, resulta que antiguamente la gente "los medicos " la " cienca" pensaba que era rudimentario proque no sabia para que servia, (hay muchos otros huesos como este) resulta que aumenta la eficacia mecanica del cuadriceps. y es indispensable para el normal recorrido de la tibia sobre el femur. de otra forma tendriamos un movimiento como articulacion de "muñeco de plastico" en fases de ,como de 90 angulos.

  • gracias por traducirlo muchas gracias me gustaira escuchar mas de venon fang porque habla muy rapido y no le entienndo todo.

  • They did not find dinosaur 'red blood cells' Watch...

    watch?v=fgpSrUWQplE

  • @gregrutz >>They did not find dinosaur 'red blood cells' Watch... watch?v=fgpSrUWQplE

    --Wrong way to debunk something, don't debunk arguments with words. Do it with evidence. They were talking about soft tissue, not about blood cells. Soft tissues is not a common issue in fossils "that old". So that discovery is truly remarkable.

  • ''Evolutionist assume with time thing get better.''

    What happened to you from age 2 to 12. Did you violate the 2nd Law of Thermodynamic or did you do what life does best > 'grow'. It's life people, it does stuff all by itself. It changes and evolves.

  • @gregrutz >>It's life people, it does stuff all by itself. It changes and evolves.

    --It evolves and adapt, but is LIMITED. Changes and adaptations are ALWAYS limited within the same kind of animal.

  • World wide flood! That's the way to preserve the fossils rapidly

    Why aren't the fossils all mixed up?

    Water does not preserve fossils. Not all fossils are buried in mud.

    What is the name of the flood mud layer with all the dead bodies in it?

  • @gregrutz >>Why aren't the fossils all mixed up?

    --As I stated before, depending on its habitat, skills, weight, density, etc. But again, there is not such thing as geologic column but only in textbooks.

    >>Water does not preserve fossils. Not all fossils are buried in mud.

    --There are different ways of fossilization. Fossils form under the right condition in order to become one.

    >>What is the name of the flood mud layer with all the dead bodies in it?

    --???

  • @HushAndLearn Go to the Grand Canyon and look at all the rock layers, there are 44 distinct layers. This is a GEOLOGIC COLUMN for this area of the world The rocks are dated with the oldest ones on the bottom. Is this too hard for you? Do you understand? Questions so far?

    The chart in the text books is a TIME SCALE showing all the time periods that may or may not be present in a geologic location.  The 'layers' in the text book are equal to how long the period lasted, not rock layers.

  • @gregrutz >>This is a GEOLOGIC COLUMN for this area of the world The rocks are dated with the oldest ones on the bottom. Is this too hard for you?

    --Because of the fossils they found, and then they date the fossils by the layer. Come on now! Open your eyes for the sake of logic and reasoning!

    >>Do you understand? Questions so far?

    --That's not even a question. If you can't differ what even a question is, then I don't think you can't understand evolution.

  • @gregrutz >>The chart in the text books is a TIME SCALE showing all the time periods that may or may not be present in a geologic location

    --There are a number of locations on the earth where all ten periods of the Phanerozoic geologic column have been assigned. However, this does not mean that the geological column is real because those locations where it has been possible to assign all ten periods represent less than 0.4% of the earth’s surface, or 1% if the ocean basins are excluded. ETC...

  • @HushAndLearn No one is saying there should be a complete Geologic Column anywhere, dummy. Erosion washed most of it away. Finding just 0,4% is enough proof anyway. Read a Geology book, I am tired of arguing science with ID-iots who have never read a science book,'

  • @gregrutz >>No one is saying there should be a complete Geologic Column anywhere, dummy

    --Then don't assume is reliable

    >>Finding just 0,4% is enough proof anyway

    --Actually not, because even where the ten periods assigned, the way in which they were assigned can be quite subjective. It is a well known fact, for example, that many unfossiliferous Permian rocks are ‘dated’ as such solely because they happen to be sandwiched between faunally-dated Carboniferous and faunally-dated Triassic rocks

  • @HushAndLearn No one claims there should be all the rocks every laid down all in one place. The geologic column is only in the text books remember. It does not happen in nature, there is always some erosion, unconformities.

  • @gregrutz >>No one claims there should be all the rocks every laid down all in one place

    --Therefore it shouldn't be use as reliable evidence. It is hypothetical

    >>The geologic column is only in the text books remember. It does not happen in nature, there is always some erosion, unconformities.

    --Of course, but the the strata on either side of the unconformity are perfectly parallel and show no evidence of erosion. Those thin strata layer formation can only happened by a flood all in all

  • @gregrutz >>Read a Geology book, I am tired of arguing science with ID-iots who have never read a science book

    --Don't give me cartoons, give me evidence. Evidence is what matter here, not drawings ^^

  • @HushAndLearn In case you didn't notice [since you have never looked at the fossil record] the fossils are not sorted by weight density etc. They are sorted trilobites bottom, dinosarus middle and birds and mammals in the top layers only.

    This is what we are trying to explain, the fossil record. Most species are extinct ! 99% of the life is not here any more. No sabertooth tigers, no strange Cambrian creatures.

    Fossils need to be buried quickly therefore there was a flood is not logical

  • @gregrutz >>the fossils are not sorted by weight density etc. They are sorted trilobites bottom, dinosarus middle and birds and mammals in the top layers only

    --Did I miss to mention the habitat part?

    >>Most species are extinct ! 99% of the life is not here any more

    --Because the weather is different. Fossils were huge more capable to live longer as the Bible explain and giants (Nephilim) are mentioned there.

  • @HushAndLearn ''the Bible explain and giants (Nephilim) are mentioned there''

    Great, where can I go to see one of these Giants. Where is your evidence located? Where is your proof?

  • @gregrutz >>Great, where can I go to see one of these Giants. Where is your evidence located? Where is your proof?

    --Dinosaurs as present living insects were giants back then, clearly indication of different weather condition. So the proof is in the museums.

  • @gregrutz >>Fossils need to be buried quickly therefore there was a flood is not logical

    --Well, then is the only answer. There is no other way to preserve fossils as polystrate fossils are.

