Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Study Provides Compelling Evidence of Single Impact Extinction Theory

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the scientists-all-looking-for-someone-named-ele dept.

Space 382

ectotherm writes to tell us that a new study at the University of Missouri-Columbia claims to provide compelling evidence that a single meteor impact was the cause of animal extinction 65 million years ago. From the article: "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."

cancel ×

382 comments

Wombats (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040338)

I suspect Wombats were somehow involved.

Re:Wombats (1)

Woldry (928749) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040714)

You could ask them [project-wombat.org] .

Re:Wombats (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041408)

I've heard that the wombats were all going to seminary school down at Lake Titicaca when a dump truck full of kumquats overturned on their clambake.

The rest, as they say, is history.

65 million? (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040342)


65 million years is crazy-talk, that's 64,994,000 years before God made the Earth!

Re:65 million? (5, Interesting)

sRev (846312) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040446)

I read this yesterday and have been looking in occasionally to read the comments at the bottom. It looks like there must be some global creationist group that is directing traffic to the story, as every comment makes just that same arguement. I guess the creationist party line is that the "flood" wiped out the dinosaurs. That's a lot of water.

Re:65 million? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040560)

It looks like there must be some global creationist group that is directing traffic to the story, as every comment makes just that same arguement. I guess the creationist party line is that the "flood" wiped out the dinosaurs.


Maybe they are just hoping that a crapflood will wipe out scientists?

Re:65 million? (1, Insightful)

buswolley (591500) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040986)

Personally, I don't believe that the Universe was made just thousands of years ago, but first consider the following:

It seems possible that if a creator was able to make a Universe, then He would also be able to create that Universe with a false history. To be more precise,

I mean the Creator could have created a Universe at state B, with Physical Law set Y, in such a way as to make it appear that state A had existed, by reconstructing state A by applying Y on states B..C...D...k...etc, where A In other words, if something is to come out of nothing, and can take on any form, it may well APPEAR that there was a prior history before that creation, but it isn't actually true. Light may take a million/billion years to reach us from that star, but those intermediating states may be reconstructed by an all knowing all powerful entity. By placing a photon with the appropriate properties and vectors in between the star and our planet, say 10,000 Light years out, may make it appear that the photon originated from that star millions/billions of years ago.

Re:65 million? (0, Offtopic)

buswolley (591500) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041008)

Sorry about the html screwups above.

Re:65 million? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041244)

That's something that's always struck me. An omnipotent god could trivially create a zillion photons all the way up to every star in the iniverse. And in fact could create 15 billion years of fake history which would be completely indistinguishable from "real" history.

Which also means that we could also postulate that the universe came into existence 10 seconds ago, complete with this comment half written.

Re:65 million? (1)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041354)

That's something that's always struck me. An omnipotent god could trivially create a zillion photons all the way up to every star in the iniverse. And in fact could create 15 billion years of fake history which would be completely indistinguishable from "real" history.

Uh, that is what omnipotent means. I'm not agreeing with it, but by definition, an omnipotent God could do literally anything.

Re:65 million? (4, Insightful)

flynt (248848) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041246)

So you have no problem granting me equal logical standing when I say the following: that I have, as of this moment, created your entire reality. Isn't it possible that if I was the creator, and created the universe, then I could also have created that universe with a false history? You believe me don't you? I have a post that says it's true! All other posts were planted here by me to tempt the faithless.

The problem with the statement is that there is no way to challenge it. You can't prove it, I can't disprove it, at best it's uninteresting, and at worst it's meaningless.

Re:65 million? (3, Interesting)

TheJorge (713680) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041582)

I see a bigger problem with that statement.

If we are to assume God did in fact create the universe and all its laws in such a way to make it look as though it's been around a lot longer than it has, and then gave us the tools of analysis and reason to "discover" these laws and the universe's history, who are we to thumb our noses at him and see through his giant fabrication? I mean, if He went to all this effort to make it look like there were dinosaurs 65 million years ago, carefully placing each photon and atom and what-not, we're pretty big jerks to dismiss all his efforts and say, "Yeah, that was nice with the fossil record and the carbon dating and all, but we know the truth. Good try with all that 'evidence' you made us." Even if you really know the secret truth that the universe has only been around 6500 years, lets not go and put a damper on God's efforts. Just go along with the rest of us when we say things like "Evolution" and "Big Bang"-- it'll make God a lot happier. And you don't want to make God angry.

oblig Bill Hicks (4, Funny)

BitterAndDrunk (799378) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041290)

'Sure.' Dinosaurs? ..... 'God put those there to test our faith.'
I think God put you here to test my faith, dude. You believe that?
'Uh huh.'
Does that trouble anyone here? The idea that God might be fuckin' with our heads? Anyone have trouble sleeping restfully with that thought in their heads?
God's running around, burying fossils: 'Hu hu ho. We'll see who believes in me now, ha HA. I'm a prankster god. I am killing me. Ho ho ho ho.'
You know, you die, you go to St. Peter, 'Did you you believe in dinosaurs?'
Well, you know, there was fossils everywhere. [Bill makes sound effects with his mic] KOOM Aaaahhhh. 'What are you, an idiot? God was FUCKING with you! Giant flying lizards, you moron! That's one of God's easiest jokes!'
'It seemed so plausibleeeee! Ahhhhhhhh!' Bound for the lake of fire. . . . "

We miss you Bill . . . please tell the flying saucers to drop you off for another show.

