Study Finds that a Single Impact Killed the Dinosaurs
Posted on: Tuesday, 28 November 2006, 13:35 CST
Data supports the single-impact theory in a controversial discussion
COLUMBIA, Mo. – The dinosaurs, along with the majority of all other animal species on Earth, went extinct approximately 65 million years ago. Some scientists have said that the impact of a large meteorite in the Yucatan Peninsula, in what is today Mexico, caused the mass extinction, while others argue that there must have been additional meteorite impacts or other stresses around the same time.
A new study provides compelling evidence that "one and only one impact" caused the mass extinction, according to a University of Missouri-Columbia researcher.
"The samples we found strongly support the single impact hypothesis," said Ken MacLeod, associate professor of geological sciences at MU and lead investigator of the study. "Our samples come from very complete, expanded sections without deposits related to large, direct effects of the impact – for example, landslides – that can shuffle the record, so we can resolve the sequence of events well. What we see is a unique layer composed of impact-related material precisely at the level of the disappearance of many species of marine plankton that were contemporaries of the youngest dinosaurs. We do not find any sedimentological or geochemical evidence for additional impacts above or below this level, as proposed in multiple impact scenarios."
MacLeod and his co-investigators studied sediment recovered from the Demerara Rise in the Atlantic Ocean northeast of South America, about 4,500 km (approximately 2,800 miles) from the impact site on the Yucatan Peninsula. Sites closer to and farther from the impact site have been studied, but few intermediary sites such as this have been explored.
Interpretation of samples from locations close to the crater are complicated by factors such as waves, earthquakes and landslides that likely followed the impact and would have reworked the sediment. Samples from farther away received little impact debris and often don’t demonstrably contain a complete record of the mass extinction interval. The Demerara Rise samples, thus, provide an unusually clear picture of the events at the time of the mass extinction.
"With our samples, there just aren’t many complications to confuse interpretation. You could say that you’re looking at textbook quality samples, and the textbook could be used for an introductory class," MacLeod said. "It’s remarkable the degree to which our samples follow predictions given a mass extinction caused by a single impact. Sedimentological and paleontological complexities are minor, the right aged-material is present, and there is no support for multiple impacts or other stresses leading up to or following the deposition of material from the impact."
The impact of a meteorite on the Yucatan Peninsula likely caused massive earthquakes and tsunamis. Dust from the impact entered the atmosphere and blocked sunlight, causing plants to die and animals to lose important sources of food. Temperatures probably cooled significantly around the globe before warming in the following centuries, wildfires on an unprecedented scale may have burned and acid rain might have poured down.
MacLeod and many other scientists believe that these effects led to the relatively rapid extinction of most species on the planet. Some other scientists have argued that a single impact could not have caused the changes observed and say that the impact in the Yucatan predates the mass extinction by 300,000 years.
MacLeod’s co-investigators were Donna L. Whitney from the University of Minnesota, Brian T. Huber from the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History and Christian Koeberl of the University of Vienna. The study was recently published in the ‘in press’ section of the online version of the Geological Society of America Bulletin. Funding was provided by the U.S. Science Support Program, the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Austrian Science Foundation. Samples were recovered on Leg 207 of the Ocean Drilling Program.
