Saving Planet Earth
- Thread starter Deist27
- Start date
river-wind
Valued Senior Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Vicious Cycle
true, which I why I asked why we have teeth designed for eating meat, not why we *only* have teeth for eating meat.
There is always a chance that Deist27 is correct, and we are all wrong. The presence of molars for mashing of meterial which could include plant matter certainly supports the *possibility* that we were once a plant eating - only species. The equal presence of meat teeth makes it very unlikely, but you never know.
true, which I why I asked why we have teeth designed for eating meat, not why we *only* have teeth for eating meat.
There is always a chance that Deist27 is correct, and we are all wrong. The presence of molars for mashing of meterial which could include plant matter certainly supports the *possibility* that we were once a plant eating - only species. The equal presence of meat teeth makes it very unlikely, but you never know.
Yes, the teeth are there, but the digestive system is not. Vegetation is a terrible way to get nutrients (look at ruminants and ungulates, which are constantly grazing). It is hard to digest, and you don't get very much energy out of it. Humans simply don't have the labour intensive digestive systems necessary for vegetation-only diets.
About Saving Planet Earth
and who must save it, though some replies have taken us off on a tangent. To get back on topic, can nature save Earth?
Gravity alone does not hold down the atmosphere. Genesis says there was a water canopy in the Thermosphere encasing the Earth and preventing air molecules from escaping into space (Gen 1:6,7). When the canopy collapsed, Genesis claims the flooding began. Without the water canopy holding molecules down, all vapors are slowly dissipating into outer space. The atmosphere was at least twice the present thickness before disaster struck. This we know because present air thickness does not provide enough "lift" for the extinct Pterodactyl to fly. The only conditions under which the massive winged dinosaurs could fly is within an atmosphere at least twice the present thickness. It would take in the present continuous and extremely high winds for Pterodactyl to fly on a daily basis. Hardly the type of conditions that favor animal growth. Scientific studies also have shown that within the ancient atmosphere, our cells can reproduce themselves accurately and the aging process can be prevented! Those paradise conditions provided an environment for a potentially everlasting life. But now good health is dissipating into outer space.
One theory states that the huge dinosaurs died from oxygen deprivation. As atmospheric thinning took place most plants would also disappear. Another theory, observing humans, says that physical work, which is good for the muscles, takes from the brain its' much needed share of oxygen. This also implies there is no longer enough air for our most advanced species to exist at full genetic expression, further blocking progress.
and who must save it, though some replies have taken us off on a tangent. To get back on topic, can nature save Earth?
Gravity alone does not hold down the atmosphere. Genesis says there was a water canopy in the Thermosphere encasing the Earth and preventing air molecules from escaping into space (Gen 1:6,7). When the canopy collapsed, Genesis claims the flooding began. Without the water canopy holding molecules down, all vapors are slowly dissipating into outer space. The atmosphere was at least twice the present thickness before disaster struck. This we know because present air thickness does not provide enough "lift" for the extinct Pterodactyl to fly. The only conditions under which the massive winged dinosaurs could fly is within an atmosphere at least twice the present thickness. It would take in the present continuous and extremely high winds for Pterodactyl to fly on a daily basis. Hardly the type of conditions that favor animal growth. Scientific studies also have shown that within the ancient atmosphere, our cells can reproduce themselves accurately and the aging process can be prevented! Those paradise conditions provided an environment for a potentially everlasting life. But now good health is dissipating into outer space.
One theory states that the huge dinosaurs died from oxygen deprivation. As atmospheric thinning took place most plants would also disappear. Another theory, observing humans, says that physical work, which is good for the muscles, takes from the brain its' much needed share of oxygen. This also implies there is no longer enough air for our most advanced species to exist at full genetic expression, further blocking progress.
What caused this canopy to collapse? And, although I hate to ask, do you have any evidence other than Genesis (or any other part of the Bible) to support that there was indeed a canopy to begin with?