Re:65 million? (1)

mojodamm (1021501) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041352)

Tell you what; if I was omnipotent I sure wouldn't be playing this crappy version of 'The Sims', just to mess with all the insignificant life-forms I'd created earlier. Do people honestly think that if God created us in his image, he'd be content to just tool around in the heavens because he couldn't find anything better to do?

Metaphysics (4, Insightful)

CustomDesigned (250089) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041364)

A false history is a metaphysical concept. Any scientific investigation would see the "false" history. Indeed, the "false" history is the true physical history seen by honest scientists - except when viewed from outside the system. There is no sense even bringing it up in a scientific discussion.

An analogy would be a computer simulation. You have a gigantic computer simulating a universe. You don't want to run the simulation from the big bang, so you load a precomputed state which includes 14 billion years already simulated. Now, this is important to know for discussions of the reality in which the giant computer exists. But it is meaningless for any discussion or investigation of the simulation rules for the universe being simulated.

BTW, your simulation has a "cheat" function called "miracle" used for, ah, errr, "debugging". The AI units in your simulation can't reliably tell which events are miracles, and which are normal operation of the simulation. This is because they cannot know the full state of the simulation, and likely won't even know the full rule set - due to being part of the simulation themselves.

Re:65 million? (1)

bushki3 (1025263) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041418)

Maybe man's perception of time is not the same as God's perception. Perhaps those millions of years worth of "proof of evolution" that we see only cover 6 days worth of creation for a God who exists in Eternity? Thus it's possible that a time difference is all that separates the creationist from the evolutionist.

Re:65 million? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040510)

Ahh, so you're one of those (weird?) Christians who interprets The Bible literally?

Or are you trying to make fun of something which you don't seem to know anything about?

Re:65 million? (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040762)

Please use a dictionary and look up the word "sarcasm".

And if you don't think a huge number of people today don't believe the earth is 6000 years old, you're naive.

Re:65 million? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040854)

Okay, I looked it up, it means what I thought it means.

I don't believe a huge number of people today believe Earth is 6000 years old, so I'm naivete.

I do believe that grub is an anti-religious troll (read his sig, then read his posting history).

Re:65 million? (1)

saforrest (184929) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040920)

I don't believe a huge number of people today believe Earth is 6000 years old, so I'm naivete.

Er, whether or not grub is an anti-religious troll, there are lots of believe who believe this. This was evident from the public reaction in American media to this court case [wikipedia.org] .

Re:65 million? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041502)

Uh huh... but even the entire USA is hardly a representative sample. That said, the American media is hardly a representative sample of Americans.

Creationists == Atheists

Why? Because they both have the least confidence in their faith (yes, grub, Atheism is a faith, whether that makes it a religion...??) and are therefore the most vocal about it. That's why it is perceived that so many Americans are atheists, while the rest are seen as creationists.

HELLO, there are over 1,000,000,000 Catholics in the world alone. That's enough to populate 3 USA's; and the vast majority of Catholics aren't creationists. Then we'll talk about the other some billions of Christians, the Jews, etc. who aren't creationists either.

The thing that drives me nuts about the average Slashdotting atheist is, they like to paint the picture that anyone who believes in God accepts The Bible literally. That's not only stereotyping, it's wildly inaccurate.

Re:65 million? (2, Interesting)

ettlz (639203) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041074)

And yet, you are here on Slashdot.
I do believe that grub is an anti-religious troll (read his sig, then read his posting history).
And yet, you are here posting anonymously, thereby preventing us from examining your proclivities.

Re:65 million? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040844)

Religion is for retards.

Re:65 million? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040644)

When Young Earth Creationists say that the Earth was created 6000 years ago, they're talking in God-years.

Re:65 million? (-1, Flamebait)

cyberscan (676092) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041156)

The Creationalist might like to know that:

There is NO PLACE in the Bible that says that the Earth is 6000 years old. In Genesis it says that the earth BECAME (or CAME TO BE) void and without form. In other words, there is NO PLACE THAT STATES THAT THE EARTH IS ONLY 6000 YEARS OLD.

The Monkeyists might like to know:

The way that dating mechanisms work is based on unproven assumption. In order for Carbin 14 dating system to be accurate, there hase to be NO CHANGE in the ratio of carbon 14 to carbon 12 in the atmosphere over the years for which the system is claimed to be accurate.

