I never said science has all the answers.
I'm sure you don't feel the need to source where I said that.
so how long should it have taken for the skin etc to start to decay?Just know this, the Egyptian mumification process is rarely as proficient.
Mumification of the bodies in Guanajuato Mexico... should also serve as a reference point...
(quick, go and Google it... that's why I hate internet debates, people try and come off as smarter than they really are because they can go 'look up' some
sort of comeback)...
The denaturalization tendencies of DNA at temperature and pressure extremes should also not be overlooked. DNA is easily hydrolyzed by water, weak organic acids and weak organic bases... So even if mineral dirts do chemically bind these agents, the salts produced by their reactions are still corrosive to the genetic material and other "soft proteins"... so how is it they managed to stand the test of time?
I'm going off what I remember. I'll do a search later but again I'll state that ligaments, tendons, muscles and skin... we found to be some kind of fossilized mummy. We're not talking about soft rubbery bendable tissue. Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm just going off what I remember. Wait for it...here it comes...I have no source. So link me up if you got something. I'd love to read it.
Now your lack of comprehension is bursting through that bubble of yours...
I don't need to link a source to validate generally known facts about our Sun because I know exactly what I'm talking about...
If the Sun wasn't expending mass to fuel its nuclear reactions then it wouldn't be bound by the First Law of Thermodynamics...
You know...
Mass is neither created nor destroyed (only transformed through Einstein's general law of relativity E=mc2)
So the gargantuan amounts of energy that emanate from the Sun come from where exactly?
Do you even understand what nuclear fusion is???
Lets say he stretched this thing out like a blob of clay then. Wouldn't the measurement of the further points based on light years still be subject to real time recordings. So the starting point may be different but the measurement still holds true since we in fact have a basis for the speed of light.
That's what happens when you debate with Blake he distorts the truth to further serve his pagan master. He may be another mouse troll!
if I misspoke about the loss of mass, I apologize. Let me clarify:Your so right!! The sun is an endless ball of energy and as long as it stays connected to the 2200000 volt power supply it will heat up for another 20 Billion years. or until God trips over the cord.
Dam Blake everyone knows the Sun loses mass each day did you fall asleep in Science class that day?
losing mass does not equal shrinking sun size.
hopefully that clears it up for you and any other of your trolls that stay awake during Sunday School class.
Shouldn't Blake lose a point after that last ass waxing he just got from Phenomanul?
you mean like how the universe is < 100,000 years old based on what we all know about the sun?
I don't need to link a source to validate generally known facts about our Sun because I know exactly what I'm talking about...
enough to get by in a discussion like this.Do you even understand what nuclear fusion is???
do you know how to calculate expansion rates of the universe?
apparently not.
I'm surprised you gave me any points at all.
pat yourselves on the back, mouse.
just curious, do you believe that an almighty creator made the Bible to be the undeniable, unmistakeable word of God?
oh it finally happened!!
Which screen names are mouse?
I AGREE WITH 911.
I'm still waiting for your evidence that the earth is 50,000 years old, mouse.oh it finally happened!!
Well we know for sure mouse can't be Laker Lanny or Jesus they posted at the same time. Or should we wait for Blake's carbon 15 test?
An easier question is which ones are not.Which screen names are mouse?
Don't really care which ones belong to mouse, chalupa or bigzak.Which screen names are mouse?
They are all equally worthless and provide nothing to the discussion.
The speed of light is a natural constant (among 15 or so other constants which govern the universe)... it doesn't change... mass cannot supercede the speed of light without becoming energy... nothing is moving away from us at a speed greater than this velocity constraint... or else we wouldn't be able to see it.
What I'm suggesting is that the initial bang that produced the universe occurred outside of these constraints... two star clusters could have been pulled apart by billions of light years in less than a micro second... a fact which could lend credence to the notion that millions of years were required to attain that distance between the two... when in fact that time requirement would not necessarily apply...
ok
Blake....there you go again.
That could be said about some of your own posts.
Give them time to adapt to the topic, after all you waited 24 Billion years to post at the club whats another 39 minutes?
Blake sure is one sour pickle when gets pwned.
I'll argue just about anything but I'm not feeling this one.
Light whether put there from moment one is still measurable. Is it not?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