Now this is interesting. Have you ever seen a live Pteradactyl? I'd like to know how the conclusion that the air is too thin for one to glide was drawn. In fact, with wing to body proportions of a Pteradactyl, as presented by fossils, I would say that they are better adapted for gliding than any bird today (save maybe the albatross).
Really? What studies? Could you provide a link, or a book source for this. I mean, wow. With the technology we have, we could likely recreate these ancient atmospheres in small areas, kind of like a biosphere. Think of that, anti-aging chambers. Now that's an untapped market.
Physical work does indeed increase blood flow to muscles. However, it does not take it away from the brain. That would cause you to black out. The brain and heart always have a specific amount of blood flow to them, so that we don't die. Organs such as the stomach and intestines have blood flow diverted away from them, because our bodies can afford to digestion slowed for a while.
What does the brain have to do with genetic expression?
river-wind
Valued Senior Member
very good point.
Deist27, I would like to add this to my list of questions. If Humans were designed to eat only plants, why are our digestive systems more similar to carnivor digestive sytems, and less like those of pure vegiterian animals?
as for the Pterodactyl:
Did they really fly, or were they just (puny) gliders?
Well, this was already answered for you a few questions back, but it would be useful to narrate the rehabilitation of the pterosaurs' image. When the flying theory got accepted, the question shifted to their flying prowess. Most paleontologists of the 19th and early 20th centuries agreed that they could fly to some extent, though not necessarily as capable as today's birds and bats. After the 1920's, opinion seemed to go downhill: namely, that they were mere gliders, with weak, flimsy wings that easily suffered debilitating tears. With the growing popularity in the last few decades of the image of dinosaurs as agile, possibly warm-blooded animals, pterosaurs have been recognized as powered, highly successful flyers.
Weren't their wings fragile and susceptible to injury?
Much of the earlier thinking that pterosaurs were weak flyers stemmed from the perception that their wings were fragile structures, easily susceptible to injury. After all, bird wings consist of several feathers that can be replaced one at a time without an appreciable loss of support; and bat wings are supported by four elongated digits that prevent a tear from running down its entire length. A pterosaur wing, with only a single finger to support it and no internal reinforcements, was thought to be inferior. But recent studies have disproved it. Closer examinations of several beautifully preserved specimens showed that the wings were reinforced by closely-spaced fibers called actinofibrillae. These stiffened the wing and would have prevented a tear from running down the entire length.
What other adaptations did they evolve?
The pterosaur body was highly adapted to enduring the rigors of flight. Many bones are fused together, providing a sturdy framework for the muscles and other organs. The pelvic vertebrae had in fact fused with the pelvic bones, providing a shock-absorbing structure (the synsacrum) that braced the animal when it landed. In larger pterosaurs, the pectoral vertebrae were similarly fused in a structure called the notarium. The sternum, or breastbone, had a keel that provided an attachment for large pectoral muscles, and a forward projection, the cristospine, may have functioned much like the furcula ("wishbone") in birds. Many rhamphorhynchoid fossils show the outline of a flap of skin at the tip of the tail that may have acted as a rudder, and the neural spines were likewise elongated in some. In order to reduce weight, pterosaur bones were hollow; indeed, they were even thinner than many avian bones. The later pterodactyloids, as mentioned earlier, lost all traces of teeth and may have had horny beaks.
from http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/9020/pterosaur/
and also:
(sorry can't find a link
)some scientists built a full sized model of a Pterodactyl, same weight, size, and mass distrabution as suggested by the fossils that have been found. THey crashed the sucker about 6 times, and pretty much decided that the thing couldn't fly. then one of the members considers making anew version of the model in which the head could turn. they built this one (as the vertebrea showed that the head of the Pterodactyl would have been quite flexable), and wouldn't you know, it flew! I saw it on NOVA when I was about 6 or so, and then they had an exhibit on it at the Frankin Institute in Philadelphia a few years later.