  • They know the brightness of some stars types and can tell how far away it is by it's brightness. Read a Astronomy book and stop getting you science from a science teacher who doen't understand it.

  • @gregrutz >>Read a Astronomy book and stop getting u science from a science teacher who doen't understand it.

    --I read science, but I always question the way they get their data, they are humans & science always change. I don't know u but I always question things impartially.

    I am not against the stars being billion years ago, the Bible clearly states that God created them for signs, months & years. So the light must be already render in the planet & not for Adam and Eve to wait million years

  • Read a History book. By 6000 BC Egyptians in the SW corner of Egypt were herding cattle and constructing large buildings. Subsistence in organized and permanent settlements in predynastic Egypt by the middle of the 6th millennium BC centered predominantly on cereal and animal agriculture. Metal objects replaced prior ones of stone. Tanning of animal skins, pottery and weaving are common. There are indications of seasonal occupation of the Al Fayyum in the 6th millennium BC.

  • @gregrutz >>Read a History book

    --I do, but you haven't for what I see you didn't read the article:

    pbs. org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/explore/­howold.html

    >>There are indications of seasonal occupation of the Al Fayyum in the 6th millennium BC.

    --You need to update. People have been excavating in Egypt for the last 200 years. No single artifact, no single inscription, or pottery, or anything has been found until now, in any place to predate the Egyptian civilization more than 5,000 years ago.

  • si una vez estudiabamos la patela, resulta que antiguamente la gente "los medicos " la " cienca" pensaba que era rudimentario proque no sabia para que servia, (hay muchos otros huesos como este) resulta que aumenta la eficacia mecanica del cuadriceps. y es indispensable para el normal recorrido de la tibia sobre el femur. de otra forma tendriamos un movimiento como articulacion de "muñeco de plastico" en fases de ,como de 90 angulos.

  • gracias por traducirlo muchas gracias me gustaira escuchar mas de venon fang porque habla muy rapido y no le entienndo todo.

  • They did not find dinosaur 'red blood cells' Watch...

    watch?v=fgpSrUWQplE

  • @gregrutz >>They did not find dinosaur 'red blood cells' Watch... watch?v=fgpSrUWQplE

    --Wrong way to debunk something, don't debunk arguments with words. Do it with evidence. They were talking about soft tissue, not about blood cells. Soft tissues is not a common issue in fossils "that old". So that discovery is truly remarkable.

  • ''Evolutionist assume with time thing get better.''

    What happened to you from age 2 to 12. Did you violate the 2nd Law of Thermodynamic or did you do what life does best > 'grow'. It's life people, it does stuff all by itself. It changes and evolves.

  • @gregrutz >>It's life people, it does stuff all by itself. It changes and evolves.

    --It evolves and adapt, but is LIMITED. Changes and adaptations are ALWAYS limited within the same kind of animal.

  • World wide flood! That's the way to preserve the fossils rapidly

    Why aren't the fossils all mixed up?

    Water does not preserve fossils. Not all fossils are buried in mud.

    What is the name of the flood mud layer with all the dead bodies in it?

  • @gregrutz >>Why aren't the fossils all mixed up?

    --As I stated before, depending on its habitat, skills, weight, density, etc. But again, there is not such thing as geologic column but only in textbooks.

    >>Water does not preserve fossils. Not all fossils are buried in mud.

    --There are different ways of fossilization. Fossils form under the right condition in order to become one.

    >>What is the name of the flood mud layer with all the dead bodies in it?

    --???

  • @HushAndLearn Go to the Grand Canyon and look at all the rock layers, there are 44 distinct layers. This is a GEOLOGIC COLUMN for this area of the world The rocks are dated with the oldest ones on the bottom. Is this too hard for you? Do you understand? Questions so far?

    The chart in the text books is a TIME SCALE showing all the time periods that may or may not be present in a geologic location. The 'layers' in the text book are equal to how long the period lasted, not rock layers.

  • @gregrutz >>This is a GEOLOGIC COLUMN for this area of the world The rocks are dated with the oldest ones on the bottom. Is this too hard for you?

    --Because of the fossils they found, and then they date the fossils by the layer. Come on now! Open your eyes for the sake of logic and reasoning!

    >>Do you understand? Questions so far?

    --That's not even a question. If you can't differ what even a question is, then I don't think you can't understand evolution.

  • @gregrutz >>The chart in the text books is a TIME SCALE showing all the time periods that may or may not be present in a geologic location

    --There are a number of locations on the earth where all ten periods of the Phanerozoic geologic column have been assigned. However, this does not mean that the geological column is real because those locations where it has been possible to assign all ten periods represent less than 0.4% of the earth’s surface, or 1% if the ocean basins are excluded. ETC...

  • @HushAndLearn No one is saying there should be a complete Geologic Column anywhere, dummy. Erosion washed most of it away. Finding just 0,4% is enough proof anyway. Read a Geology book, I am tired of arguing science with ID-iots who have never read a science book,'

  • @gregrutz >>No one is saying there should be a complete Geologic Column anywhere, dummy

    --Then don't assume is reliable

    >>Finding just 0,4% is enough proof anyway

    --Actually not, because even where the ten periods assigned, the way in which they were assigned can be quite subjective. It is a well known fact, for example, that many unfossiliferous Permian rocks are ‘dated’ as such solely because they happen to be sandwiched between faunally-dated Carboniferous and faunally-dated Triassic rocks

  • @HushAndLearn No one claims there should be all the rocks every laid down all in one place. The geologic column is only in the text books remember. It does not happen in nature, there is always some erosion, unconformities.

  • @gregrutz >>No one claims there should be all the rocks every laid down all in one place

    --Therefore it shouldn't be use as reliable evidence. It is hypothetical

    >>The geologic column is only in the text books remember. It does not happen in nature, there is always some erosion, unconformities.