Of course these points are not allowed to be brought up in any "science" program in the public schools. Do I believe that natural selection should be taught in school? YES I DO!!! It is a proven fact. Now do I believe that evolution is the basis for all life appearing on this planet? No I DO NOT!!! That THEORY might be mentioned with arguments for and against it, but there is equal amount of evidence for other possibilities regarding the origin of life on this planet, and I am not just talking a god creating everything. I do expect at least 5 posts arguing against what I say because most people here are biased towards evolution as being the source of all life.

Re:65 million? (1)

jakel2k (736582) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041436)

In Genesis, it states that Heaven and Earth were created along with everything else in 7 days... from that you have Adam and Eve... from that you can trace appx. each generation, including how long certain people lived. That can be traced to the creation to the flood to the house of David to Jesus... and from there you have well documented 2000 years. Which adds up to about 6000 years.

Re:65 million? (1)

malsdavis (542216) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041512)

That THEORY might be mentioned with arguments for and against it, but there is equal amount of evidence for other possibilities regarding the origin of life on this planet

There are no serious arguments against "natural selection". "natural selection" has nothing to do with the "first spark of life" which is what you appear to be referring to.

Are you seriously trying to say you have proper evidence that contradicts the "primordial soup" theory? If you actually do (which I highly doubt), you would become world famous in academia if you could write a paper on it!

because most people here are biased towards evolution as being the source of all life.

They are only biased in the same way that a jury might be made biased upon seeing an overwhelming amount of evidence. They have reached their conclusions based on the large amount of compelling evidence, what have you reached your upon?

Re:65 million? (5, Insightful)

wall0159 (881759) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041524)

>> equal amount of evidence for other possibilities regarding the origin of life
The theory of evolution is not a theory regarding the origin of life.

>> The Monkeyists might like to know
I presume you're trying to imply that people are thought to be descended from monkeys. This is not what evolution states.

>> there hase to be NO CHANGE in the ratio of carbon 14 to carbon 12
This is true. In fact, the ratio has not been constant. A quick look at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating shows that scientists are aware of this. (who would have thunk it?)
So, is the ratio constant historically? No. Does that make carbon dating useless? No.

>> I do expect at least 5 posts arguing against what I say
That'd be because what you say is factually incorrect and misleading.

Re:65 million? (4, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040866)

65 million years is crazy-talk, that's 64,994,000 years before God made the Earth!

Read through the comments at the bottom. Seriously. These people really believe this stuff, and I've personally met people who, if you try to talk to them about almost anything scientific (like, oh say, 80,000-year-old human remains) will absolutely tell you "No, way! The Earth is only 6,000 years ago. It says so in the Bible!"

I'm not at all suggesting that people give up their religious convictions, but I am saying that some people need to stop confusing religion with science. They are separate disciplines and need to be separate. If you absolutely must believe that the choice is eaither A) God loves me and the Earth is only 6,000 years or B) there was a mass extinction event on the Earth 65 million years ago, so there can't be a God, then you are either seriously depraved or downright stupid.

Re:65 million? (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041282)

And the Bible doesn't even give the number 6000. It is extrapolated by Bible researchers based on counting named generations (sure they mentioned every one?) and making assumptions.

Re:65 million? (1)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041296)

Go read "End of Faith" by Sam Harris. *Any* religious beliefs are entirely and wholly incompatible with science.

In the old days before science became it's own field, religion *was* the science and of course they got along famously together. Once Science grew up, Religion wasn't so thrilled since it's basic prinicples were being overturned one by one.

Religion has been nothing more than the explanation of that which can't be explained right now. It rained? must be the Rain god is upset. It didn't rain? guess what, he's still upset, just differently. Repeat adnauseum for anything you need to explain.

'God' today is just the summation of all the different 'gods' so called 'primitive' cultures generally had.

And if you look at most religions, they all have the same basic beliefs - be nice to others, be 'good'. Funny how all the different 'human' groups came up with the same conclusions...we all like to live next to people who aren't going to hurt or kill us.

So religion is also a human expression of the desire for 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' to re-use a phrase.

There is no God...there is however the basic goodness that comes with being human expressed over and over again throughout history. (obviously bad apples will exist, even outside of nurture forces...but the *vast* majority of people don't want to hurt others)

Re:65 million? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041504)

It might interest you to know that I don't belong to one of the major Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) and that I'm also a (former) agnostic. The specifics of my religious/spiritual beliefs are outside the scope of this discussion.

But in any respect, your argument (and by extension, I'm assuming Harris' book) seems to be that religion only exists to explain the unexplained. Since there's nothing (or almost nothing) left unexplained, we don't need religion (or spirituality, I assume).

Except that there are things left unexplained, and there are events in people's lives that cannot be explained.

But that's even besides my main point. Religion exists not to explain the unexplained, but because it is human nature to ponder the mysteries of life. No matter how much science figures out, there are always mysteries, not all of which can be explained by science or that science would ever even try to understand. But that's even still besides my main point.

