But this is typical of creationists. They think any old speculation, no matter how outlandish, involving however many unobserved phenomena, is equivalent to a well reasoned hypothesis with data that supports it involving a well observed and understood phenomena.
The skeletal structure of a dinosaur is quite sufficient to support itself without some magical mysterious “reduction in gravity”.
But this is typical of creationists. They think any old speculation, no matter how outlandish, involving however many unobserved phenomena, is equivalent to a well reasoned hypothesis with data that supports it involving a well observed and understood phenomena.
You state that dinos bone structure is sufficient to support there weight in todays gravity environment. Question, why are they no land animals greater in size than elephants today? (note: elephants are mammals and have mammalian bone structures while dinos had bird/reptile bone structures and were 10x the size of elephants). If todays gravity is the same throughout time why don’t we see larger and heavier animals? Why is human physiology capped at around 7’ and a functional maximum weight at around 250 - 300 lbs? My answer would be this is what our physiological system (circulation, bone structure and muscle density) can achieve against current conditions of gravity. Change gravity then you can change these physiological dimensions. Seems reasonable, no?
“But this is typical of creationists. They think any old speculation, no matter how outlandish, involving however many unobserved phenomena, is equivalent to a well reasoned hypothesis with data that supports it involving a well observed and understood phenomena.”
Don’t know how I became a “Creationist” to you while citing string theory, but okay lets play. A creationist posits that God/Gods/Intelligent Design created something (matter, life and conciousness) from nothing (empty space). Physicists posit matter existed at all times, but time only began when extremely dense matter comprising our universe exploded creating our current growing universe. Notice here, that science can’t explain the nothing to something phenomena because they can’t study/measure the state of nothing. So what science is saying is matter has always existed, but time is strictly relative to an expanding universe. (this is short hand for science has no idea how matter was created) Not sure this is true, either time is an absolute or its relative, but current physics state both are true. If you step back and realize that science does not attempt to answer the “creation” question but merely shuffles the shells and declares all matter existed at all times (thus no creation), that matter takes many forms through time (matter’s form can be explained through time), but time, as an absolute, is relative to the expansion of matter, while matter’s reduction to a super dense state via black holes and its superdense lifespan is free of time, it can get a mite confusing. You will notice that science sidestepped the original question of how it all started by explaining away the “creation” of matter by saying it always existed.
So my questions to you is (1) how did matter come into being? (2)how can time (as a constant force) create life out of matter? and (3)given the Darwinian model, why did homo sapiens ever need a 3lb brain to do nothing more than chase food and screw?
You have called me a name because you intimated that I have questions regarding the certainty of science. The name “Creationist” could easily have be replaced by “Skeptic”. I would ask whether you consider Einstein a “Creationist” or for that matter Newton? OBTW, even Darwin went to Church every Sunday. So are they all “Creationists”? Personnally, I am like a lot of other people, I wonder how it all could have happened, I study what is known, knowable, and theorized, and then I ask myself what it all means. To me, there is an intelligence within the universe. Its language is math. It can be discovered because the intelligence gave homo sapiens the tool with which to discover the patterns (both linear and non-linear). This I “believe” because of what I “know” (or think I know) about things. Bottom line, we were given a big brain to do things beyond chasing food and screwing. We are a post Darwinian species, we have choice, imagination and spirit. If we did not have these things, then the concept of “time” would not exist. So am I a creationist? Yes, I truly believe there was nothing before there was something. I don’t believe you answer the creation question honestly by saying it never happened, because matter has always existed. I have absolutely no idea how you can create something out of nothing, but my gut tells me it occurred at some point. Just sayin.
There is one maxim concerning science that you should embrace; what you think you know is often times wrong. Or said another way, “you don’t know, what you don’t know”. Stay thirsty my friend.