    --Of course, but the the strata on either side of the unconformity are perfectly parallel and show no evidence of erosion. Those thin strata layer formation can only happened by a flood all in all

  • @gregrutz >>Read a Geology book, I am tired of arguing science with ID-iots who have never read a science book

    --Don't give me cartoons, give me evidence. Evidence is what matter here, not drawings ^^

  • @HushAndLearn In case you didn't notice [since you have never looked at the fossil record] the fossils are not sorted by weight density etc. They are sorted trilobites bottom, dinosarus middle and birds and mammals in the top layers only.

    This is what we are trying to explain, the fossil record. Most species are extinct ! 99% of the life is not here any more. No sabertooth tigers, no strange Cambrian creatures.

    Fossils need to be buried quickly therefore there was a flood is not logical

  • @gregrutz >>the fossils are not sorted by weight density etc. They are sorted trilobites bottom, dinosarus middle and birds and mammals in the top layers only

    --Did I miss to mention the habitat part?

    >>Most species are extinct ! 99% of the life is not here any more

    --Because the weather is different. Fossils were huge more capable to live longer as the Bible explain and giants (Nephilim) are mentioned there.

  • @HushAndLearn ''the Bible explain and giants (Nephilim) are mentioned there''

    Great,  where can I go to see one of these Giants. Where is your evidence located? Where is your proof?

  • @gregrutz >>Great, where can I go to see one of these Giants. Where is your evidence located? Where is your proof?

    --Dinosaurs as present living insects were giants back then, clearly indication of different weather condition. So the proof is in the museums.

  • @gregrutz >>Fossils need to be buried quickly therefore there was a flood is not logical

    --Well, then is the only answer. There is no other way to preserve fossils as polystrate fossils are.

    

  • They know the brightness of some stars types and can tell how far away it is by it's brightness. Read a Astronomy book and stop getting you science from a science teacher who doen't understand it.

  • @gregrutz >>Read a Astronomy book and stop getting u science from a science teacher who doen't understand it.

    --I read science, but I always question the way they get their data, they are humans & science always change. I don't know u but I always question things impartially.

    I am not against the stars being billion years ago, the Bible clearly states that God created them for signs, months & years. So the light must be already render in the planet & not for Adam and Eve to wait million years

  • Read a History book. By 6000 BC Egyptians in the SW corner of Egypt were herding cattle and constructing large buildings. Subsistence in organized and permanent settlements in predynastic Egypt by the middle of the 6th millennium BC centered predominantly on cereal and animal agriculture. Metal objects replaced prior ones of stone. Tanning of animal skins, pottery and weaving are common. There are indications of seasonal occupation of the Al Fayyum in the 6th millennium BC.

  • @gregrutz >>Read a History book

    --I do, but you haven't for what I see you didn't read the article:

    pbs. org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/explore/­howold.html

    >>There are indications of seasonal occupation of the Al Fayyum in the 6th millennium BC.

    --You need to update. People have been excavating in Egypt for the last 200 years. No single artifact, no single inscription, or pottery, or anything has been found until now, in any place to predate the Egyptian civilization more than 5,000 years ago.

  • How do you say, ''This liar is in Federal Prison'' in Spanish?

    El Gingo no dropa da soap.

  • @gregrutz -The same way you say "he never went for lying, but for telling the truth".

    He never deny nor reject not paying federal taxes. The problem is that this government wants more and more money to go and kill people in war, etc. etc. etc. And a lot of us don't agree with that and many other issues. But no wonder.

  • @HushAndLearn And the government has to spend more tax money on fraudsters like Kent to put him in prison. That makes Kent the problem, a waste of money.

  • @gregrutz -You must be kidding. At this point you can't tell if the there were more deaths and murders in 9/11 or in for looking Osama bin Laden. Kent work for that money and the IRS want just to steal our money from things we don't support as easy as that.

  • @HushAndLearn Fuck You, You Un American Bastard !

  • @gregrutz -Thanks, but is truth. There is no more blind person than the one who don't want to see the truth.

  • @HushAndLearn Blind person? The dinosaures ruled the earth for 160 Million years. Deal with the TRUTH.

    There are trees older than 4400 years old, Hovind is WRONG about a flood 4400 years ago. TRUTH.

  • @gregrutz >> The dinosaures ruled the earth for 160 Million years. Deal with the TRUTH.

    --Truth? If you would be able to empirically prove that as a truth, you wouldn't be here arguing it. Sorry, but I don't need personal opinions.

    >>There are trees older than 4400 years old

    --Sorry, but even Don Batten, Ph.D. (tree physiologist) say that trees can produce up to 5 rings a year (any wood in the process). Any minimum weather change can alter the rings, so dendrochronology is not accurate.

  • @HushAndLearn So dendrochronology is wrong. And Carbon 14 dating is wrong. And Radiometric dating is wrong. And Astrnomers are wrong about the age of the universe. And Geologist are wrong about the age of the earth. And historians are wrong about the Chinese and Egyptians. And fossils don't prove the earth is OLD. And all scientists are wrong.

    BUT KENT IS RIGHT ! PRAZE KENT ! LET'S PRAY TO KENT TO GET OUT OF PRISON.

    Open you eyes and learn.

  • @gregrutz >>So dendrochronology is wrong & Carbon 14 dating is wrong

    --Of course, because any wood in the process can give unidentifiable false rings

    >>Radiometric dating is wrong

    --If you get into a room and see a candle burning, you can measure how fast is burning. But you can't tell the original height, nor you can tell if the environment was linear

    >>Astrnomers are wrong about the age of the universe

    --Everybody with common sense will know that you can't measure stars with such distance

  • @HushAndLearn ''Everybody with common sense will know that you can't measure stars with such distance''

    Everyone with an education knows they can and do measure the distance to the stars. They use parallax to measure the close ones and stars with a know brightness to measure the ones far away.

    Try reading a science book some time.

  • @gregrutz >>They use parallax to measure the close ones and stars with a know brightness to measure the ones far away

    --If they would, they wouldn't wait 6 month until the planet get to the other side to make a triangle, with such long distance. That triangle would become virtually a line. Brightness can't tell you distances for heaven sake o.0

    >>Try reading a science book some time.

    --I do, but you just believe everything people say without questioning, that's call brainwash, lol ^-^

  • @HushAndLearn What would convince you that evolution is true?

