Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dinosaur Shocker (YEC say dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years)
Smithsonian Magazine ^ | May 1, 2006 | Helen Fields

Posted on 05/01/2006 8:29:14 AM PDT by SirLinksalot

Dinosaur Shocker

By Helen Fields

Neatly dressed in blue Capri pants and a sleeveless top, long hair flowing over her bare shoulders, Mary Schweitzer sits at a microscope in a dim lab, her face lit only by a glowing computer screen showing a network of thin, branching vessels. That’s right, blood vessels. From a dinosaur. “Ho-ho-ho, I am excite-e-e-e-d,” she chuckles. “I am, like, really excited.”

After 68 million years in the ground, a Tyrannosaurus rex found in Montana was dug up, its leg bone was broken in pieces, and fragments were dissolved in acid in Schweitzer’s laboratory at North Carolina State University in Raleigh. “Cool beans,” she says, looking at the image on the screen.

It was big news indeed last year when Schweitzer announced she had discovered blood vessels and structures that looked like whole cells inside that T. rex bone—the first observation of its kind. The finding amazed colleagues, who had never imagined that even a trace of still-soft dinosaur tissue could survive. After all, as any textbook will tell you, when an animal dies, soft tissues such as blood vessels, muscle and skin decay and disappear over time, while hard tissues like bone may gradually acquire minerals from the environment and become fossils. Schweitzer, one of the first scientists to use the tools of modern cell biology to study dinosaurs, has upended the conventional wisdom by showing that some rock-hard fossils tens of millions of years old may have remnants of soft tissues hidden away in their interiors. “The reason it hasn’t been discovered before is no right-thinking paleontologist would do what Mary did with her specimens. We don’t go to all this effort to dig this stuff out of the ground to then destroy it in acid,” says dinosaur paleontologist Thomas Holtz Jr., of the University of Maryland. “It’s great science.” The observations could shed new light on how dinosaurs evolved and how their muscles and blood vessels worked. And the new findings might help settle a long-running debate about whether dinosaurs were warmblooded, coldblooded—or both.

Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as “a complete and total Christian.” On a shelf in her office is a plaque bearing an Old Testament verse: “For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”

It may be that Schweitzer’s unorthodox approach to paleontology can be traced to her roundabout career path. Growing up in Helena, Montana, she went through a phase when, like many kids, she was fascinated by dinosaurs. In fact, at age 5 she announced she was going to be a paleontologist. But first she got a college degree in communicative disorders, married, had three children and briefly taught remedial biology to high schoolers. In 1989, a dozen years after she graduated from college, she sat in on a class at Montana State University taught by paleontologist Jack Horner, of the Museum of the Rockies, now an affiliate of the Smithsonian Institution. The lectures reignited her passion for dinosaurs. Soon after, she talked her way into a volunteer position in Horner’s lab and began to pursue a doctorate in paleontology.

She initially thought she would study how the microscopic structure of dinosaur bones differs depending on how much the animal weighs. But then came the incident with the red spots.

AdvertisementIn 1991, Schweitzer was trying to study thin slices of bones from a 65-million-year-old T. rex. She was having a hard time getting the slices to stick to a glass slide, so she sought help from a molecular biologist at the university. The biologist, Gayle Callis, happened to take the slides to a veterinary conference, where she set up the ancient samples for others to look at. One of the vets went up to Callis and said, “Do you know you have red blood cells in that bone?” Sure enough, under a microscope, it appeared that the bone was filled with red disks. Later, Schweitzer recalls, “I looked at this and I looked at this and I thought, this can’t be. Red blood cells don’t preserve.”

Schweitzer showed the slide to Horner. “When she first found the red-blood-cell-looking structures, I said, Yep, that’s what they look like,” her mentor recalls. He thought it was possible they were red blood cells, but he gave her some advice: “Now see if you can find some evidence to show that that’s not what they are.”

What she found instead was evidence of heme in the bones—additional support for the idea that they were red blood cells. Heme is a part of hemoglobin, the protein that carries oxygen in the blood and gives red blood cells their color. “It got me real curious as to exceptional preservation,” she says. If particles of that one dinosaur were able to hang around for 65 million years, maybe the textbooks were wrong about fossilization.

Schweitzer tends to be self-deprecating, claiming to be hopeless at computers, lab work and talking to strangers. But colleagues admire her, saying she’s determined and hard-working and has mastered a number of complex laboratory techniques that are beyond the skills of most paleontologists. And asking unusual questions took a lot of nerve. “If you point her in a direction and say, don’t go that way, she’s the kind of person who’ll say, Why?—and she goes and tests it herself,” says Gregory Erickson, a paleobiologist at Florida State University. Schweitzer takes risks, says Karen Chin, a University of Colorado paleontologist. “It could be a big payoff or it could just be kind of a ho-hum research project.”

In 2000, Bob Harmon, a field crew chief from the Museum of the Rockies, was eating his lunch in a remote Montana canyon when he looked up and saw a bone sticking out of a rock wall. That bone turned out to be part of what may be the best preserved T. rex in the world. Over the next three summers, workers chipped away at the dinosaur, gradually removing it from the cliff face. They called it B. rex in Harmon’s honor and nicknamed it Bob. In 2001, they encased a section of the dinosaur and the surrounding dirt in plaster to protect it. The package weighed more than 2,000 pounds, which turned out to be just above their helicopter’s capacity, so they split it in half. One of B. rex’s leg bones was broken into two big pieces and several fragments—just what Schweitzer needed for her micro-scale explorations.

