The egg indicates this ancient flying reptile was a female, and that realisation has allowed researchers to sex these creatures for the first time.
Ewwwwww, that's just sick and plain dirty.
Posted on 02/01/2011 11:58:12 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Any finds in China whether fossil, archaeological or technological I tend to view with suspicion.
It would be a very cool find. If it were real.
Don’t mind the naysayers Greenbow ~ you are not alone in your spiritual beliefs. There are many here at FR who do see a scientific explanation for a young Earth and universe.
See creationscience.com for the best overall vantage point imho.
Also some more info on my links page.
How about 101 proofs ignored by our modern-day secular scientists in favor of radio-isotope dating and all it’s inherent flaws?
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2264681/posts
Don’t throw starlight into this argument either w/o fully understanding Einstein’s work or better yet reading Russell Humphrey’s book ‘Starlight and Time’ to better grasp the apparent age of starlight.
It’s very obvious you neither understand the math of physics or you would not post that kind of crap. The speed of light is fixed, and the distances to other stars and galaxies can be accurately determined. Face it, you cannot prove with consistent math that those galaxies are not up to several billion light years away from Earth, and that light has been traveling for that amount of time.
It’s very obvious you neither understand the math of physics or you would not post that kind of crap. The speed of light is fixed, and the distances to other stars and galaxies can be accurately determined. Face it, you cannot prove with consistent math that those galaxies are not up to several billion light years away from Earth, and that light has been traveling for that amount of time.
That thread you pointed to was just more of the same garbage of creationism’s “God made everything in 6 24 hour days” trying to pose as science I’ve seen posted here for the last few years.
You can try to blow off radioisotope dating, but then how do you explain nuclear physics of which this is an integral part? How can we make nuclear explosions and power plants work if it is not true? Again, you have absolutely no coherent and consistent explanation complete with the math. You cannot cherry pick which parts of physics you want to believe and which you will not accept, It is a unified whole that all fits together and gives an explanation of how the universe works that fits all of the observed data and has a consistent and coherent mathematical proof.
A pterodactyl was a flyin' fool
Just a breeze flappin daddy of the old school
But a mama dactyl could sure make him drool
Aaaaah - eee - yaaah!Ape call, doodly - ah - bah
Dont be square Joe. Go ape!Nervous Norvus, 1956
The egg indicates this ancient flying reptile was a female, and that realisation has allowed researchers to sex these creatures for the first time.
Ewwwwww, that's just sick and plain dirty.
How can they be sure they weren't like penguins where the male also spends time incubating the egg?
I always thought the way to tell the sex of a pterosaur was to tell it a joke. If he laughs it's a male, but if she laughs it's a female.
And the fact those laws were set in the first split second of the big bang.
“The egg indicates this ancient flying reptile was a female, and that realisation has allowed researchers to sex these creatures for the first time. “
Translation: It allowed the researchers to pronounce another assumption.
The male of some species of birds (such as penguins) also sit on their eggs while their mate is away looking for food. What scientific evidence do they have that this bird is not male?
“The male of some species of birds (such as penguins) also sit on their eggs while their mate is away looking for food.”
—In this case, however, it doesn’t appear that the egg had even been laid yet.
Ptruly a wonderful find!
:’)
Pthat’s ptrue.
I understand the math well enough to know that radio-isotope dating has certain assumptions inherent in it.
I understand it well enough to know that evolutionists would like to cover-up millions of year old anomolies w/ Mt. St. Helens to call them xenoliths (or some such) and claim that it doesn’t expose radio-isotope dating for the fraud that it is.
I understand Einstein’s work well enough to know the starlight shows apparent age now actual earth-days age.
I understand nuclear physics well enough to know that the power comes from splitting the uranium (or other radioactive) atoms rather than the radio-isotope decay rates for same.
I understand when modern day scientists calls something that can not be observed nor repeated ‘science’
I understand how to read and research both sides of an argument before I go spouting off and labeling others work as crap.
Another assumption that you simply can not prove.
How long was that split second? What is the 1st cause of the big bang?
And I understand the math well enough to know that it disproves old-age evolution where you would need several orders of magnitude more than billions of years for evolution to NOT be a fairy-tale.
I understand how evolution can not explain the Cambrian explosion, polystrate fossils, thousands upon thousands of missing links, stasis in the fossil record, and more exposed and outright fraud than, not only any other branch of science, but more than all of the other branches of science combined.
Face it long ages evolution is toast just like global warming.
Ohhh
one more thing
I understand that true science does not cherry pick just the data that it needs to supoort a theory while discarding or defaming all the counter-evolutionary data.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.