    Nothing ?!?

    They who is the brainwashed one?

  • @gregrutz >>What would convince you that evolution is true? Nothing ?!? They who is the brainwashed one?

    --I do believe in evo, but depending what you mean for evo. I believe evo within its original taxonomy kingdom. I don't believe a kingdom can change at any generation into another taxonomy kingdom. Evolution with limits, e.x. species can adapt to certain level of heat, but no any kind of heat, so right there is a limited evolution such as the mule is a limited one for being infertile.

  • @HushAndLearn IF you understood evolution you would know why the mule is infertile. The horse and the donkey have evolved into different species, moving away from each other, that is why they can't interbreed any more.

    Evolution is one species spliting into 2 species. Creationists get it backwards, alway tryings to breed to modern animals and can't figure out why it does not work.

  • @gregrutz >>The horse and the donkey have evolved into different species, moving away from each other, that is why they can't interbreed any more

    --Yes, but they still part of the same taxonomy family. And no, they aren't moving apart. Is just a personal interpretation. They still the same family.

    >>Evolution is one species spliting into 2 species

    --But they still the same taxonomy family regardless the number of generations.

    >>Creationists get it backwards

    --Not to me as I stated

  • @HushAndLearn Yes the horse and the mule are still in the same family.

    ''Equidae (sometimes known as the horse family) is the taxonomic family of horses and related animals, including the extant horses, donkeys, and zebras, and many other species known only from fossils.''

    They are different species. Species can not interbreed.

    The Hominidae, also known as great apes, as the term is used here, form a taxonomic family: chimpanzees, gorillas, humans, and orangutans.

    Watch a video by AronRa.

  • @gregrutz >>They are different species.Species can not interbreed

    --That's why is limited, they won't and can't change into a different taxonomy kingdom. Speciation is not the argument here.

    >>The Hominidae, also known as great apes, as the term is used here, form a taxonomic family: chimpanzees, gorillas, humans, and orangutans.

    --Known by evolutionist believers, not by facts in any mean. This is where personal world views come in play

    >>Watch a video by AronRa

    --Lol. That hippie is a joke

  • @HushAndLearn ''Speciation is not the argument here''. EVOLUTION IS SPECIATION DUMB SHIT !

    If you 'believe' in speciation you believe in evolution, Origin of Species.

    You are a joke if you listen to Hovind.

  • @gregrutz >>Speciation is not the argument here''. EVOLUTION IS SPECIATION DUMB SHIT !

    --Nope, is like the rat poison, 98% of the food is good, the other 2% is just poison. I am not talking about Speciation. I am talking the LIMITS of the taxonomy Speciation.

    >>If you 'believe' in speciation you believe in evolution, Origin of Species

    --LIMITS!!! Which mean within the same kind of animal.

    >>You are a joke if you listen to Hovind.

    --Thanks, and you if you listen to Hippie AronRa, rotfl!

  • @HushAndLearn You don't understand evolution. Kingdoms don't change, species split into 2 species. There are limits, there will never be a Crocoduck. Dogs will always make dogs.

  • @gregrutz >>Kingdoms don't change, species split into 2 species.

    --Then you don't really understand the real concept of evolution. Evolution claim that all this different kingdoms came from a single one. For heaven sake, speciation is nobodies' argument, is the large scale changes where an specific taxonomy family changes into another one at any number of generation, and that is not science.

  • @HushAndLearn But they know how much C14 is in living things and it start to become less when it dies. Trees sometimes make 2 rings, that is why you use more than one tree and overlap them enough there will be no mistake.

    Astronomers thing the universe is 13.7 Billion year old.

    Don't you think it is strange that every dating method ever discovered shows the earth is old?

  • @gregrutz >>But they know how much C14 is in living things and it start to become less when it dies

    --But no one can tell if the environment were linear nor with how much Carbon the begin with.

    >>Trees sometimes make 2 rings

    --Nope, it can make up to 5 according the trees physiologists.

    >>that is why you use more than one tree and overlap them enough there will be no mistake

    --They do mistake because not all the time overlap.

  • @gregrutz >>Astronomers thing the universe is 13.7 Billion year old

    --Personal world views don't count is science.

    >>Don't you think it is strange that every dating method ever discovered shows the earth is old?

    --Such? just give me an empirical one. One I can test, observe, prove and demonstrate the entire even and not by just getting personal interpretation of the evidence. Yep, you rely on beliefs and don't even see that.

  • @HushAndLearn Astronomy is a science not a world view, dummy.

    Biology is a science not a world view, dummy.

    You are not smart enough to understand how radiometric dating works so you could never test it, so go to the Grand Canyon and count the layers and guess how long they took to get laid down and then raised to 8000 feet above sea level.

  • @gregrutz >>Astronomy is a science not a world view, dummy

    --Is silly if you think they can measure such far distance stars. Star questioning the method, don't just be blindfolded.

    >>You are not smart enough to understand how radiometric dating works so you could never test it

    --If you can't even understand the example of the candle I gave you 3 times, then I think some one else is the one not able to test it

  • @HushAndLearn They date crystals. The crystals sturcture is too small for Lead to fit into it. So they know there was not daughter product, lead, in the crystle in the first place. By comparing the amout of lead in the sample they can tell how old it is. Get it now?

    With C14 dating they know how much C14 is in living plants and when the plant dies the amount starts going down. So they know what it started with.

    All the different methods cross check each other and know dates. It works.

  • @gregrutz >>By comparing the amout of lead in the sample they can tell how old it is. Get it now?

    --Absolutely not, you are assuming it is linear for any weather case, breaking this way a common scientific method by taking it for granted. Like the candle example I gave you.

    >>With C14 dating they know how much C14 is in living plants and when the plant dies the amount starts going down

    --That doesn't mean plants get the same carbon quantity before the flood since the weather were different

  • @gregrutz >>So they know what it started with

    --What an awful "scientific method" you used. Fossils as insects were huge before and we still have those same insects much smaller. Fossils shown a clear evidence of a different life development before the worldwide flood. So no, you can't tell how much carbon they develop at any rate by the fact you don't know many surrounded factors.

