Posted on 11/29/2018 9:52:53 AM PST by KierkegaardMAN
...Due to the principles of gravity, mass, and the limitations of muscular anatomy in any life form, it would not be possible for any animal weighing more than 20,803 pounds to be able to lift its own weight (Holden, 1994). However, the Brontosaurus is supposed to weigh over 70,000 pounds, and other so-called sauropods are supposed to be many times larger than that.
Then there is the issue of neck size - a long necked animal of that size would not even be able to lift its neck. Additionally, their blood pressure would be way too high to be able to live. Their heart would literally explode. For reference, a giraffe has a long neck, and even at its relatively tiny size in comparison to sauropods, a giraffe is at essentially the peak of blood pressure that is possible to live, having a higher blood pressure than any other animal...
(Excerpt) Read more at thetechreader.com ...
“Bones dont decay?”
You have an interesting point. On our property at least 1 deer will winter kill, whether it be from coyotes getting it, a stray hunter’s bullet or disease. My point is, in the spring all we will find is the hair. Lots of it. The bone, hoof and tooth matter simply do not exist.
I trapped out several beaver a few years back and piled the bodies on the shore. Couple weeks later all that was left was the snares and a few claws. No bones, no teeth, nothing else.
My point is, something eats this stuff before it has a chance to rot.
So the probability of finding millions of prehistoric bones is really minimal unless the conditions were ripe for them to be fossilized.
Are you saying the Brontosaurus fossils are fakes?
Day and night were created BEFORE the sun was created.
How can you base the length of a day on the sun?
Do you realize how silly that sounds? Gravity was weaker?
Evolutionists need to be consistent, either things constantly vary or they don’t. Fitting the facts to the narrative is very disenguous.
Maybe days were longer, or maybe shorter, maybe there was lower or higher air pressure, 220,221, whatever it takes.
Maybe just better left said “we don’t know” rather than constantly mix and match theories that do not support one another.
That’s the time it takes for the earth to spin once on it’s axis :)
Yup. It's quit common for dogs to eat bones, if given the chance. That's just one example.
[1:1] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth,
[1:2] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.
[1:3] Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
[1:4] And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
[1:5] God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
Indeed.
What kind? Back in the 1950s, college days, my botany professor didn’t seem to know. Can’t be suction pump.
Scattered hair and a pile of undigested willow twigs is all that remains in the spring of the body of a winter-killed moose. I’ve seen scores of such piles in northern B.C.
Snort.
One mythical charter vouching for another myth...that’s rich!
.. The physiology of water uptake and transport is not so complex either.
The main driving force of water uptake and transport into a plant is transpiration of water from leaves.
Transpiration is the process of water evaporation through specialized openings in the leaves, called stomates.
The evaporation creates a negative water vapor pressure [that] develops in the surrounding cells of the leaf.
Once this happens, water is pulled into the leaf from the vascular tissue, the xylem, to replace the water that has transpired from the leaf.
This pulling of water, or tension, that occurs in the xylem of the leaf, will extend all the way down through the rest of the xylem column of the tree
and into the xylem of the roots due to the cohesive forces holding together the water molecules along the sides of the xylem tubing.
(Remember, the xylem is a continuous water column that extends from the leaf to the roots.)
Finally, the negative water pressure that occurs in the roots will result in an increase of water uptake from the soil.
Also of possible interest at Phys.org:
Researchers report overnight cycle of water movement in trees
(line breaks added in hopes of avoiding the dreaded ‘text wall’)
but its just that ... your opinion.
Now, I haven't done any literature research on the actual process, but I do have a BS in Engineering and a PhD in physical chemistry. However, a convenient explanation doesn't seem to appear,just off-hand.
In a deep well, there has to be a mechanical pump that pushes the water up to the earth's surface, usually into a water tower, to obtain a practical pressure to distribute the water by gravity. I doubt if a centrifugal pump would work deep down, either. after 30 feet max, it would just sit there and cavitate, wouldn't it?
For a tree, water going up inside would be atmospheric pressure to the roots, wouldn't it? The water has to come from somewhere. And I would think that if the ambient was 100% relative humidity, there could be no negative pressure developed by evaporation, eh?
To me, the Scientific American explanation is a bit inadequate, isn't it?
I found this, here: The USGS Water Science School
Plants and trees couldn't thrive without capillary action. Plants put down roots into the soil which are capable of carrying water from the soil up into the plant. Water, which contains dissolved nutrients, gets inside the roots and starts climbing up the plant tissue. Capillary action helps bring water up into the roots. But capillary action can only "pull" water up a small distance, after which it cannot overcome gravity. To get water up to all the branches and leaves, the forces of adhesion and cohesion go to work in the plant's xylem to move water to the furthest leaf.
- - - - - -
Which is a lot better summary of what I'd always heard/read about the way it works.
Given my (now retired) craft, I'm just glad it works, however trees actually do it :-)
I told you it sounded like heresy.
Point is, the bones exist, therefore the animals existed on this planet at some point.
Two: the size of the bones indicates that many of these animals were much, much larger than any animals we see on the planet today. So large, in fact, that they could not exist on earth with its present gravity.
There must be some logical explanation for this, as condition one and condition two cannot co-exist. Gravity on earth could not have been as strong as it is today, or those massive fossils would not be in the ground. Those animals could not have existed at all, if the planet's gravity were as strong then, as it is now.
How could our planet's gravity have been weaker? We do not know. We can only assume that it must have been, and that someday we'll find the answer.
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.