Also, religion != morality != ethics. Religion doesn't exist because we think we need to be nice to one another. And as much as religions are similar on some ethical and moral issues, they differ very greatly on others.

Ok, here's my main point (finally): Religion exists because people need to believe in something greather than themselves. That's it in a nutshell.

Re:65 million? (1, Troll)

venicebeach (702856) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041386)

I'm not at all suggesting that people give up their religious convictions

Why not? That's exactly what they should do. The fact that there are convictions immutable by evidence is the problem.

Re:65 million? (1)

jakel2k (736582) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041628)

Some interesting combinations of the two I've heard:
  1. Dinosaurs, (along with Unicorns, Winged Horses...) didn't get on the ark.
  2. Each day of God is millions of years in human time.
  3. Using carbon dating on scripture, scrolls...

Re:65 million? (1)

pilgrim23 (716938) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040898)

Ever wondered what god the dinosaurs fought wars and slaughtered each other in the name of?

oh and regards your sig: Watch out at zebra crossings.....

Re:65 million? (5, Funny)

ettlz (639203) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041116)

Ever wondered what god the dinosaurs fought wars and slaughtered each other in the name of?

Jehovasaurus.

Next!

Re:65 million? (1)

winomonkey (983062) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041544)

Please, please, please allow me to say this - thank you from the very bottom of my little heart. I have been having a pain-in-the-ass of a day, and your joke has made it notably brighter.

Re:65 million? (2, Funny)

truckaxle (883149) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041490)

This reminds me of an incident at the San Diego museum of Natural History. There was a display of Therizinosaurus [wikipedia.org] . A group of kids were admiring the display when one of them asked out loud how old the fossils were. A member of the museum staff was walking by and overheard the question and quickly answer "72 million and 14 years".

That answer satisfied most, but after a few seconds another asked how could they ever identify the age so precisely. The staff member responded "Well when I started work here they told me that it was 72 million years old and I have worked here for 14 years so now it is 72 million and 14 years old."


Re:65 million? (1)

hxftw (996114) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041576)

The Bible does not say that the Earth was created 6000 years ago. People who say that it was; either haven't actually read the Bible, lied, or didn't understand it. Genesis 1:1-2. "(1) In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth.(2) Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God's active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters." This was BEFORE the 6 creative days. As for people saying that it was 6 24 hour long days, here is this. 2 Peter 3:8. "However, let this one fact not be escaping YOUR notice, beloved ones, that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day." If you actually took the time to do real research, science and the Bible actually agree on many scientific things. People simply don't want to see it. And for those who don't know who Jehovah is, Psalms 83:18. " That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah, You alone are the Most High over all the earth." The "YOUR" you see above just indicates it is in plural, as in more than one person. Many translators took out God's name and replaced it with GOD or LORD. I'm sick of hearing people preaching that the Bible says something when it doesn't, and when people say science and the Bible contradict each other. DO THE RESEARCH.

Okay... (3, Insightful)

Stanistani (808333) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040354)

Since this helps to support a widely-held theory of the mass extinction 65 million years ago, why is this really news?

Help me out here.

Didn't they just fill in another data point?

Re:Okay... (1)

Profane MuthaFucka (574406) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040404)

OK, fine. It's OLD news. It's still interesting.

Re:Okay... (2, Informative)

inKubus (199753) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040474)

Some scientists believe that there were multiple events that caused the massive global change that caused the mass extinction. This theory is that there was only one.

It's amazing to imagine the world populated by giant birds and lizards. But what did these creatures breathe? Perhaps the world was covered in plant life, which provided a lot of Oxygen. Then the impact hit, killing the plants, lowering the oxygen enough that the larger animals just sort of suffocated. The smaller animals had smaller lungs, less air requirements, and thus did not perish.

Re:Okay... (1)

hobo sapiens (893427) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040812)

thank you. Talk about much ado about nothing. Did nobody else even read the article? Did anyone else get the fact that this theory stands in constrat to others which state the dinosaurs were wiped out by a chain of events rather than one cataclysmic one?

Re:Okay... (1)

quakeroatz (242632) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041380)

This sediment finding supports the idea of a single, massive impact. As opposed to multiple events or impacts.

Also they are pushing the idea that sediment layers near the impact point would be so affected by the ensuing earthquakes and tsunamis, it may explain why there is little sediment evidence located near the alleged Yucitan crash site.

In short: One huge frikken impact which in which secondary events blew the crap out of the originals imapct's nearby, "tell-tale" sediment layer.

big news... but wrong (3, Funny)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040414)

Dinosaurs were not killed off in a mass extinction 65 million years ago... many of them survived and are currently employed by the *AA and associated groups.

Re:big news... but wrong (1)

fittekuk (1033554) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040440)

Well, I think some birds and reptiles are left overs who survived the extinction.