    >>All the different methods cross check each other and know dates. It works.

    --Failed!

  • @gregrutz >>so go to the Grand Canyon and count the layers and guess how long they took to get laid down and then raised to 8000 feet above sea level

    --No more than 2 years, how about that =)

  • @HushAndLearn The ‘Super Group’ of rocks in the Grand Canyon are below the level layers at the east end. These layers were laid down level, block faulted into mountains [they are tilted], worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over the basement layers. Then another 5000 feet of sediments was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some corals. Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level. Finally water flowing down hill cut the canyon. How long did you say?

  • @gregrutz >>These layers were laid down level, block faulted into mountains [they are tilted], worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over the basement layers

    --You are clearly describing variations of the underwater phenomena.

    >>Then another 5000 feet of sediments was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some corals.

    --For heaven sake, volcano lava would leave bumps and too thick strata layer. Opposite of the evidence we have. Sand can't solidify without using liquid.

  • @HushAndLearn The sand of the Coconino layer is from wind blown sand dumb shit.

    NOT ALL SEDIMENTS ARE FROM WATER !

    READ A FUCKING GEOLOGY BOOK 

  • @gregrutz >>The sand of the Coconino layer is from wind blown sand dumb shit.

    --Lol, and how do you think it sediment? Duh!

    >>NOT ALL SEDIMENTS ARE FROM WATER !

    --Hay, hay, hay. But it needs it in order to solidify.

    >>READ A FUCKING GEOLOGY BOOK

    --I do, but I also use common sense, logic and reasoning for the sake of impartiality and integrity. I just don't get brainwash because some and some people with a piece of paper say something. Wake up buddy!

  • @gregrutz >>Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level. Finally water flowing down hill cut the canyon. How long did you say?

    --Less than 2 years, because a river can cut over fresh strata formation in a mater of months from the water was left from the flood.

    See!!!!! My explanations are as scientific as any other method using better common sense, logic and reasoning. ;-)

    Kind regards.

  • @HushAndLearn HELLO? YOU MISSED THE>>> Layers were block faulted into mountains [they are tilted], worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over the basement layers. Then another 5000 feet of sediments was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some corals. Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level.

    Creationist are always so worried about cutting the canyon in less than 6000 years and they don't look at the rocks that are exposed and tell a long history.

  • @gregrutz >>HELLO? YOU MISSED THE> Layers were block faulted into mountains [they are tilted], worn flat, & then the Teapeats Sandstone

    --Are you kidding? Those are PRECISELY only plausible under water phenomena

    >>Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level

    --Show any picture that represent your interpretation

    >>Creationist r always so worried about cutting the canyon in less than 6K years

    --I am not, is just that there is no problem with that according to the evidence

  • @HushAndLearn >>Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level

    --Show any picture that represent your interpretation

    Look at any picture of the Grand Canyon, the RIM IS AT 8000 feet asl. on the north side and above 7000 feet on the south rim.

    And water does not block fault the land into mountains. Plate Tectonics does, proven in the 1950s.

    The River cut the canyon in 5-7 million years.

  • @gregrutz >>Look at any picture of the Grand Canyon,  the RIM IS AT 8000 feet asl.on the north side and above 7000 feet on the south rim

    --I haven't find it, I don't see how is that against a flood compared to you world view!

    >>water does not block fault the land into mountains. Plate Tectonics does, proven in the 1950s.

    --You mean earthquakes. Not plate tectonics.

    >>River cut the canyon in 5-7 million years

    --I know u believe that while I believe a river can do it while layers still fresh

  • @HushAndLearn Plate tectonics causes earthquakes dummy

  • @gregrutz >>Plate tectonics causes earthquakes dummy

    --There is not such thing as plate tectonics. All the Pangaea fairy tale is just that...a grown up tale.

    The continents are not floating bouncing around, the continents still connected underwater.

    Continents do move a bit, but from that to assume they were like that and connected linearly from millions of years, is just silly.

  • @HushAndLearn ''Everybody with common sense will know that you can't measure stars with such distance''

    Everyone with an education knows they can and do measure the distance to the stars. They use parallax to measure the close ones and stars with a know brightness to measure the ones far away.

    Try reading a science book some time.

  • @gregrutz >>They use parallax to measure the close ones and stars with a know brightness to measure the ones far away

    --If they would, they wouldn't wait 6 month until the planet get to the other side to make a triangle, with such long distance. That triangle would become virtually a line. Brightness can't tell you distances for heaven sake o.0

    >>Try reading a science book some time.

    --I do, but you just believe everything people say without questioning, that's call brainwash, lol ^-^

  • @HushAndLearn What would convince you that evolution is true?

    Nothing ?!?

    They who is the brainwashed one?

  • @gregrutz >>What would convince you that evolution is true? Nothing ?!? They who is the brainwashed one?

    --I do believe in evo, but depending what you mean for evo. I believe evo within its original taxonomy kingdom. I don't believe a kingdom can change at any generation into another taxonomy kingdom. Evolution with limits, e.x. species can adapt to certain level of heat, but no any kind of heat, so right there is a limited evolution such as the mule is a limited one for being infertile.

  • @HushAndLearn IF you understood evolution you would know why the mule is infertile. The horse and the donkey have evolved into different species, moving away from each other, that is why they can't interbreed any more.

    Evolution is one species spliting into 2 species. Creationists get it backwards, alway tryings to breed to modern animals and can't figure out why it does not work.

  • @gregrutz >>The horse and the donkey have evolved into different species, moving away from each other, that is why they can't interbreed any more

    --Yes, but they still part of the same taxonomy family. And no, they aren't moving apart. Is just a personal interpretation. They still the same family.

    >>Evolution is one species spliting into 2 species

    --But they still the same taxonomy family regardless the number of generations.

    >>Creationists get it backwards

    --Not to me as I stated

  • @HushAndLearn Yes the horse and the mule are still in the same family.

    ''Equidae (sometimes known as the horse family) is the taxonomic family of horses and related animals, including the extant horses, donkeys, and zebras, and many other species known only from fossils.''