---
On the Net:
Related Articles
- Scientists Say Mine Collapse Was Cause of Seismic Event
- New Report 'Impact of Devices on a Mobile Broadband Universe' Includes the Ways in Which Devices Have Impacted the Growth of WiBro in South Korea
- New Vaccine Against Deadliest Strain of Avian Flu Tested By University of Pittsburgh Scientists
- Plant Extinctions Might Impact Humans
- MetaPass Introduces World's First Universal Enterprise Single Sign-On
- The University of Maryland Collaborates With Blackboard to Offer a Single, Campus-Wide Teaching and Learning System; The Office of Information Technology Completed RFP Process to Acquire Service
- An Integrated Case Study for Evaluating the Impacts of an Oil Refinery Effluent on Aquatic Biota in the Delaware River: Advanced Chemical Fingerprinting of PAHs
- Top University post for scientist who took time to develop
- Thomas Jefferson University and University of Michigan Scientists Identify Gene Defect Behind Muscle-Wasting Disease in Mice; May Lead to Treatments for Comparable Diseases in Humans
- University at Buffalo Scientists Patent Novel Inhibitor of Poxvirus Replication; Work Could Result in Treatment for Smallpox, Monkeypox
Rating: 3.9 / 5 (410 votes)
 |
 |
Rate this article:
User Comments (682)
| 682. |
Posted by poo on 09/14/2008, 18:31 OMG THE FLOOD, SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING |
| 681. |
Posted by woody on 06/21/2008, 08:17 its cool |
| 680. |
Posted by woody on 06/21/2008, 08:17 its cool |
| 679. |
Posted by nanny sue on 06/19/2008, 04:51 hello ben dover!!!!!!!!! |
| 678. |
Posted by moist owl on 06/19/2008, 04:50 i believe that the scientific theorum behind this ground breaking discovery is a load of ****. |
| 677. |
Posted by randy on 06/19/2008, 04:48 it was crap |
| 676. |
Posted by Ben Dover on 02/05/2008, 05:30 Yo dave hows it hanging...! you sound cool as |
| 675. |
Posted by dave on 01/30/2008, 04:15 shut it |
| 674. |
Posted by leslie puha on 10/08/2007, 16:04 hae man watzz up |
| 673. |
Posted by SallyThompso on 06/21/2007, 07:45 Didn't help with my case study one bit |
| 672. |
Posted by from Korea on 06/03/2007, 06:26 In science, it's just what we think we know now, but we will know much more later on. All ready, we have proof that the Noah's Ark is real. Check your self on Google images! If there are proof, and there are, why aren't some people accepting the truth? Scientists say that the earth is billions and billion years old, but according to the bible, it only has been about 6000 years! There also are fossils of dinosaurs and humans found af the same spot, which also scientists say, that dinasaurs died off long before the humans. If that is correct, why are the painting in the cave walls that have people chasing after dinosaurs, or anything? Believe the bible and the bible only, all of our answers lie there. It is the only truth in the world, because the bible is God's word. |
| 671. |
Posted by chin yow ming on 06/02/2007, 10:33 i thoght that it was a very good artical and that there should be more articals like it in the world. |
| 670. |
Posted by adam brooks on 03/16/2007, 09:59 if anybody is reading this plz help me from my teacher mr bryant he touches me up every time we are alone and i dont like it plz help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| 669. |
Posted by raj tholia on 12/13/2006, 22:58 Dear Sir or Madam few years back I was in Madagascar 1980, and there I purchased dinosaur khaki (latrine), which i am not sure is it really is? I would like to give in free to somebody who would like to work on it and get more information on it. My email is rajtholia@yahoo.com Thanks |
| 668. |
Posted by astronaut on 12/13/2006, 22:40 jfitch, please state what you would find to disprove the Bible. Please site professional sources, not like the ones you say that Christians use. |
| 667. |
Posted by cheesedoodle on 12/13/2006, 22:39 Okay everyone, let's decide this once and for all. Those who oppose the Bible, please disprove anything in the Bible right now, cite the source, and those who support it seek out a reply and cite it. I myself have found NOTHING to disprove the Bible. many people I have asked have said that the Bible is disproven and wrong. When I ask them what is wrong about it or to prove it, they grow silent. Also, many who attack the Bible have probably never even read it. |
| 666. |
Posted by M. Eow on 12/06/2006, 02:59 "I couldn't help it, I saw the third dinosaur coming with PINEAPPLES!" |
| 665. |
Posted by crass on 12/04/2006, 20:56 I hope someone has a fitting next entry. For now, why do people have to try to shoehorn contemporary scientific methods into the Bible? |
| 664. |
Posted by jfitch on 12/04/2006, 09:41 Why are posts being edited and dropped altogether? The word "manipulate" DID show up when I read my previous post this morning, now it has been edited! What could possibly be the reason to do that?!? Well, I guess that is a good sign that it isn't worth my effort to post here anymore. Bye all. And thanks to the fundies for making life fun;) |
| 663. |
