1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Confirmed: growth rate was different in past around time of flood!

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by dad, Mar 11, 2020.

  1. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    Ancient shells had a faster growth rate, new study shows.

    "The ancient mollusk, from an extinct and wildly diverse group known as rudist clams, grew fast, laying down daily growth rings. The new study used lasers to sample minute slices of shell and count the growth rings more accurately than human researchers with microscopes.
    The high resolution obtained in the new study combined with the fast growth rate of the ancient bivalves revealed unprecedented detail about how the animal lived and the water conditions it grew in, down to a fraction of a day.

    "We have about four to five datapoints per day, and this is something that you almost never get in geological history. We can basically look at a day 70 million years ago. It's pretty amazing."

    Ancient shell shows days were half-hour shorter 70 million years ago: Beer stein-shaped distant relative of modern clams captured snapshots of hot days in the late Cretaceous

    The reasons for the observed fast growth rates are speculation. The associated fairy tales about the climate and moon etc are speculations used to try and explain how such a fast rate could have occurred.

    Ha
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +5,108
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    You have misunderstood the article. There is no surprise here about the growth rate of the mollusc, nor about the shorter length of day. It is common knowledge that the Earth is transferring angular momentum to the Moon, via the drag exerted by the tides. Anyone with 6th form knowledge of mechanics will understand that must be happening. (Conservation of angular momentum etc.)

    The point of the article is that the daily growth "rings" allow the length of day during the Cretaceous, i.e. over 65 million years ago, to be accurately estimated - and it was half an hour shorter.
     
    • Winner Winner x 7
    • Informative Informative x 7
    • Like Like x 1
  3. beenherebeforeagain

    beenherebeforeagain Rogue Animist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    18,383
    Ratings:
    +5,734
    Religion:
    Modern Animist
    let me see if I get what you're saying here...

    Proposition 1: Earth days were shorter by about 30 minutes about 65-70 million years ago...

    Proposition 2: One ancestral species of clam grew very fast (very similar to some species of clam today)...

    Therefore: God caused a worldwide catastrophic flood 6,000 or so years ago...

    Or am I missing something...?
     
    • Winner Winner x 7
    • Like Like x 3
    • Useful Useful x 1
  4. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    No. I do not think so.


    Speculation when applied to the distant past. That assumes that all the reasons the oon now may be getting more distant from the earth also existed in the deep past. No. That is not known at all.
    False.
    The only time this had to happen is since our nature and laws started to exist as we know them. Before that, we do not know. For all I know, the planets may have moved and the moon before or during the nature change. For all we know, the rotation and orbit of things could have been greatly affected. Perhaps a sudden increase of rotation of the planet could have been part of the mechanism that started the rapid continental separation?! Ha. Perhaps in the future the sun will not be required in crop growth here and sustaining life as we now know it. Perhaps the earth will cease rotating (or change the amount) so that the sun rotates around the earth!? Ha. Who knows?


    Not interested in any speculative points or associations that fishbowl theorists desire to make in the article. I am only interested in facts and what is KNOWN. The years are not known, that is religion. It is based mostly on isotope ratios that are believed to represent ratios formed in our present nature. Period. Any other basis or correlation likewise assumes a same nature and physics in the past. Period. As for climate claims based on the fast growth, that is a joke.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  5. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    No. I assume people would know better than to take foolish dream dates seriously.
    No. The only species that they studied here is now determined to have grown fast. It need not be an ancestor of today's creatures either. It could have been an evolved clam kind that left remains and lived at the same time the other scriptures we know also lived but could not leave remains. We do not know.
    Strike three. No. The rapid growth (and probably rapid evolution, and reproduction etc etc) was not due to the year of the flood, but to the nature of the day.
    Yes, basically everything.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +5,108
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    I see. So you quote this article as "confirming" something it neither says nor supports. :confused:
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
  7. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    1,738
    Ratings:
    +1,411
    Religion:
    none
    Well, you are pretty alone with that assumption.
    Your lack of understanding anything scientific is notorious.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  8. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    Look at the bolded bits in the OP. It says growth rates were faster for the creature.
     
  9. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    Or your is. Don't blame me.

    The study does say growth rates were faster. The silly faith based reasons that they think it 'had to have happened' and implications based on these things can be dismissed. Look at the facts. Just the facts.
     
  10. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +5,108
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    "Faster"? Faster than what? I didn't see anything in the article comparing growth rates.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    Try reading the OP before commenting. Faster than today.
     
  12. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +5,108
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    The article does not say that at all. It just says this extinct species grew "fast". That's all. There is no comparison of its growth rate with any other creature.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    1,738
    Ratings:
    +1,411
    Religion:
    none
    It says they were fast, not faster, right there in the bolded bits.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  14. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    Never said there was. Focus. But if you have a study for any other creature then post it! The point you seem to miss here is that the creatures studied grew at a faster daily rate then what we see today.
    Seems like a simple concept.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +5,108
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    The article does not say that, though. It just says this mollusc grew fast. Fast enough for each day's growth to leave a detectable growth ring in the shell.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    Here is the OP

    ""The ancient mollusk, from an extinct and wildly diverse group known as rudist clams, grew fast, laying down daily growth rings. The new study used lasers to sample minute slices of shell and count the growth rings more accurately than human researchers with microscopes.
    The high resolution obtained in the new study combined with the fast growth rate of the ancient bivalves revealed unprecedented detail about how the animal lived and the water conditions it grew in, down to a fraction of a day.

    "We have about four to five datapoints per day, and this is something that you almost never get in geological history. We can basically look at a day 70 million years ago. It's pretty amazing."

    Surely you can comprehend that the jist of this is that the creatures used to have a fast daily growth rate compared to now?
     
  17. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    And do they grow that fast today? Ha.
     
  18. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +5,108
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    No the jist of it is that because they seem to have had a symbiosis with photosynthetic organisms, they grew by day and not by night, thus creating a pattern of daily growth rings.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +5,108
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    They are extinct. Read the article.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. dad

    dad Undefeated

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    Messages:
    3,402
    Ratings:
    +234
    Religion:
    christian
    No. You imagine and claim and believe that the rapid growth had to be de to that. I am not interested in your beliefs, just the facts.
     
Loading...