    They are different species. Species can not interbreed.

    The Hominidae, also known as great apes, as the term is used here, form a taxonomic family: chimpanzees, gorillas, humans, and orangutans.

    Watch a video by AronRa.

  • @gregrutz >>They are different species.Species can not interbreed

    --That's why is limited, they won't and can't change into a different taxonomy kingdom. Speciation is not the argument here.

    >>The Hominidae, also known as great apes, as the term is used here, form a taxonomic family: chimpanzees, gorillas, humans, and orangutans.

    --Known by evolutionist believers, not by facts in any mean. This is where personal world views come in play

    >>Watch a video by AronRa

    --Lol. That hippie is a joke

  • @HushAndLearn ''Speciation is not the argument here''. EVOLUTION IS SPECIATION DUMB SHIT !

    If you 'believe' in speciation you believe in evolution, Origin of Species.

    You are a joke if you listen to Hovind.

  • @gregrutz >>Speciation is not the argument here''. EVOLUTION IS SPECIATION DUMB SHIT !

    --Nope, is like the rat poison, 98% of the food is good, the other 2% is just poison. I am not talking about Speciation. I am talking the LIMITS of the taxonomy Speciation.

    >>If you 'believe' in speciation you believe in evolution, Origin of Species

    --LIMITS!!! Which mean within the same kind of animal.

    >>You are a joke if you listen to Hovind.

    --Thanks, and you if you listen to Hippie AronRa, rotfl!

  • @HushAndLearn You don't understand evolution. Kingdoms don't change, species split into 2 species. There are limits, there will never be a Crocoduck. Dogs will always make dogs.

  • @gregrutz >>Kingdoms don't change, species split into 2 species.

    --Then you don't really understand the real concept of evolution. Evolution claim that all this different kingdoms came from a single one. For heaven sake, speciation is nobodies' argument, is the large scale changes where an specific taxonomy family changes into another one at any number of generation, and that is not science.

  • @HushAndLearn But they know how much C14 is in living things and it start to become less when it dies. Trees sometimes make 2 rings, that is why you use more than one tree and overlap them enough there will be no mistake.

    Astronomers thing the universe is 13.7 Billion year old.

    Don't you think it is strange that every dating method ever discovered shows the earth is old?

  • @gregrutz >>But they know how much C14 is in living things and it start to become less when it dies

    --But no one can tell if the environment were linear nor with how much Carbon the begin with.

    >>Trees sometimes make 2 rings

    --Nope, it can make up to 5 according the trees physiologists.

    >>that is why you use more than one tree and overlap them enough there will be no mistake

    --They do mistake because not all the time overlap.

  • @gregrutz >>Astronomers thing the universe is 13.7 Billion year old

    --Personal world views don't count is science.

    >>Don't you think it is strange that every dating method ever discovered shows the earth is old?

    --Such? just give me an empirical one. One I can test, observe, prove and demonstrate the entire even and not by just getting personal interpretation of the evidence. Yep, you rely on beliefs and don't even see that.

  • @HushAndLearn Astronomy is a science not a world view, dummy.

    Biology is a science not a world view, dummy.

    You are not smart enough to understand how radiometric dating works so you could never test it, so go to the Grand Canyon and count the layers and guess how long they took to get laid down and then raised to 8000 feet above sea level.

  • @gregrutz >>Astronomy is a science not a world view, dummy

    --Is silly if you think they can measure such far distance stars. Star questioning the method, don't just be blindfolded.

    >>You are not smart enough to understand how radiometric dating works so you could never test it

    --If you can't even understand the example of the candle I gave you 3 times, then I think some one else is the one not able to test it

  • @HushAndLearn They date crystals. The crystals sturcture is too small for Lead to fit into it. So they know there was not daughter product, lead, in the crystle in the first place. By comparing the amout of lead in the sample they can tell how old it is. Get it now?

    With C14 dating they know how much C14 is in living plants and when the plant dies the amount starts going down. So they know what it started with.

    All the different methods cross check each other and know dates. It works.

  • @gregrutz >>By comparing the amout of lead in the sample they can tell how old it is. Get it now?

    --Absolutely not, you are assuming it is linear for any weather case, breaking this way a common scientific method by taking it for granted. Like the candle example I gave you.

    >>With C14 dating they know how much C14 is in living plants and when the plant dies the amount starts going down

    --That doesn't mean plants get the same carbon quantity before the flood since the weather were different

  • @gregrutz >>So they know what it started with

    --What an awful "scientific method" you used. Fossils as insects were huge before and we still have those same insects much smaller. Fossils shown a clear evidence of a different life development before the worldwide flood. So no, you can't tell how much carbon they develop at any rate by the fact you don't know many surrounded factors.

    >>All the different methods cross check each other and know dates. It works.

    --Failed!

  • @gregrutz >>so go to the Grand Canyon and count the layers and guess how long they took to get laid down and then raised to 8000 feet above sea level

    --No more than 2 years, how about that =)

  • @HushAndLearn The ‘Super Group’ of rocks in the Grand Canyon are below the level layers at the east end. These layers were laid down level, block faulted into mountains [they are tilted], worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over the basement layers. Then another 5000 feet of sediments was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some corals. Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level. Finally water flowing down hill cut the canyon. How long did you say?

  • @gregrutz >>These layers were laid down level, block faulted into mountains [they are tilted], worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over the basement layers

    --You are clearly describing variations of the underwater phenomena.

    >>Then another 5000 feet of sediments was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some corals.

    --For heaven sake, volcano lava would leave bumps and too thick strata layer. Opposite of the evidence we have. Sand can't solidify without using liquid.

  • @HushAndLearn The sand of the Coconino layer is from wind blown sand dumb shit.

    NOT ALL SEDIMENTS ARE FROM WATER !

    READ A FUCKING GEOLOGY BOOK

  • @gregrutz >>The sand of the Coconino layer is from wind blown sand dumb shit.

    --Lol, and how do you think it sediment? Duh!

    >>NOT ALL SEDIMENTS ARE FROM WATER !

    --Hay, hay, hay. But it needs it in order to solidify.