Posted by jfitch on 12/04/2006, 05:33 To 661. If you notice, ALL scientific theories use these words/phrases in the discussion of unknowns. This is scientific speculation and is unproven at THIS time. It's funny that you would comment about the use of these words when posting in a comments section of a scientific website. I mean, obviously you have been exposed to science and understand how hypothesis/theories are researched and proven/dis-proven over time. Science doesn't use the words fact and truth until such things are PROVEN to be fact or truth. It's also funny that you accept the "truth" and "facts" of the bible without hesitation, but have such a hard time accepting science. The website you have posted a link to is full of silly science. AnswersinGenesis is a JOKE, a source of amusement for those with the ability to think logically. You say that there is no evidence to disprove the bible? That is ridiculous! There is MUCH more evidence to DISPROVE than there is to prove ANY of it! You have been brainwashed. Posting links to christian websites makes you look ignorant. These websites MANIPULATE science to FIT the scriptures and then dismiss anything that doesn't fit. You are being tricked. |
| 662. |
Posted by krupp on 12/03/2006, 23:53 Kind of like how OJ likely slashed his wife and her friend, probably drenched his gloves in their blood, may have run at full speed into his own air conditioning unit, and might have tried to blame the murders on Columbian drug lords. But if a good book said that he was practicing his chip shot at the time, it would be considered factual, and no amount of circumstantial evidence woulid disprove it. The Titanium Aliibi. |
| 661. |
Posted by woodchuck on 12/03/2006, 17:17 Have you noticed that this article, as well as others on scientific "evidence" with regard to evolution, contains words such as likely, probably, may have, might have, etc. How can anyone call research findings with such vague terms "science?" There is far more scientific evidence that proves the Bible to be factual and none that disproves it. To read more, go to http://www.iccfaith.com/speakers.html or http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp |
| 660. |
Posted by krupp on 12/03/2006, 03:21 Youngearthguy, in 637 you say that female whales don't have the pelvic bones that the males do. I don't find any references that state that the females have different bones in that area. Is there an obvious source for this? |
| 659. |
Posted by krupp on 12/02/2006, 16:52 Just that I don't see how you can know what you know in 653 and write what you write in 637. I think you are probably a 'lutionist purposefully sandbagging the floodies' argument. That or the whale kicked you pretty hard in the head with one of its vestigal appendages. |
| 658. |
Posted by OMG on 12/02/2006, 12:57 Thank you, Bill, you are right (#656). The current rate of uplift has nothing to do with it; that rate changes, in various areas, as the earth itself changes, and that rate was certainly much higher at times during the previous billions of years. Youngguy, the only way we CAN have mntns is that the earth IS billions of years old. Would you have us believe that \"the flood\" washed the mntns into place? Or that they \"suddenly\" shot out of the earth as people stood there and watched? Good thinking. |
| 657. |
Posted by Bill N on 12/02/2006, 11:37 Well, I am done with this debate. It took a LONG time for the "flat Earth" people to believe the truth, just like it will take a while to convince the "young Earthers" that THEIR beliefs are wrong. It's is NOT my job to explain science to the ignorant. The sad fact is that no matter how well it's explained or how LOGICAL it is, people brainwashed into believing that there is a magical being in the sky that created everything, will ALWAYS believe that. What is painfully sad is the fact that a LIMITED knowledge of science, and faith in a book used to control bronze age man, is responsible for the very narrow view of the world and universe around them. The christian science websites do a disservice to these people. The information is MOLDED to "agree" with the teachings of the bible and the actual scientific fact is explained away with nonsense (thermodynamics...LOL!). But, People are entitled to believe what they want to and I don't WANT to change that about anyone..I just don't want anyone posting WRONG "science" as fact. It's only a DESPERATE, foolish, and uneducated attempt at justifying the beliefs of the insecure. sad. |
| 656. |
Posted by Bill N on 12/02/2006, 07:51 To youngearthguy/post # 652: That is some of the most ill informed drivel I have EVER read! Your inability to understand how mountains are created is mind-boggling! It's disgusting actually! And then the examples you give of WHY the earth would be "eroded flat" are ridiculous! Show me ONE "non-christian based" site that says ANY of that! The Earth is constantly evolving and mountains and land are being created as I type! What land mass is above sea level, and erosion rates don't "prove" anything about young earth...not even close! What happens to the sediment? The earth has been changing for billions of years and it will continue to change for billions more after the humans kill each other off. Yes, billions of years ago there was MORE geological activity, BUT, that doesn't prove "young Earth " BS..It only says that geologically, the planet is LESS active than in the past. That can change;) And yes, IF no more mountains are ever formed, then 20 million years COULD erode the surface flat. But, There are a lot of "if"s there. I still fail to see how THIS proves the fairy tale (bible) correct. |
