• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Malaysian plane shot down

Those pics were fucked.
Did the fall kill them? Or lack of oxygen? because there doesn't seem to be much burnt bodies?
 
kaz said:
Those pics were fucked.
Did the fall kill them? Or lack of oxygen? because there doesn't seem to be much burnt bodies?
Click to expand...

Settle Kaz. Cabin depressurization knocks them out almost immediately apparently. All they prolly felt was a quick thud for a second or so (parden the pun) as the missile hit the plane, then they would have been unconscious. Some wouldn't have known anything happened apparently.
 
Some of the passengers would have experienced ballistics trauma from the many projectiles & fragments that come out of the proximity-detonated warhead on the SAM. After that it would have been hypoxia within about 10-15 seconds. Not really an instant death.
 
Big Dave said:
I know that this is continuing off topic but let's address a couple of things first.
There are two main forms of science. Operational science which is based upon conclusions from repeated experimentation and historical science which is based upon analysis of evidence and then applying a series of assumptions to determine the historical account. The problem with all historical sciences is that conclusions cannot be repeated in an experiment as whatever is in question has already happened sometime in the past.

Here is one of the core issues with evolution. There is no known genetic process that adds new information to the genetic code that would be required to create new functions in any organism.

From a geological perspective we are also told that coal takes millions of years to develop yet in a lab with the right conditions ( ridiculous pressure) you can make brown coal in about a week and black coal within a month. This has implications for potential age of items found within coal deposits.

Just three items to think about there.
Click to expand...

Genetic mutations happen all the time. These are new information in the genetic code and can end up being advantageous.

Coal takes millions of years under conditions seen in nature. The conditions used in labs are nothing like this, so it doesn't apply to coal in nature, obviously.
 
Hey bazza, not disputing that genetic mutations happen all the time, it's just that as observed they result in a loss of information not a gain.

As for coal I believe the timescale for coal formation is based on how deep coal is found underground, and because it is so deep it must be really old.
 
Big Dave said:
Hey bazza, not disputing that genetic mutations happen all the time, it's just that as observed they result in a loss of information not a gain.

As for coal I believe the timescale for coal formation is based on how deep coal is found underground, and because it is so deep it must be really old.
Click to expand...

First point is wrong again.
 
How is the point wrong @bazza? What is the mutation process you are referring to that results in a gain of new information
 
Big Dave said:
How is the point wrong @bazza? What is the mutation process you are referring to that results in a gain of new information
Click to expand...

Its a evolution denier myth that doesn't even make sense.
The list of examples could go on and on, but consider this. Most mutations can be reversed by subsequent mutations - a DNA base can be turned from an A to a G and then back to an A again, for instance. In fact, reverse mutation or "reversion" is common. For any mutation that results in a loss of information, logically, the reverse mutation must result in its gain. So the claim that mutations destroy information but cannot create it not only defies the evidence, it also defies logic.
Click to expand...
 
I would imagine the explosion may have shattered a fair few bones in peoples bodies too :(

russia has a lot to answer for.
 
Ok @bazza I'll leave it with this final thought.

What you have referred to sounds like basic genetic decay. Random changes to individual "letters" in genetic code which in most cases result in no functional change in the organism, in other cases you end up with destructive variation such as cancers and other genetic disorders.

The new information I'm referring to is about adding complete structures such as how could a fish move from having gills to obtain oxygen to having lungs capable of breathing air. There is more to it than this but this is the general idea.

I don't expect that this would change your views or many others who read this, but there are people who are using a little more than an unfounded belief in a flying spaghetti monster to base their belief on.
 
Big Dave said:
Ok @bazza I'll leave it with this final thought.

What you have referred to sounds like basic genetic decay. Random changes to individual "letters" in genetic code which in most cases result in no functional change in the organism, in other cases you end up with destructive variation such as cancers and other genetic disorders.

The new information I'm referring to is about adding complete structures such as how could a fish move from having gills to obtain oxygen to having lungs capable of breathing air. There is more to it than this but this is the general idea.

I don't expect that this would change your views or many others who read this, but there are people who are using a little more than an unfounded belief in a flying spaghetti monster to base their belief on.
Click to expand...

If you want to continue the evolution denial posts maybe start a new thread for it and we will continue to discuss it there.

I might also start and new thread why Ronald McDonald is the one true god. As much proof for that as any other religion and I hope people respect my choice.
 
Evolution can easily co-exist with creationism. Why things happen and for what ultimate purpose cannot be answered by any of the human constructs.

Also the time scale in the scriptures is one that we have interpreted. Look up Gap Theory.

I accept the world is several Ga old, I worked on rocks that K-Ar dating (a geochronologist's tool in our own construct of the physical world) "proves" this. Land I have walked over where the Strelly Pool Chert outcrops contains the oldest fossilised life forms on the planet. They are not thousands of years old, they occurred billions of years ago.

As for the fossil records that relate to evolution of h.sapiens sapiens - heck, there are some very creative interpretations based on relatively limited and scattered data over enormous periods of time.
 
vonfram88 said:
After that it would have been hypoxia within about 10-15 seconds. Not really an instant death.
Click to expand...

I dont think thats true, they just tell you that to make you feel better about it.
It would have taken about 127 seconds to fall to 8000 feet its possible to remain concious for this amout of time from decompression.
 
Penn said:
I dont think thats true, they just tell you that to make you feel better about it.
It would have taken about 127 seconds to fall to 8000 feet its possible to remain concious for this amout of time from decompression.
Click to expand...

Maybe, if the temperature wasn't sub zero. And dropping from 35,000 feet it would be sub zero for most of that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top