    >>READ A FUCKING GEOLOGY BOOK

    --I do, but I also use common sense, logic and reasoning for the sake of impartiality and integrity. I just don't get brainwash because some and some people with a piece of paper say something. Wake up buddy!

  • @gregrutz >>Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level. Finally water flowing down hill cut the canyon. How long did you say?

    --Less than 2 years, because a river can cut over fresh strata formation in a mater of months from the water was left from the flood.

    See!!!!! My explanations are as scientific as any other method using better common sense, logic and reasoning. ;-)

    Kind regards.

  • @HushAndLearn HELLO? YOU MISSED THE>>> Layers were block faulted into mountains [they are tilted], worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over the basement layers. Then another 5000 feet of sediments was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some corals. Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level.

    Creationist are always so worried about cutting the canyon in less than 6000 years and they don't look at the rocks that are exposed and tell a long history.

  • @gregrutz >>HELLO? YOU MISSED THE> Layers were block faulted into mountains [they are tilted], worn flat, & then the Teapeats Sandstone

    --Are you kidding? Those are PRECISELY only plausible under water phenomena

    >>Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level

    --Show any picture that represent your interpretation

    >>Creationist r always so worried about cutting the canyon in less than 6K years

    --I am not, is just that there is no problem with that according to the evidence

  • @HushAndLearn >>Then the whole area got raised to 8000 feet above sea level

    --Show any picture that represent your interpretation

    Look at any picture of the Grand Canyon,  the RIM IS AT 8000 feet asl. on the north side and above 7000 feet on the south rim.

    And water does not block fault the land into mountains. Plate Tectonics does, proven in the 1950s.

    The River cut the canyon in 5-7 million years.

  • @gregrutz >>Look at any picture of the Grand Canyon,  the RIM IS AT 8000 feet asl.on the north side and above 7000 feet on the south rim

    --I haven't find it, I don't see how is that against a flood compared to you world view!

    >>water does not block fault the land into mountains. Plate Tectonics does, proven in the 1950s.

    --You mean earthquakes. Not plate tectonics.

    >>River cut the canyon in 5-7 million years

    --I know u believe that while I believe a river can do it while layers still fresh

  • @HushAndLearn Plate tectonics causes earthquakes dummy

  • @gregrutz >>Plate tectonics causes earthquakes dummy

    --There is not such thing as plate tectonics. All the Pangaea fairy tale is just that...a grown up tale.

    The continents are not floating bouncing around, the continents still connected underwater.

    Continents do move a bit, but from that to assume they were like that and connected linearly from millions of years, is just silly.

  • @gregrutz >>Geologist are wrong about the age of the earth

    --Because they use personal world views and opinions about the evidence. If that's the case, I can give my own as well

    >>And historians are wrong about the Chinese and Egyptians

    --Modern Egyptologists found out no single artifact, no single inscription, or pottery, or anything has been found until now, in any place to predate the Egyptian civilization more than 5,000 years ago

    pbs. org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/explore/­howold.html

  • @HushAndLearn --Because they use personal world views and opinions about the evidence. If that's the case, I can give my own as well

    BULL SHIT ! THEY LOOK AT THE FACTS.  THINGS LIKE THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN AND FOSSILS.

    YOU AND HOVIND JUST DENY THE FACTS.

    'Fossils only prove something died.'' NO, Fossils prove something lived. And 98% of them are extinct, no trilobites, no dinosarus, no sabertooth tigers, no giant mammoths, no Cambrian strange marine creatures.

    You can't explain this history

  • @gregrutz >>BULL SHIT ! THEY LOOK AT THE FACTS. THINGS LIKE THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN AND FOSSILS

    --If you can't prove they get offspring nor who is it, then that isn't a fact. Get over with.

    >>YOU AND HOVIND JUST DENY THE FACTS

    --No, we just deny personal interpretations of the evidence. We don't deny the facts.

    >>Fossils only prove something died.'' NO, Fossils prove something lived

    --Agree.

    >>You can't explain this history

    --World wide flood! That's the way to preserve the fossils rapidly

  • @gregrutz >>And fossils don't prove the earth is OLD

    --They date fossils by the layer is found and date the layer by the fossils they found, this is call circular reasoning. You can't even prove if they had any offspring.

    >>And all scientists are wrong

    --Not all scientists believe in macro-evolution, just in simple evolution with limited adaptations as I do believe.

    >>BUT KENT IS RIGHT

    --Not in all cases, only in the one I show here

    >>Open you eyes and learn

    --I did, I hope you do it too.

  • @gregrutz >>Geologist are wrong about the age of the earth

    --Because they use personal world views and opinions about the evidence. If that's the case, I can give my own as well

    >>And historians are wrong about the Chinese and Egyptians

    --Modern Egyptologists found out no single artifact, no single inscription, or pottery, or anything has been found until now, in any place to predate the Egyptian civilization more than 5,000 years ago

    pbs. org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/explore/­howold.html

  • @HushAndLearn --Because they use personal world views and opinions about the evidence. If that's the case, I can give my own as well

    BULL SHIT ! THEY LOOK AT THE FACTS. THINGS LIKE THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN AND FOSSILS.

    YOU AND HOVIND JUST DENY THE FACTS.

    'Fossils only prove something died.'' NO, Fossils prove something lived. And 98% of them are extinct, no trilobites, no dinosarus, no sabertooth tigers, no giant mammoths, no Cambrian strange marine creatures.

    You can't explain this history

  • @gregrutz >>BULL SHIT ! THEY LOOK AT THE FACTS. THINGS LIKE THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN AND FOSSILS

    --If you can't prove they get offspring nor who is it, then that isn't a fact. Get over with.

    >>YOU AND HOVIND JUST DENY THE FACTS

    --No, we just deny personal interpretations of the evidence. We don't deny the facts.

    >>Fossils only prove something died.'' NO, Fossils prove something lived

    --Agree.

    >>You can't explain this history

    --World wide flood! That's the way to preserve the fossils rapidly

  • @gregrutz >>And fossils don't prove the earth is OLD

    --They date fossils by the layer is found and date the layer by the fossils they found, this is call circular reasoning. You can't even prove if they had any offspring.