| 655. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/02/2006, 07:41 Bill, I was making a point. All your type of evolutionist do is make personal attacks. You can’t site the specific science to defend your positions. You run and hide behind the lab coats of your professors and hurl insults like “you’re a stupid head” “you don’t know science” na na nana na kind of gibberish. Your tactics are on the lower end of the cognitive reasoning in that you claim all evidences to be a fraud. Here Bill, I will give you a structured sentence for you to fill in. Stuckie the dog is a fraud because “_____”. You fill in the blank of course. Here’s another one. Leather can’t fossilize (or socialize) because “_______” . Do you get the idea? |
| 654. |
Posted by Bill N on 12/02/2006, 07:22 Youngearthmoro...err...guy. I guess you were unable to see that a made and edit to explain my mistake. The word "socialization" should have been fossilization. Yes, I made a mistake with spelling just like you mistake a fairy tale for truth. No one is perfect. I actually think you knew what word I meant but in a typical christian self righteous way you had to point the finger at me because you are insecure. Yes, I am SURE there are MANY christian websites that claim these bullshit examples of retarded non-science (nonsense) as truth and fact, but the reputable science based sites will point out MANY reasons why these examples fail to live up to the promise when scrutinized (leather would be fossilized in the boot...that type of thing). Someone CREATED these things to deceive AND to make money from suckers. Do you REALLY want to criticize my spelling and grammar during a debate? It IS a fact that only the desperate and insecure resort to that childish tactic. It doesn't surprise me that you do it because I can see from your lack of scientific knowledge, that you are probably a bit immature. |
| 653. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/02/2006, 07:12 Krupp, what is your point? From the literature I have read, it was mining workers from the Dicalite Division of Grefco Corporation. Are you going to try to make the evidence moot because one of them claims to be a victim of alien abduction or thinks he is Napoleon? The fossil is the point. Red Herrings don’t erase the facts. The whale was unearthed in April of 1976. I don’t care if it was dug up by an overzealous German Shepherd. It was written about in secular and creationist publications. |
| 652. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/02/2006, 05:59 If the earth were billions of years old, you are correct. We would not have mountains. It has been estimated (not by me) that by landslides, wind erosion, ground creep etc… the continents will be eroded flat even with the current rate of uplift in under 20 million years. Geologists speculate that we are going thru a period of extreme erosion now due to the topography. They say volcanoes and uplift made up the difference in the past. They know it presents a problem to the old earth theory. 27.5 x 10^9 tons sediment/year wash into the oceans while 383 x 10^15 tons of land mass remains above sea level. The numbers aren’t really the point of contention. It is realization that once again they have to use words like “propose” “speculate” & “may have happened” to explain away evidence that the Bible is correct and they are wrong. |
| 651. |
Posted by krupp on 12/02/2006, 03:36 Youngearthguy, Do you favor publicity for first-hand accounts of the Lompoc whale by those who discovered/excavated it? |
| 650. |
Posted by OMG on 12/02/2006, 01:41 "The rate of erosion far exceeds the uplift"?? How is that possible...we wouldn't have mountains if that were the case. This sounds just like some earlier quotes (that I'm not going to try to go back and find) that claimed that at the rate the world's rotation is slowing it would have to spin impossibly fast in its early days if it were old, and that we should do the math...I wonder if the person who said that did the math? I highly doubt it. |
| 649. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/01/2006, 20:04 Wow Bill. You are a bright one. I am sure the reason your grammar and spelling are abominable is due to the ongoing research hours you are pouring into protecting your bubble. So, exactly what does “quick socialization” have to do with anything? Do you believe it was a friendly boot once it turned to stone? Was it antisocial when it was just a regular leather boot with an intact leg in it? I just wanted you to clarify your position if you can pull yourself away from the microscopes and Petri dishes long enough. By the way, we can both site thousands of web addresses to support and refute both sides of the argument. My stance is that there is no such thing as bad publicity. The fact that some evolution cultist has to make a site trying to refute the evidence will make some of the folks who have not swallowed the lie of evolution curious. Maybe they will dig a little deeper instead of falling for the humanist religion. |
| 648. |
Posted by Bill N on 12/01/2006, 19:46 From my last post..."socialization" should be fossilization. Damned spellcheck! |
| 647. |