Re:big news... but wrong (3, Funny)

CreatureComfort (741652) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040830)


If you count vultures and snakes, the GP still applies.

Re:big news... but wrong (1)

From A Far Away Land (930780) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040694)

I think you mean ??AA. *AA would include organizations like AAA, or Canadian Automobile Association along with the RIAA, MPAA. I'm no certain if it would include Alcoholics Anonymous, it might depend on the language.

according to... ? (was:big news... but wrong) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040848)

According to the creationists, the dinosaurs were killed off when God flooded the earth. What compelled Noah not to include a pair of every dinosaurs on the arc however, is beyond me...

Re:according to... ? (was:big news... but wrong) (1)

Who235 (959706) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041098)

What compelled Noah not to include a pair of every dinosaurs on the arc however, is beyond me...

Obviously he couldn't fit them in there.
Do you have any idea how big 300 cubits is?
Not long enough to fit a bunch of freakin' T-rexes and stuff on, that's for sure.
Oh well, at least he managed to bring the bees. I love a little honey in my tea.

Re:according to... ? (was:big news... but wrong) (1)

yurigoul (658468) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041350)

I believe that this was explained in detail in "A History of the World in 10 1/2 Chapters" by Julian Barnes:

The dinosaurs shared their boat with some aggressive woodworm no one ever heard from since ...

(But this could also have been another book ...)

Re:big news... but wrong (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040904)

...having been recently laid off from a Microsoft advertising campaign.

*sigh* (3, Funny)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040416)

I was *not* a meteor impact that killed the dinosaurs, it was global warming. Let's examine the facts here, with nearly everybody driving around Bedrock in their souped up SUVs, you can imagine all the CO2 those things put out, not to mention the contributing factor of mass extinctions due to consumption of racks of ribs at drive-ins.

Re:*sigh* (3, Funny)

anzha (138288) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040580)

You're confused. That was the synapsids in the Permian with their unchecked Volcano Maker Pro users.

The KT Event was a case of the dinos getting waaaaaaaaaaaay too excited over their Orbital Dynamics for Dummies books.

A tad bit more seriously. Take that Gerta Keller [wikipedia.org] !

Re:*sigh* (1)

venicebeach (702856) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040608)

Yes, clearly if the dinosaurs stopped driving Hummers sooner they would still be around.

Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it people.

Re:*sigh* (1)

grozzie2 (698656) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040686)

There's 18 inches of fresh snow on the ground outside, and more of it falling as i type this. I'm fed up with all these promises of global warming. Would you folks kindly quit with the talk, and get on with it, you've been promising global warming for years now, and it's all just empty talk promises. I'm getting tired of waiting, so please, just hurry up and deliver on that promise, i'm tired of shovelling snow....

Re:*sigh* (2, Funny)

Woldry (928749) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040778)

But I'm already driving as much as I can!

Re:*sigh* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041106)

I suggest you get a 4x4 SUV to drive though all that snow. It'll even help prevent snow in the future!

Re:*sigh* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041110)

No shit. It's -25 deg C here now. Most winters it doesn't get below -5. I was promised global warming!

Re:*sigh* (1)

yoder (178161) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041214)

"There's 18 inches of fresh snow on the ground outside, and more of it falling as i type this. I'm fed up with all these promises of global warming."

I wish I could say the same but our winter weather is starting about a month later than when I was a kid (late 60's early 70's). We haven't had a real winter (ground completely snowcovered for more than a month) in probably close to 7 years.

I once say a bumper sticker... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040426)

... that said "Big Bang Theory: God spoke and BANG it happened."

I call BS (5, Funny)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040456)

Look at the film. You can see another meteor on the grassy knoll.

1963 called (0, Troll)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040556)

"Look at the film. You can see another meteor on the grassy knoll."

1963 called. It wants its nutty conspiracy theory back. Fortunately, there are plenty of cranks peddling tales of explosives in WTC buildings to give you plenty of new material.

Re:1963 called (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040826)

oh lawd is dat sum troll

World Comedians Called (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041072)

They want you to learn some humor.

Shots, I would think that after 5 years of your supporting a joker, a crack-pot, and an idiot (you figure out which one is which), that you would learned to acquire some humor.

YESSSSSSSSs (1, Offtopic)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041562)

Step right up folks! It's another edition of Captain Splendid's "Who pissed in your cornflakes this morning!"

Today's contestant is Krell. So, Krell, tell us, who pissed in your cornflakes this morning? Enquiring minds want to know!

Seriously, cheer up you grumpy fucker, and thanks for playing!

Re:I call BS (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040780)

It seems that people on slashdot call this BS character alot, and he always has a great deal of information at his fingertips.

Can someone please give me his number? Thanks.

Re:I call BS (1)

Hogwash McFly (678207) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040964)

Noone knows BS's number. Of course, getting hold of Noone is just as difficult.

