Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Response to Ian Juby's "Fossils Galore" Part 3/6 RE-UPLOAD

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
652 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Oct 14, 2010

Reupload due to comments being disabled (YT screwup)

This is a video response to Carl Baugh's television program "Creation in the 21st Century", the two part episode titled "Fossils Galore!" with Canadian Creationist Ian Juby.

Links to part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4iT8QH5JQI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub8fmOhxU4g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NdUaX96_9k

Links to part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDH7hzlBP7g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF2j4pUgplc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ai7gY51GHqA

Link to Ian Juby's youtube page: http://www.youtube.com/user/wazooloo
Link to Ian Juby's creation page: http://genesisweek.com/
And his newsletter/blog: http://ianjuby.org/

Link to a video I did some time ago on why chalk is proof of an old Earth (note a contradiction, in my calculation of coccolithophore accumulation in the older video I use a figure of just OVER one millimeter per year while in the current video I use just UNDER 1 mm. To err on the side of caution I will concede the faster depositional rate as I cannot locate my sources and when the original video was made I had more recent access to the papers. Either way, 1, 2, or even 1000 millimeters per year does not help the creationist as these 100+ METER chalk deposits were supposedly made during a year-long global flood): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SKjyThouCU

Good treatment of nautiloid phylogeny, physiology, and evolution: http://www.tonmo.com/science/fossils/nautiloids.php

Wiki page on thalassinid crustaceans with mention of their fossil burrows: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalassinidea
And articles about Baugh's 'fossil finger': http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/giants.htm
http://paleo.cc/paluxy/finger.htm

Category:

Education

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 0 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (LithodidMan)

  • He DIDN'T SAY THE CHALK LAYER IS WORLDWIDE, AT ALL. FIRST OF ALL YOU HAVE THE FIRST SEVERAL MINUTES OF THEIR DIALOGUE MISSING, BUT IT IS ABOUT THE CAMBRIAN LAYERS. YOU NEED TO WATCH IT AGAIN, AND LISTEN FOR HIS GUEST'S REPLY TO HIM; HE CLEARLY SAYS, THAT HE'S GLAD THAT THE HOST MENTIONED THE CHALK LAYER, LOCATED AT THE CLIFFS OF DOVER!!! NOT- A WORLDWIDE CHALK LAYER! NICE JOB, ON YOUR LISTENING SKILLS.... NOT!! BECAUSE OSTRICHES HAVE A LONG NECK, AND SIMILAR BODY PROPORTION- TO NECK R

  • @TheWayandWordofLife Nice use of all caps. He said "Within the Cretaceous layering, adjacent to the layers we work in in Glen Rose, adjacent to that and included in that, there is a world-wide distribution..." He is talking about the Austin Chalk formation and how it is part of a continuous chalk layer supposedly laid down during the flood. Baugh has made this claim dozens of times on video and in print. So now, whose listening skills are in question here?

  • You just said (13:39) birds and Dinosaurs have no common ancestor, I thought birds were directly descended from Dinosaurs and are in fact, Dinosaurs themselves?

  • @christo930 Birds are dinosaurs and did descend directly from them. I was referring to the fact that Ian Juby does not support common descent yet felt it valid to use an ostrich as a proxy. I was pointing out a contradiction on his part based on what he claims to believe (which I am not entirely convinced he does believe). Hopefully that makes sense.

  • Comments not showing for me.....

  • The coccoliths; Are they using large amounts of oxygen? Is that the reason why these are bad for other plankton? And if so; That would also reduce their own growth, given that the water needs time to re-oxygenate.

    Anyway; I believe RHYMEMADEN1 AKA Claire said the Cliffs of Dover had grown just about 3 millimeters per 1000 years. Would you say that's about right?

  • @skinnyjohnsen The coccoliths are using up nutrients, and shading light from other phytoplankters. In the absence of light they do not produce oxygen, just consume it. So the entire bloom is bad for production in the system, espcially in cold water systems where diatoms form the base of the food web.

    If Claire said 3mm/Ky, I would believe it. That is about the figure I have seen published. My figure was a hypothetical maximum, which is orders of magnitude faster than actual.

see all

All Comments (8)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @LithodidMan Thanks for the clarification, I understand what you mean. He inadvertently admitted a direct connection between birds and dinosaurs, while simultaneously denying it:)

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more