Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It's Official: An Asteroid Wiped Out the Dinosaurs
Reuters ^ | 03/05/2010 | Kate Kelland

Posted on 03/05/2010 5:46:05 AM PST by jilliane

A giant asteroid smashing into Earth is the only plausible explanation for the extinction of the dinosaurs, a global scientific team said on Thursday, hoping to settle a row that has divided experts for decades.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Politics; Science; Weather
KEYWORDS: asteroid; catastrophism; chicxulub; deccantraps; dinosaur; dinosaurs; godsgravesglyphs; paleontology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last
To: GeronL
“It’s the only plausible explanation” is NOT science

Actually, it is science. What it isn't is the metaphysically certain truth. Science doesn't give you the truth, it gives you the best answer with the evidence at hand. People often forget that.

Science is extremely limited and most scientific discoveries are very incremental. That's what makes climate science so absurd.

81 posted on 03/05/2010 10:10:12 AM PST by AmishDude (It doesn't matter whom you vote for, it matters who takes office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
What’s in it for the winning side?

Nothing. The real question is what the losing side loses, which is research grants to pursue alternative extinction theories down dark rat holes at public expense.

Is this a pet project of yours or are you just normally this testy?,

My pet project, right now, is a personal war on the anti-science bigots who call themselves conservatives. A stunning fraction of scientists refuse to support anything remotely approaching conservatism because of the anti-science bigotry they perceive among its chief exponents.

This cauterwailing about a pronouncement of a sceintific body is the sort of thing that drives the nail in that cofin.

And yes I am that testy over the collective ignorance that conservatives are capable of demonstrating when they chalk their soles for the task.

Otherwise, not my field and not my topic, so other than knowing that some of these guys are really smart guys doing really good work, I have no dog in the fight.

82 posted on 03/05/2010 2:13:11 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: MestaMachine
How can you declare an issue “closed” or “proven” that has no final disposition?

I have no idea WTF you think you are bloviating about.

83 posted on 03/05/2010 2:14:43 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: BrandtMichaels
Science is never closed but that does not impede it’s progress.

This is simply wrong. Most issues are closed sooner or later. That does not mean it cannot be revisited. For instnace the constancy of the speed of light or the lack of superluminescent particles is "closed." No one seriously disbelieves it. Very very good physicists will ocasionally trot out a new experiment on a new accelerator to test it. That is fine. New evidence could emerge. No one oposes a few folks spending resources looking. But still, for all intents and purposes, the issue is closed and we move on assuming that the Lorentz Group is a symmetry of elementary fields.

84 posted on 03/05/2010 2:19:26 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: BrandtMichaels
but you can not re-create the dinos nor re-create and test the event

I can measure the alcohol content of your sorry butt post mortem and calculate the trajectory off of the machanical bull that tossed you and I can come up with a pretty convincing theory about how you met your demise without recreating the event, getting you liquored up and finding someone to hold your beer.

85 posted on 03/05/2010 2:25:29 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: jilliane

Settled science?


86 posted on 03/05/2010 5:01:52 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson; metmom
Hey AndyJackson,

Is it true what OldProfessor states, that, "we see the bar lowered to 41 [scientists]," as the consensus in this article?

.

87 posted on 03/05/2010 5:23:46 PM PST by celmak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

Caterwauling is not a modern discovery nor are you the first person to tire of ‘fools,’ but still discourse is the stuff of reasonable fellows, not the contrariness of harridans and hooligans of speech, don’t you think?


88 posted on 03/06/2010 8:28:33 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, then writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: celmak
Is it true what OldProfessor states, that, "we see the bar lowered to 41 [scientists],"

If those 41 were the only ones, you might have a point.

89 posted on 03/06/2010 9:58:41 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

The Bible doesn’t even mention dinosaurs. Any theories why?

And if they aren’t mentioned in the Bible, maybe the whole thing is a hoax?


90 posted on 03/06/2010 10:48:21 AM PST by AlanD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AlanD

Maybe because dinosaurs weren’t germaine to the content of the bible?


91 posted on 03/06/2010 2:11:42 PM PST by GeronL (I Own Me (yep, boiled down to 6 letters))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: AlanD
"The Bible doesn’t even mention dinosaurs. Any theories why?

They don't mention species either, do you think the Bible might have labeled the dinosaurs differently? The Bible does mention "with their kind," maybe they called dinosaurs "leviathans?"

.

92 posted on 03/06/2010 4:10:45 PM PST by celmak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
discourse is the stuff of reasonable fellows, not the contrariness of harridans and hooligans of speech, don’t you think?

If folks approached this in the spirit of open discourse to discover a truth I would have no problem. But, folks confuse serious science on an issue that has been long settled and not just by a committee of 41, with junk science.

Everyone who protests that global warming is junk science is reliant upon information and data collected by satellites and recording stations built by scientists, all interpreted by scientists who are among the harshest critics of those behind the global warming conspiracy.

There are good scientists and there are frauds. Good scientists should not suffer because frauds rush in.

93 posted on 03/08/2010 8:20:53 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
If those 41 were the only ones, you might have a point.

As well as if they were frauds posturing as good scientists and opposing well-founded conclusions of the best scientists going.

If we could just reach some sort of agreement that the Federal Reserve's reckless monetary policies over the past decades are a source of our present ruin we might actually be able to bury the hatchet as I don't think we disagree on other matters.

94 posted on 03/08/2010 8:24:50 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

Note: this topic was posted 3/5/2010. Thanks jilliane.

95 posted on 01/25/2014 9:16:38 AM PST by SunkenCiv (;http://www.freerepublic.com/~mestamachine/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Anti-science is when someone says its “settled” and anyone who questions the “official” line is an idiot.

I question your official definition of anti-science.

96 posted on 01/25/2014 10:21:40 AM PST by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Note: this topic is from 03/05/2010. Adding to the list, not pinging.

97 posted on 10/03/2015 4:02:56 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (What do we want? REGIME CHANGE! When do we want it? NOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson