A little humour

Brian Moon

What is the proof that jellyfish have been around that long?

SSmith1226

What is the proof that jellyfish have been around that long?

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071030211210.htm

Fossil Record Reveals Elusive Jellyfish More Than 500 Million Years Old
Date:
November 2, 2007
Source:
Public Library of Science
Summary:
Using recently discovered 'fossil snapshots' found in rocks more than 500 million years old, researchers have described the oldest definitive jellyfish ever found. The researchers describe four types of cnidarian fossils preserving traits that allow them to be related to modern orders and families of jellyfish. The specimens are about 200 million years older than the oldest previously discovered jellyfish fossils.

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/science/07jellyfish.html?referringSource=articleShare

In a second article from the peer reviewed journal, “The New York Times”:
Yet if any taxonomic dynasty is entitled to the originalist mantle, to the designation of genuine emblematic earthling animal, and also to brand the rest of us the alien arrivistes, it is the jellyfish. A diverse group of thousands of species of gooey, saclike invertebrates found throughout the world, the jellyfish are preposterously ancient, dating back 600 million to 700 million years or longer. That’s roughly twice as old as the earliest bony fish and insects, three times the age of the first dinosaurs.

Brian Moon

@SSmith1226

What proof do you have that rocks are a certain age?
Evolutionists have been taking their own assumptions as truth and building "evidence" with them for a long time.

The New York Times lies consistently. You can't trust it.

SSmith1226

@Brian-Moon said in A little humour:

@SSmith1226

What proof do you have that rocks are a certain age?
Evolutionists have been taking their own assumptions as truth and building "evidence" with them for a long time.

The New York Times lies consistently. You can't trust it.

Brian,
The exact answer is above my pay grade. I would assume that the level or rock had material mixed with it that could be carbon dated, or else mixed in with other fossils that could be dated. Also the evidence for these ancient jellyfish was found in Utah. I am not an expert in archeology, paleontology, and geology, so I won’t take it beyond the following, but I can say that it has been a few years since the ocean covered Utah. I was just trying to help, because I was curious as well.

administrator

@SSmith1226 said in A little humour:

@Brian-Moon said in A little humour:

@SSmith1226

What proof do you have that rocks are a certain age?
Evolutionists have been taking their own assumptions as truth and building "evidence" with them for a long time.

The New York Times lies consistently. You can't trust it.

Brian,
The exact answer is above my pay grade. I would assume that the level or rock had material mixed with it that could be carbon dated, or else mixed in with other fossils that could be dated. Also the evidence for these ancient jellyfish was found in Utah. I am not an expert in archeology, paleontology, and geology, so I won’t take it beyond the following, but I can say that it has been a few years since the ocean covered Utah. I was just trying to help, because I was curious as well.

I can vouch for that. Man, it is dry as a bone out here. But, we do have some "fishy" artifacts.

BigDub

As for proof, is there pudding involved? If not, then, sorry.

neal085

@SSmith1226 and @Brian-Moon

That's all very interesting. Science is defined by observation, and there is no recorded observation for the millions of years, etc., which makes it all just everyone's best guess. Most people can't make an accurate portrayal of events 100 years ago, much less the supposed millions of years ago. Who can hope to authoritatively state such a record?

I remember looking into carbon dating a while back, and the margin for error is apparently astronomical. As a dating mechanism it has more questions than answers, yet it was taught as the standard for my entire school tenure.

Anyway, don't know how all this landed under the topic of humor, so, uh, here's a quick joke:

What is green and has wheels?

Grass. I was lying about the wheels.

Dr GO

@neal085 said in A little humour:

@SSmith1226 and @Brian-Moon

What is green and has wheels?

Grass. I was lying about the wheels.

...and possibly smoking the grass... which lead to the creation of the above "joke" no doubt.

J. Jericho

@BigDub said in A little humour:

As for proof, is there pudding involved? If not, then, sorry.

Jellyfish pudding does not seem appetizing!

J. Jericho

Whew! I hope we are back on track; it was starting to appear that the word "A" had been removed from"A little humour".

Brian Moon

@BigDub said in A little humour:

As for proof, is there pudding involved? If not, then, sorry.

Sorry no pudding.

Brian Moon

@neal085 said in A little humour:

@SSmith1226 and @Brian-Moon

That's all very interesting. Science is defined by observation, and there is no recorded observation for the millions of years, etc., which makes it all just everyone's best guess. Most people can't make an accurate portrayal of events 100 years ago, much less the supposed millions of years ago. Who can hope to authoritatively state such a record?

I remember looking into carbon dating a while back, and the margin for error is apparently astronomical. As a dating mechanism it has more questions than answers, yet it was taught as the standard for my entire school tenure.

Anyway, don't know how all this landed under the topic of humor, so, uh, here's a quick joke:

What is green and has wheels?

Grass. I was lying about the wheels.

No proof for millions of years. One reason is that it is physically impossible. PM me if you'd like to know more. The best evidence shows that Utah was covered by an ocean about 4,500 years ago.

Brian Moon

I probably would cause too much of a stir by posting Calvin the Deplorable cartoons. They are pretty funny though.

Dr GO

@Brian-Moon said in A little humour:
...Most people can't make an accurate portrayal of events 100 years ago, much less the supposed millions of years ago. Who can hope to authoritatively state such a record?

I remember looking into carbon dating a while back, and the margin for error is apparently astronomical. As a dating mechanism it has more questions than answers, yet it was taught as the standard for my entire school tenure.

Anyway, don't know how all this landed under the topic of humor, so, uh, here's a quick joke:

What is green and has wheels?

Grass. I was lying about the wheels.

No proof for millions of years. One reason is that it is physically impossible. PM me if you'd like to know more. The best evidence shows that Utah was covered by an ocean about 4,500 years ago.

Lets take it back Billions of years (accurate to 120 million years):
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/04/29/how-do-we-know-the-age-of-the-universe/#76ed29816155

ROWUK

@Brian-Moon
is a joke thread really the place for another Evolutionist vs Creationist discourse? I think the topic deserves its own thread - with the chance that it will get shut down when (not if) it gets louder. It is almost religion - regardless of what side of the issue one is on. We did have this issue at TrumpetMaster too...

As far as the NY Times "consistently" lying, that is certainly open to interpretation if reporting someone elses findings is lying or reporting. Or if it is the reader that injects other arguments...

I have no knowledge of jellyfish, so I asked Dr. Google what science there is. There is a wealth of research and plenty of non ambiguous "proof". It was an interesting 30 minutes!

The reference to Utah specifies the Cambrian era (in fact 500 million years ago):
Van Iten, Heyo; Marques, Antonio C.; Leme, Juliana de Moraes; Pacheco, Mirian L. A. Forancelli; Simões, Marcello Guimaraes (2014). Smith, Andrew (ed.). "Origin and early diversification of the phylum Cnidaria Verrill: major developments in the analysis of the taxon's Proterozoic-Cambrian history". Palaeontology. 57 (4): 677–690. doi:10.1111/pala.12116.

A more precise date using modern radiometric dating yield a date of 541 ± 0.3 million years ago.
Gradstein, F.M.; Ogg, J.G.; Smith, A.G.; et al. (2004). A Geologic Time Scale 2004. Cambridge University Press.

None of the science that I mentioned delves into any divine creation or "evolution" of the jellyfish from lower forms. It does show a unique trait that makes a specific type more or less immortal. Here is a non-scientific site that is certainly entertaining: https://immortal-jellyfish.com

Let's make this thread funny again...

Tobylou8

Man-a-War broke out over that jellyfish thing. I sea some got salty over the deal.

Dr GO

@ROWUK said in A little humour:

@Brian-Moon
is a joke thread really the place for another Evolutionist vs Creationist discourse? ...None of the science that I mentioned delves into any divine creation or "evolution" of the jellyfish from lower forms.

When referring to lower forms... are you suggesting... perhaps.... country western singers?

Let's make this thread funny again...

Kehaulani

This may be one of the reasons more people don't stay here. Non-musical, non-trumpet, not even not sticking to the topic of humour. Wait a minute, maybe it is.

administrator

@Kehaulani said in A little humour:

This may be one of the reasons more people don't stay here. Non-musical, non-trumpet, not even not sticking to the topic of humour. Wait a minute, maybe it is.

I'm pretty sure people don't stick around because they go somewhere else!

Get it! Somewhere else!!.....ok

IrishTrumpeter

Would you rather kiss a shark or a jellyfish?
A jellyfish. That’s a no-brainer.