While that information is very fascinating, and I am not disagreeing with you, Deist said that the atmosphere of today is too thin for flight, not that they couldn't fly. I guess I said that they were gliders, but I am not up on my paleontological theory, and may have read an outdated book way back when.
There is still the doubt in my mind that the atmosphere was different then, with regards to pressure, since the whole thing seems to be based on the fact that there was an ice layer around the outer atmosphere.
There is still the doubt in my mind that the atmosphere was different then, with regards to pressure, since the whole thing seems to be based on the fact that there was an ice layer around the outer atmosphere.
Revolution
Registered Senior Member
You want to save planet Earth?
I know of the sure fire only way that is guarunteed to work:
Kill off all the parasites aka humans on it
Guess the best way would be by a super bug.
You remember the movie The Stand? Love that movie
Another good one: 12 Monkeys!
I know of the sure fire only way that is guarunteed to work:
Kill off all the parasites aka humans on it
Guess the best way would be by a super bug.
You remember the movie The Stand? Love that movie
Another good one: 12 Monkeys!
Earth was not doomed to destruction by a cataclysmic event. Earth was doomed before it even exited. It is most likely that the earth will be vaporized in about 3-4 billion years and blown of into space by our apparently friendly life giving sun.
Before that plate tectonics will grind to a stop and our precious water will disappear into the earth along with carbon and many elements essential to life.
The magnetic field will dissipate and with it will go our atmosphere.
WE would need technology beyond anything we could even imagine to save the EARTH and why would we want to.
All we have is the fact that life is very resilient. After each major cataclysmic event life have evolved into hundreds of thousands of species. Large brained primates like us humans have only been around for a few million years; most of the mammals have evolved since the dinos died.
We, humanity and life (Earth being the only know source of life) have a very simple decision to make.
One; Except mortality and go down with the least suffering.
Two; Doggedly fight and ensure that the fate of earth will not bring us down. We must shake the earth's loving embrace and move out into space.
And so a future cry will be.. The earth is dead, long live life.
Yet even our universe will conspire against life. Whether it collapses into its self or dissipates into radiation, life will have to considerer its mortality.
Before that plate tectonics will grind to a stop and our precious water will disappear into the earth along with carbon and many elements essential to life.
The magnetic field will dissipate and with it will go our atmosphere.
WE would need technology beyond anything we could even imagine to save the EARTH and why would we want to.
All we have is the fact that life is very resilient. After each major cataclysmic event life have evolved into hundreds of thousands of species. Large brained primates like us humans have only been around for a few million years; most of the mammals have evolved since the dinos died.
We, humanity and life (Earth being the only know source of life) have a very simple decision to make.
One; Except mortality and go down with the least suffering.
Two; Doggedly fight and ensure that the fate of earth will not bring us down. We must shake the earth's loving embrace and move out into space.
And so a future cry will be.. The earth is dead, long live life.
Yet even our universe will conspire against life. Whether it collapses into its self or dissipates into radiation, life will have to considerer its mortality.
river-wind
Valued Senior Member
Blindman- that's when we must escape into the 4th spacial dimention and above
i vote for #1 myself.
i vote for #1 myself.
Deisttwentyseven are you trying to take Genesis as a science journal? It is a history book/diary on the perceptions of humans at the time.
Dinosaurs existed to ~65my before God created the earth, so how can you use Pterodactyl as a proof of a flood that happened 4,000 y.a.?
The creation in Genesis happened 6,000 y.a.
Carbon-decay can trace fossils from billions of years.
Why did God create radioactive decay? He likes a bit 'o' confusion?
That's a good start to a scientific book.
Dinosaurs existed to ~65my before God created the earth, so how can you use Pterodactyl as a proof of a flood that happened 4,000 y.a.?
The creation in Genesis happened 6,000 y.a.
Carbon-decay can trace fossils from billions of years.
Why did God create radioactive decay? He likes a bit 'o' confusion?
That's a good start to a scientific book.