Posted by Bill N on 12/01/2006, 19:03 LOL! It's AMAZING what some people believe as evidence! It took me about 2 minutes to find this site because I KNEW that a boot would ALSO be fossilized, just like the contents! It is LAUGHABLE that anyone would present this "Limestone Cowboy" as "proof" of quick socialization! Pathetic to the extreme. A site to explain the absurdity: http://paleo.cc/paluxy/boot.htm And since this "stuckie" is in tourist trap, I'm sure it is just more PURE DECIET to trick simple minded people into believing more BS. Just about 40 seconds of thought will prove, to anyone with 1/4 of a brain, that "stuckie" is a hoax. The bubble is intact. |
| 646. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/01/2006, 18:02 A fossil can’t be made in less than 6500 years? You must not have heard of the Limestone Cowboy. It is a cowboy boot with the foot and part of the leg still in it that was turned to stone. It was founding 1980 in Iraan, Texas. How about the fossilized trilobite in the imprint of a shoe? It was found in 1968. Humans and trilobites were not supposed to be from the same time period. There is a petrified dog in a tree on display in a museum in Waycross, Ga. The dog is named “Stuckie”. Sorry to burst your bubble James. |
| 645. |
Posted by Scott on 12/01/2006, 17:34 Quote: Posted by Michael on 11/28/2006, 16:21 What I don't understand is why all the dinosaurs went to Mexico for the single impact?" For spring break !! |
| 644. |
Posted by James on 12/01/2006, 17:16 I cannot see how anyone can be using the idea that a flood deposited fossils on moutain tops. These are fossils that are millions of years old. You can't make a fossil in a time span on the order of 6500 years. Are you saying that the flood happened AND THEN someone came along with pixie dust and turned the shells, boans, and sometimes delicate tissue into rock? That doesn't make sense at all. We have bodies of individuals and animals from roughly that time ago. Some are mummified, some are just skeletons but none are actually turned to stone. |
| 643. |
Posted by James on 12/01/2006, 17:13 I cannot see how anyone can be using the idea that a flood deposited fossils on moutain tops. These are fossils that are millions of years old. You can't make a fossil in a time span on the order of 6500 years. Are you saying that the flood happened AND THEN someone came along with pixie dust and turned the shells, boans, and sometimes delicate tissue into rock? That doesn't make sense at all. We have bodies of individuals and animals from roughly that time ago. Some are mummified, some are just skeletons but none are actually turned to stone. |
| 642. |
Posted by James on 12/01/2006, 17:06 If there is a such a thing as god I do not reasonable see why it would want to hide. Why would he present himself to people in the far past in such dramatic ways and not now? Please don't say he is showing himself now. I mean concrete ways that everyone would agree. Don't talk to me about faith. Why would god want me to have my god-given logical thinking ability to be at odds with the ambiguity of faith. God in the way that Christians see him simply doesn't exist now. Actually, if he did I can very easily see him abandoning human beings because of our total idiocy in the past. The best thing people can do is wake up and smell the coffee. Why would god start hiding from us? |
| 641. |
Posted by Bill N on 12/01/2006, 17:03 It is amazing AND sad that someone can believe that the ONLY way a whale skeleton can end up in Michigan is through a fabled "great flood". The Earth has been evolving and changing for billions of years and some people EASILY forget that MOST of the Earth was covered with water for a VERY long time! It's amazing how SELECTIVE some people are with their scientific knowledge. They ONLY believe the science that directly "proves" (*snicker*) what they CHOOSE to believe. And anything that disproves ANYTHING in the fable (bible) can't be right! Pathetic! Let's face it, some people believe in the magical man in the sky that reads EVERYONES mind simultaneously and sends them to the bad place to suffer ...forever, for touching their pee pee and admiring the **** of the woman next door, and other people believe in facts. |
| 640. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/01/2006, 17:01 So how many landslides and turbidity currents (underwater landslides) do you suppose occurred on top of Mt. Everest? Petrified clams were found there. Marine fossils are found on top of the Andes Mountains. Don’t give me the old plate tectonic upheaval junk. The rate of erosion far exceeds the uplift. The continents would have eroded flat many times over in the time that old earth geologist put on those fossils. The Bible says in the last days of the flood that the mountains rose up and the valleys sank down and the water rushed off. We find fossils all over the earth because of this flood. As for partial skeletons, you are right. A lot of them are incomplete. During a flood, dead things float around and break apart. They sink to the bottom in different places and are covered with sediment and fossilize. So how is it that you think you crushed me again? I am not even breaking a sweat rebuffing your sophomoric logic. |