Re:I call BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041108)

Noone knows BS's number? I call BS.

lolz (-1, Redundant)

GillBates0 (664202) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040532)

OMG, that's like 64994000 before God even created anything.

Some people'll believe anything. LOLz.

Fl00d (3, Insightful)

picob (1025968) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040538)

If you want to laugh read through the comments. Laugh or be concerned, that is.

But.... (1)

spahn (227384) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040582)

But the Creation Museum says the Earth is only 6,000 years old! :-D

Re:But.... (3, Funny)

InsaneProcessor (869563) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040938)

God has a sense of humor. When he created everything, he figured that there would be some idiots (we call them scientists but not all fall into the idiots class) that wouldn't believe the truth so He created a past that they could track down and say "see, there is no creation, just evolution" just to keep them busy.

--
Liberalisim is an absurd ideology that displays the lack of knowledge of history.

Re:But.... (1)

suitepotato (863945) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041090)

Old, very old.

Not every or even most practicing Christians or Jews believe the biblical creation story as literal truth. We're not all dim enough to raise the writings of ancient *human* (and thus fallible) ancestors to the level of G-d's word.

Can you get a new joke and stop beating on other people because you've still got unresolved juvenile issues from being made by mom and dad to get up early and to sit/stand/kneel on a Sunday morning?

Re:But.... (1)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041400)

Also a very old reply. "We don't take it literally" being an excuse that allows completely unfounded beliefs to continue to exist. The same moderation that allows you to say which parts of the Bible are 'right' and which aren't really the real words of God, allows extremists to say it's still ok to stone people to death, homosexuals are bad and to not associate with women on their period.

If you don't believe in certain parts of the Bible...by all means WRITE A NEW ONE. I just don't see that happening much these days, do you?

Religion was created by humans for humans...there is no 'God' except the one(s) we create for each of ourselves as needed.


MacLeod? (4, Funny)

rainer_d (115765) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040664)

Hell, he's probably witnessed it himself.

Re:MacLeod? (1)

Gospodin (547743) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040840)

He is Connor MacLeod of the Clan MacLeod. He was born in 65,000,000 BC in the village of the Cephalopods on the shores of Loch Shiel. And he is immortal.

Re:MacLeod? (1)

zomper514 (235646) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041092)

Obviously it was a single impact...There can be only one!

How it really happened... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040710)

65 million years ago...

Dino 1: Wii is the best dino console.
Dino 2: No. The Wii graphics suck. Xbox 360 is awesome.
Dino 3: Wii and Xbox 360 both suck. Playstation 3 with Cell processor rules. Plus we have BluRay.
Dino 1: PS3 is too expensive and there aren't enough blue diodes. All dinosaurs can afford Wii though. It great!
Dino 2: Meh, PS3 is expensive and Wii doesn't do hidef. Xbox 360 sits right in the middle and saves the day. Go 360, go!

God: Ok, that does it. No more dinosaurs.

Re:How it really happened... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041320)

That means....we're next

"Those that do not know history are doomed to repeat it"

back in college (0, Redundant)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040876)

I once dated a smoking-hot (female) engineering student. I was totally psyched, because I thought an engineering student would make a much better date the the vapid and witless masses in the communication and humanities majors*.

Well, I learned that knowing calculus and physics doesn't always make you smart. After a few too many drinks one night, she opened up to me. She told me about the "proven scientific evidence" that recently demonstrated that the dinosaurs went extinct in "Noah's flood." I was dumbfounded and had no idea how to respond.

That was the last time I asked her out. Oh well. She was so hot! But even I have standards.

* Don't kill me. Not all of you are dumb. Just the vast majority (including all those I dated).

Re:back in college (3, Funny)

gravy.jones (969410) | more than 7 years ago | (#17040960)

I have heard it said that when God cast out Satan from heaven that his impact on the earth is the same meteoric impact that scientists believe wiped out the dinosaurs.

Re:back in college (2, Insightful)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041650)

I have heard it said that when God cast out Satan from heaven that his impact on the earth is the same meteoric impact that scientists believe wiped out the dinosaurs.

So, what you're saying is that the dinos are the first ever "friendly fire" casualties?

Should explain why such a christian nation as the US is so good at it, then.

Re:back in college (1)

exp(pi*sqrt(163)) (613870) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041006)

But even I have standards.
Wasn't the "Jesus wants me to save my virginity for marriage" enough of a tipoff? Or was she one of those types who think virginity means anything goes apart from intercourse?

Nah! (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041536)

She just was extra careful not to die between Saturday night and Sunday morning....

engineers and religion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041170)

It's funny. Within that field there's an interesting dichotomy. When I was an engineering undergrad it seemed that the percentages of atheists and over-the-top thumpers were higher than in the geneneral population (of college types).

Now, I can understand the atheist part. But, I had to think about the other group. My guess is that engineers become accustomed to a 0/1 world in school that has very little uncertainty, and they eventually start thinking that way in other areas of life. Only the Bib1e can help with that.

