Posted on 12/20/2017 9:33:35 AM PST by Simon Green
(Parks Victoria released a photo on December 20, which shows a dinosaur footprint after it was damaged by vandals at Flat Rocks near Melbourne)
Vandals used a hammer to smash a 115-million-year-old three-toed dinosaur footprint in a national park in Australia. Park rangers at the Bunurong Marine Park discovered the damage to the theropod footprint while taking a school group on a tour.
The one-foot wide print was found in 2006 and deliberately left in place to allow visitors to see it in its natural state in one of the world’s few ice-age dinosaur sites.
"It is so disappointing,” Parks Victoria ranger Brian Martin told ABC News.
“It's a popular, significant site. The rock there is reasonably hard so it looks like it's been hit with a hammer and pieces of the rock around the edge of the footprint have been broken away.”
The identity of the culprits and the possible motive remain unknown, but it appears the vandals were familiar with the footprint.
“For someone to damage it intentionally, you'd have to have a rough idea of where it is because seaweed grows on the rock platform and it looks like a normal rock until you look closely and see the outline of the footprint," Mr Martin said.
(The footprint before it was smashed)
Broken fragments of the print were found on the surrounding rock platform in which it is embedded.
Palaeontologists made a silicon rubber mould of the print after it was discovered. It is hoped that technicians will be able to restore the print.
The national park, east of Melbourne, was once roamed by at least six different types of carnivorous dinosaurs.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
[[A measurement that is precise to 4 significant figures]]
4 significant figures based on what? Opinions based on flawed measurements.
[[In other words, it’s no more than 0.01% “off” from the actual figure.]]
There are no accurate means of measuring so that .01% in thi case is meaningless- it’s simply 0.1% within their opinion of how old it should be-
[[Who mentioned carbon dating? The age of the universe has been measured using studies of the microwave background radiation, ameasurements by the Planck satellite, and the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (among others).]]
I mentioned it to show that the only ‘reasonably accurate’ method of dating is carbon dating- all the others you mentioned (which are said to measure out beyond a few thousand years) are seriously flawed- even the Planck results- You can find the flaws online- Not going to look them up here- Not only are they flawed- but results not agreeing with the opinion are thrown out till all the numbers match the agenda/opinion lol- Science? Yeah ok-
Measurements and observations.
There are no accurate means of measuring
That's....quite the assertion! :-)
I mentioned it to show that the only ‘reasonably accurate’ method of dating is carbon dating- all the others you mentioned (which are said to measure out beyond a few thousand years) are seriously flawed- even the Planck results- You can find the flaws online- Not going to look them up here
Sorry, but I'm going to have to ask you for evidence that the Plank results are incorrect.
Science? Yeah ok-
Yup, science. Best tool ever invented for exploring and investigating the universe. Nothing else comes close.
[[Measurements and observations.]]
Flawed-
Analysis of polarization patterns within the CMB, obtained from the Planck data, has now been presented in a paper submitted for publication last month.7 Its authors concluded that the “noise” caused by dust within our own galaxy is about the same size as the signal detected by the BICEP2 team. Hence, analysis of the Planck data has confirmed that the signal detected by the BICEP2 team is likely to have been caused by dust within our own Milky Way galaxy.
To make matters even worse for Big Bang proponents, researchers from King’s College London have argued that accepting the BICEP2 claim at face value would imply that the universe should have collapsed in on itself shortly after the supposed Big Bang. Hence, if the BICEP2 results were correct, our universe should not even exist!8
http://www.icr.org/article/8367/
[[There are no accurate means of measuring
That’s....quite the assertion! :-) ]]
Let me clarify=- no accurate means found to date of measuring time beyond a few thousand years
Why are dating methods that measure dates of a few thousand years accurate, but those measuring longer dates inaccurate?
you can read more about the Planck and bicep2 controversy here- these are not solid results, they are opinions derived from measurements that don’t actually support one another- also they are based on ideas, not sound proven data- so how significant are they?
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=6865
The ICR?
Really?
as i mentioned- you can look all that up- I’ve been round after round on these issues here in ther past- and provided all relevant links back then- I’m burned out on it- and dealing with too much right now to spend hours looking them up again-
“Age Dating Methods Seriously Flawed” will find you what you ask
Put down the bottle.
lol- dismissing facts because of where it’s posted? Now thats ‘real science’- the facts don’t lie- no matter where they are posted- The facts don’t support the bicep2 claims- don’t kill the messenger just because you don’t like their opinions outside of the message posted-
scientists walked back their claims after the planck data came out- it doesn’t matter where that info is poste-d the fat remains, they walked back their claims because it wasn’t supported by the evidence- you can dismiss facts simply because they are posted somewhere that you have fundamental differences with- the facts don’t change-
[[you can dismiss facts simply because they are posted somewhere that you have fundamental differences with]]
You CAN’T dismiss- mistake
What exactly is Google?
I’m willing to look at disagreement within the legitimate scientific community, but I feel free to dismiss out of hand pseudoscientific organizations that push nonsense such as “psychic” phenomena, astrology, the flat Earth, and creationism.
you reserve the right to dismiss facts because you hate a site? K- at least i know where you stand now-
‘nonsense’? Getting pretty personal aren’t you?
[[pseudoscientific organizations that push nonsense such as “psychic” phenomena, astrology, the flat Earth, and creationism.]]
that;s actually really nasty of you
What exactly is Google?
I did Google it:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22taro+lizard%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab
A whopping 3 (count them, 3) results...none of which discussed lizards.
Now what?
Whom did I attack? I called various pseudosciences nonsense.
I stand by that.
Seeing as a day is one revolution of the earth on its axis, a month is how long it takes the moon to go around to the earth and a year is how long it takes the earth to go around the sun, there has always been days months and years. Just wasn’t people around to count them.
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.