    >>And all scientists are wrong

    --Not all scientists believe in macro-evolution, just in simple evolution with limited adaptations as I do believe.

    >>BUT KENT IS RIGHT

    --Not in all cases, only in the one I show here

    >>Open you eyes and learn

    --I did, I hope you do it too.

  • @gregrutz >>Hovind is WRONG about a flood 4400 years ago. TRUTH.

    --Truth? Thin strata layer without erosion clearly confirm a flood, even this pictures confirm it:

    creation. com/sandy-stripes

    Now, this is EMPIRICAL TRUTH!

    Take care :)

  • @HushAndLearn And what is the name of this ''thin strata layer'' of flood mud with all the dead bodies in it?

  • @gregrutz >>And what is the name of this ''thin strata layer'' of flood mud with all the dead bodies in it?

    --Evidence of Noah's flood. Fossils preservation only happen by rapid burial which only a worldwide flood can do.

    Kind regards.

  • @HushAndLearn

    1. You did not answer the question.

    2. Fossils form in tar pits, the bottom of lakes, coral reefs in shallow seas, landslides, etc.

    What is the name of the flood mud layer with all the fossils mixed together in it?

    Floods don't sort fossils.

    Floods don't make distinct layers of different kinds of rock.

    Not all sediments are water borne. Zion Park has 3500 feet of wind blown sand. Not from a flood.

  • @gregrutz >>You did not answer the question

    --What question?

    >>Fossils form in tar pits, the bottom of lakes, coral reefs in shallow seas, landslides, etc.

    --Most of fossils are from rapid burial which mean a clear indication from the flood! Even this waved strata formation must only come from the flood.

    jesuscreated. org/Scientific/Flood_files/ima­ge008.jpg

    Even polystrate fossils are clear evidence of the flood

  • @gregrutz >>What is the name of the flood mud layer with all the fossils mixed together in it?

    --I don't know, do you mean Hydrologic sorting?

    >>Floods don't sort fossils

    --Because they aren't sort in any order. Geologic column doesn't exist anywhere in the world but in text books base, not in reality, it always depending on weight, skills, habitat, density, etc. And is not always the same necessarily.

  • @gregrutz >>Floods don't make distinct layers of different kinds of rock

    --Of course it does, it just solidify ones more than the others over time.

    >>Zion Park has 3500 feet of wind blown sand. Not from a flood.

    --The only way to solidify sand, is using liquid such as water, sand doesn't solidify itself.

  • @gregrutz >>And what is the name of this ''thin strata layer'' of flood mud with all the dead bodies in it?

    --Evidence of Noah's flood. Fossils preservation only happen by rapid burial which only a worldwide flood can do.

    Kind regards.

  • @HushAndLearn

    1. You did not answer the question.

    2. Fossils form in tar pits, the bottom of lakes, coral reefs in shallow seas, landslides, etc.

    What is the name of the flood mud layer with all the fossils mixed together in it?

    Floods don't sort fossils.

    Floods don't make distinct layers of different kinds of rock.

    Not all sediments are water borne. Zion Park has 3500 feet of wind blown sand. Not from a flood.

  • @gregrutz >>You did not answer the question

    --What question?

    >>Fossils form in tar pits, the bottom of lakes, coral reefs in shallow seas, landslides, etc.

    --Most of fossils are from rapid burial which mean a clear indication from the flood! Even this waved strata formation must only come from the flood.

    jesuscreated. org/Scientific/Flood_files/ima­ge008.jpg

    Even polystrate fossils are clear evidence of the flood

  • @gregrutz >>What is the name of the flood mud layer with all the fossils mixed together in it?

    --I don't know, do you mean Hydrologic sorting?

    >>Floods don't sort fossils

    --Because they aren't sort in any order. Geologic column doesn't exist anywhere in the world but in text books base, not in reality, it always depending on weight, skills, habitat, density, etc. And is not always the same necessarily.

  • @gregrutz >>Floods don't make distinct layers of different kinds of rock

    --Of course it does, it just solidify ones more than the others over time.

    >>Zion Park has 3500 feet of wind blown sand. Not from a flood.

    --The only way to solidify sand, is using liquid such as water, sand doesn't solidify itself.

  • @HushAndLearn The dinosaures ruled the earth for 160 Million years.

    --Truth? If you would be able to empirically prove that as a truth, you wouldn't be here arguing it. Sorry, but I don't need personal opinions

    The is not a personal opinion, that is a scientific fact. You will not face the facts.

    Fact the fact and there would be no argument.

    IF you think evolution is a religion like kent say you will never learn anything.

  • @gregrutz >>The is not a personal opinion, that is a scientific fact. You will not face the facts.

    --It is not, nobody lives that much to testify it. Like I told you before, if you get into a room and see a candle burning, all you know is how fast is burning per time. But you don't know the original height not if the environment was linear. So no, you dinosaur myth can't be a fact by the fact that your argument is a myth.

  • @gregrutz >>IF you think evolution is a religion like kent say you will never learn anything

    --If you can't prove your world view using science as for what science really is; then is you who will never learn nor see the truth.

  • @HushAndLearn The dinosaures ruled the earth for 160 Million years.

    --Truth? If you would be able to empirically prove that as a truth, you wouldn't be here arguing it. Sorry, but I don't need personal opinions

    The is not a personal opinion, that is a scientific fact. You will not face the facts.

    Fact the fact and there would be no argument.

    IF you think evolution is a religion like kent say you will never learn anything.

  • @gregrutz >>The is not a personal opinion, that is a scientific fact. You will not face the facts.

    --It is not, nobody lives that much to testify it. Like I told you before, if you get into a room and see a candle burning, all you know is how fast is burning per time. But you don't know the original height not if the environment was linear. So no, you dinosaur myth can't be a fact by the fact that your argument is a myth.

  • @gregrutz >>IF you think evolution is a religion like kent say you will never learn anything

    --If you can't prove your world view using science as for what science really is; then is you who will never learn nor see the truth.