There's another interesting angle. Engineers at my school tended to be, in the aggregate, at the bottom of the socioeconomic heap. Many first-generation students from rural areas... so, you can imagine they'd more often be really religious.

Re:engineers and religion (2, Funny)

ettlz (639203) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041250)

Oh, so it's not
  1. design it;
  2. model it;
  3. build it;
  4. test it;
  5. pray it stays up?

Re:back in college (1)

P3NIS_CLEAVER (860022) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041366)

Standards? Your crazy! I would have done the hot meat conversion!

Re:back in college (1)

Zonnald (182951) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041626)

Heard on local radio station.
"You want to get rid of an annoying man (i.e. boyfriend)? - start talking about Jesus."

FrIst stop (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17040988)

the project to decline3 1n market than this BSD box,

Assume the flood is true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041022)

Let's assume the flood story is true. God wipes out practically the entire human and animal population by drowning them. And this is your loving God who you want to spent eternity with? Really???

Article Summary (0)

mypalmike (454265) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041040)

[Linux/Firefox version. On mostly green blob...]

Rollover to expand video

REPLAY VIDEO

The Librarian
Return to King Solomon's Mines

Sunday, December 3 8/7C TNT

Dating error + meteor frequency = = correlation (4, Interesting)

MROD (101561) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041146)

The problem with all these sedimentological studies is that the statistical period between large meteorite impacts and the systematic error in the dating of the sediments (using isotopic geochemistry) in addition to the ambiguity in the fossil record (and the dating errors in those sediments) means that it's guaranteed that you will find a correlation between any mass extinction and a large meteorite impact event.

Around the K-T boundery there is not only the Chixalub impact but a large one in Germany and a couple of others which have been discovered, all within the dating error. Add to this that there's also the Decan Traps flood basalts being errupted, ocean currents changing as the north atlantic starts to open and the amount of flooded continental shelf decreasing hugely and you have several possible smoking guns.

The evidence just isn't there currently to say why most of the dinosaur lineages died out (along with many sea reptiles and other oceanic creatures). In fact there is still a doubt as to when it actually happened and over how long a period. Ammonites, it seems, saw the meteorite coming.. about a million years before it hit.

Garbage In, Garbage Out (1, Funny)

pln2bz (449850) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041208)

If you ask the wrong questions, you'll get the wrong answers.

People should be asking how it is possible that dinosaur birds of the past could have been as large as 747's. We don't have birds today on the entire planet that are larger than about 50 lbs. And this clearly pushes the limits of what's possible with bird mass because these 50-lb birds practically kill themselves when they land. The Mongolians have tried to breed bigger falcons for thousands of years with no luck. So, how is it possible that birds were once as big as 747's?

People should be asking exactly *which* animals survived, and why?

People should be asking if the land-walking dinosaurs were alive today, would they survive? Check out http://www.bearfabrique.org/Catastrophism/sauropod s/biganims.html [bearfabrique.org] .

Ask those questions *WITH* the questions about the impact, and suddenly the bigger picture changes. Is the Big Bang Theory still just a theory, or are there alternative cosmologies that people will consider? What about the electrical force? In a theory of everything based upon electricity, gravity would be a function of electrical charge accumulation and the Theory of Relativity could be very easily explained using aether concepts that contrary to popular belief, have never actually been disproven. The aether explanation for Relativity is actually much simpler to understand than Relativity.

Do planets accumulate and transfer charge? According to astrophysicists and NASA, the answer is a vehement "NO!". But have you ever actually looked at the Aristarchus crater on the Moon? That "debris field" has *negative depth*. They are trenches! That looks a hell of a lot more like a lightning strike to me than a debris field: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/image06/060 309hubble.jpg [thunderbolts.info] . Should we just assume that it is pure coincidence that the Aristarchus and Tycho craters occur on naturally high spots on the Moon's surface?

We know that metals can accumulate charge and we know that the Earth has a hell of a lot of metals. So, why can't the Earth accumulate and transfer charge with nearby planets or bodies? Because we've never seen it happen? But we can see large-scale electrical activity all over the universe with our telescopes. We've gathered enough data by now on comets to suspect that the tail and coma of a comet are in fact lightning bolts. Check it out: http://www.thunderbolts.info/pdf/ElectricComet.pdf [thunderbolts.info] . If we're seeing large magnetic fields and temperatures of 100 million Kelvin inside of nebulae, then that means that nebulae are almost certainly *not* forming by gravitational collapse and that electricity is the dominant force in creating stars. If we're seeing large-scale electrical forces elsewhere in the universe, why should our solar system be so special as to not have these?

Why are all craters round? Sure, astrophysicists will tell you that it's because an object going fast enough will create an explosion upon impact, but then why is the sedimentary layer at the bottom of Meteor Crater undisturbed? Would a comparable nuclear explosion leave no trace of itself in the ground beneath it?