| 639. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/01/2006, 16:16 As for the different strains of AIDS, refer back to post #626. You started with a virus and ended with a virus. Genesis says everything brings forth after its kind. That is all we have ever witnessed. You may have a retrovirus that responded to zidovudine (AZT) that developed a resistance and is now treated by indinavir. Here is a news flash. It is still a virus. If that is your best evidence that we all have a common ancestor, you have faith. How long do you think it will take the AIDS virus to go from a RNA virus to an ambulocetus like creature? 10 million years? A billion? Look into your tarot cards and get back with us. |
| 638. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/01/2006, 16:16 As for the different strains of AIDS, refer back to post #626. You started with a virus and ended with a virus. Genesis says everything brings forth after its kind. That is all we have ever witnessed. You may have a retrovirus that responded to zidovudine (AZT) that developed a resistance and is now treated by indinavir. Here is a news flash. It is still a virus. If that is your best evidence that we all have a common ancestor, you have faith. How long do you think it will take the AIDS virus to go from a RNA virus to an ambulocetus like creature? 10 million years? A billion? Look into your tarot cards and get back with us. |
| 637. |
Posted by Youngearthguy on 12/01/2006, 15:43 Are you trying to prove evolution thru the old vestigial organ claim again? The bones in the pelvic area of the whale were not left over from legs. They have muscles attached to them that enable them to make baby whales. They are only found in the males. You’d better brush up on your whale anatomy. There is no order of fossils. You can put your interpretation on them. You can hope, wish, and dream that arranging them in a certain way proves your point, but it is still using your imagination. If you want to talk whales, did you know that whale skeletons have been found in Michigan? Wow, must have been a flood covering the entire earth. Did you know a whale fossil 26’ long was found in the vertical position in Lompoc, California? Wow, must have been caught up in a huge sediment slurry during a flood. Also, 346 whales were found in a 1.5km area in Peru in sedimentary rock. Information like this must make me an awfully sour breakfast.;-) |
| 636. |
Posted by Ryan L on 12/01/2006, 15:37 OK have to say this- also since aparantly to the creationist the ONLY way to get a fossil is for a flood to happen. Ever hear of landslides??? And before you say they they only happen on land... they happen underwater too. How about severe wind storms...glaciers... i can go on... but i think you get the point.(or at least i hope). Actualy no im not done. What about swamps? Stuff falls in and dies all the time. Or some stuff is killed and scavanged like u said. But the entire body isnt always eaten. You see... bones are hard to digest. Ussually things eat the meat and organs. NOT BONES. Also.. who said every skeleton was complete. We have millions of partial skeletons. So basically right there I just crushed you again. What else you got? You gonna say somehting about scientology or maybe you'll say we cant disprove the bible. Well guess what. Your right! OOOO. Yea i cant prove the bible is wrong... just like i cant prove there is no bigfoot or pink flying elephants. You cant prove that somehting doesnt exist with empirical evidence because it doesnt exist in the first place. Gotta hand it to religion tho... they are crafy in how they word stuff. |
| 635. |
Posted by Ryan L on 12/01/2006, 13:20 Hahah. Thanks "arealist". Darwin award indeed. A sad and graphic one... but none the less an award :). Thanks for beig rational also. We need more people to think. I appreciate your effort in learning abuot the world. |
| 634. |
Posted by Ryan L on 12/01/2006, 13:00 OK "youngearthguy" (very catchy name by the way. Dont hint at anything ) . The reason i gave that example was to show that there are plenty of intermediate species. Looks it up and check out all the know fossils from that animal to modern day whales. If you think im full of it... Riddle me this Batman... If evolution didnt happen and ambulocetus didnt evolve into modern day whales... Then how come we have 1000's of whale fossils that (that were in the know chain of animals from ambulocetus to modern whales) why they have residual legs inside their gut? Did god put them their to tease biologists? Maybe.... Or did they become useless as they left their terrestrial lifestyle to a more aquatic one. More probable is you ask me(along with people with the highest IQ's in the world) :) :) :) KEEP IT COMIN LITTLE GUY I CAN GO ALL DAY. I EAT MORONS LIKE YOU FOR BREAKFAST. Also.. beofre yo go off on another rant abuot no proof. Answere this. how come we have abuot 17 different AIDS drugs now? Answer- Because the virus keep evoloving to beat our drugs. The reason AIDS is so deadly is because of the fact that evolves so rapidly. Try and squirm your way out of that one. NEXT! |
| 633. |
Posted by arealist on 12/01/2006, 12:38 "Im unaware of one person in history that has done a suicide bomb to prove evolution happened." Thats because their too smart and do not want to be handed a Darwin Award: www.darwinawards.com |
RSS Feeds