How To Kill A Planet of Dinosaurs:

What motivated Einstein to say that space is modified by gravity? Imagine that a planet is orbiting around the sun. Then imagine that suddenly the Sun disappears, and the source of gravitational attraction is gone. What happens to the planet? Does it instantly go off the orbit? Or does the disappearance of gravity require some time to reach the orbiting planet's position? Einstein's answer is that it stays in the orbit for a time R/c before going off. It is as though gravitation continues to operate on the planet at its location even though the Sun is gone. Something was "emplaced" at the planet's location. Einstein explained this by proposing that the Sun had modified the space itself around it, and that "distortion" of space at the planet's location continues to remain until the news of the Sun's disappearance reaches there. What was emplaced was a local modification of the space around the planet.

In one view of the electric universe, gravity is represented as the sum of the radially aligned electric dipoles formed by all subatomic particles within a charged planet or star. In other words, a neutral particle can contain a polarity. It can be net positive in one direction and negative in the other.

Many decades ago, around the time of Einstein, the concept of an aether was explored and eventually abandoned. Nobody was able to find any experimental evidence at the time for it, but at the same time, they didn't even really know what it might consist of or how to even find it back then. An aether is a material that would fill all space like a crystalline lattice structure.

The aether would basically consist of an array of alternating protons and electrons, or alternatively called a sea of neutrons. It may even be called a lattice of neutrinos, but regardless of what you call it, the important part is that its constituents have dipoles. This lattice structure would be extremely
dense and yet simultaneously very easily displaced. In other words, the lattice stretches, compresses and moves around objects. When necessary, the lattice bonds can be broken with very small effort to make room for visible matter. It's basically kind of like water (where matter would be fish or something). Within this context, inertia would be the amount of energy required to push aside the proton-electron bonds in the aether. The larger the mass, the more bonds have to be broken, and so this explains why it takes more energy to move a massive object than a light object. You must add more energy to push past more aether.

If you presume that large planetary bodies, like small ball bearings, can acquire and lose electric charge, then this charge would attract the aether's dipoles. If the attraction is significant, then the lattice structure will compress down towards the large planetary body in the same way that water compresses at the bottom of the ocean. This increase in lattice density would have a net effect of slowing down mechanical processes. Movements from point A to B within this denser lattice structure near planets would have to traverse more aether particles, and therefore clocks in a high gravity field would tick slower than one in a lower gravity field. My guess is that the increase in aether particles would also slow electrical clocks too.

So, you can see how Einstein's relativity theory can be explained in fine detail using an alternate theory that involves an aether. Just saying that space is "warped" though doesn't really help too much in terms of understanding exactly what is happening. And you can see how the transfer of charge from one planet to another could possibly alter their gravities. And if gravity suddenly became stronger, this would certainly kill off the dinosaurs.

Think for yourself. Learn about Electric Universe Theories: www.thunderbolts.info. I'm not with those guys, but I do believe that they're onto something.

Re:Garbage In, Garbage Out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17041428)

Lay off the drugs, man. That crap is rotting your brain.

Re:Garbage In, Garbage Out (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041584)

So, you can see how Einstein's relativity theory can be explained in fine detail using an alternate theory that involves an aether.

Don't you mean dark matter?

In the end, it is pretty much the same thing... Things that affect reality that you can't see or detect.

Re:Garbage In, Garbage Out (1)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041600)

See, normally you'd have to visit three or four crackpot web sites to get a full sampling this sort of BS. Thanks for condensing it all into one spot so that we can be more clearly reminded of how poorly we're educating people about basic things like causality, critical thinking, and little details like basic physics.

If you can't really deal comfortably with things like the nice smooth sediment in a crater having accumulates in the millions of years AFTER an impact, then there's really no point taking any single utterance you make as anything other than Super Duper Troll Bait. Which it is, of course. 'Doh! You got me!

Weird (5, Funny)

pagaboy (1029878) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041356)

40 responses and not a single noodly appendage in sight. Is everyone OK?

Look, Up in the Sky! (2, Interesting)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17041472)

I want to know whether the meteor appeared from Earth to come from the direction of the Pleiades constellation that the Mayans would later prioritize in their studies with the world's most sophisticated pre-industrial astromomy.

It's already an interesting coincidence that the people whose empire was built on the site of the most influential astronomical event in "recent" Earth history would have such sophisticated astronomy. I wonder what they discovered about the part of the sky from which the meteor seemed (to the dinosaurs) to appear. The Mayan name for the Pleiades is "Tz'ab" [google.com] , "the rattlesnake's tail", which is pretty resonant with a meteorite that killed the lizards ruling the world.

I also wonder if our current complex space sciences can reconstruct the path of the meteor from its origin, by studying the trajectories of the remaining solar system objects, and projecting back 65My to a slightly larger population. A lot has happened, but astronomers' deductions have made much of very little for quite some time.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...