It turned out Bob had been misnamed. “It’s a girl and she’s pregnant,” Schweitzer recalls telling her lab technician when she looked at the fragments. On the hollow inside surface of the femur, Schweitzer had found scraps of bone that gave a surprising amount of information about the dinosaur that made them. Bones may seem as steady as stone, but they’re actually constantly in flux. Pregnant women use calcium from their bones to build the skeleton of a developing fetus. Before female birds start to lay eggs, they form a calcium-rich structure called medullary bone on the inside of their leg and other bones; they draw on it during the breeding season to make eggshells. Schweitzer had studied birds, so she knew about medullary bone, and that’s what she figured she was seeing in that T. rex specimen.

Most paleontologists now agree that birds are the dinosaurs’ closest living relatives. In fact, they say that birds are dinosaurs—colorful, incredibly diverse, cute little feathered dinosaurs. The theropod of the Jurassic forests lives on in the goldfinch visiting the backyard feeder, the toucans of the tropics and the ostriches loping across the African savanna.

To understand her dinosaur bone, Schweitzer turned to two of the most primitive living birds: ostriches and emus. In the summer of 2004, she asked several ostrich breeders for female bones. A farmer called, months later. “Y’all still need that lady ostrich?” The dead bird had been in the farmer’s backhoe bucket for several days in the North Carolina heat. Schweitzer and two colleagues collected a leg from the fragrant carcass and drove it back to Raleigh.

AdvertisementAs far as anyone can tell, Schweitzer was right: Bob the dinosaur really did have a store of medullary bone when she died. A paper published in Science last June presents microscope pictures of medullary bone from ostrich and emu side by side with dinosaur bone, showing near-identical features.

In the course of testing a B. rex bone fragment further, Schweitzer asked her lab technician, Jennifer Wittmeyer, to put it in weak acid, which slowly dissolves bone, including fossilized bone—but not soft tissues. One Friday night in January 2004, Wittmeyer was in the lab as usual. She took out a fossil chip that had been in the acid for three days and put it under the microscope to take a picture. “[The chip] was curved so much, I couldn’t get it in focus,” Wittmeyer recalls. She used forceps to flatten it. “My forceps kind of sunk into it, made a little indentation and it curled back up. I was like, stop it!” Finally, through her irritation, she realized what she had: a fragment of dinosaur soft tissue left behind when the mineral bone around it had dissolved. Suddenly Schweitzer and Wittmeyer were dealing with something no one else had ever seen. For a couple of weeks, Wittmeyer said, it was like Christmas every day.

In the lab, Wittmeyer now takes out a dish with six compartments, each holding a little brown dab of tissue in clear liquid, and puts it under the microscope lens. Inside each specimen is a fine network of almost-clear branching vessels—the tissue of a female Tyrannosaurus rex that strode through the forests 68 million years ago, preparing to lay eggs. Close up, the blood vessels from that T. rex and her ostrich cousins look remarkably alike. Inside the dinosaur vessels are things Schweitzer diplomatically calls “round microstructures” in the journal article, out of an abundance of scientific caution, but they are red and round, and she and other scientists suspect that they are red blood cells.

Of course, what everyone wants to know is whether DNA might be lurking in that tissue. Wittmeyer, from much experience with the press since the discovery, calls this “the awful question”—whether Schweitzer’s work is paving the road to a real-life version of science fiction’s Jurassic Park, where dinosaurs were regenerated from DNA preserved in amber. But DNA, which carries the genetic script for an animal, is a very fragile molecule. It’s also ridiculously hard to study because it is so easily contaminated with modern biological material, such as microbes or skin cells, while buried or after being dug up. Instead, Schweitzer has been testing her dinosaur tissue samples for proteins, which are a bit hardier and more readily distinguished from contaminants. Specifically, she’s been looking for collagen, elastin and hemoglobin. Collagen makes up much of the bone scaffolding, elastin is wrapped around blood vessels and hemoglobin carries oxygen inside red blood cells.

Because the chemical makeup of proteins changes through evolution, scientists can study protein sequences to learn more about how dinosaurs evolved. And because proteins do all the work in the body, studying them could someday help scientists understand dinosaur physiology—how their muscles and blood vessels worked, for example.

Proteins are much too tiny to pick out with a microscope. To look for them, Schweitzer uses antibodies, immune system molecules that recognize and bind to specific sections of proteins. Schweitzer and Wittmeyer have been using antibodies to chicken collagen, cow elastin and ostrich hemoglobin to search for similar molecules in the dinosaur tissue. At an October 2005 paleontology conference, Schweitzer presented preliminary evidence that she has detected real dinosaur proteins in her specimens.

Further discoveries in the past year have shown that the discovery of soft tissue in B. rex wasn’t just a fluke. Schweitzer and Wittmeyer have now found probable blood vessels, bone-building cells and connective tissue in another T. rex, in a theropod from Argentina and in a 300,000-year-old woolly mammoth fossil. Schweitzer’s work is “showing us we really don’t understand decay,” Holtz says. “There’s a lot of really basic stuff in nature that people just make assumptions about.”

young-earth creationists also see Schweitzer’s work as revolutionary, but in an entirely different way. They first seized upon Schweitzer’s work after she wrote an article for the popular science magazine Earth in 1997 about possible red blood cells in her dinosaur specimens. Creation magazine claimed that Schweitzer’s research was “powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bible’s account of a recent creation.”

This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. She’s horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. “They treat you really bad,” she says. “They twist your words and they manipulate your data.” For her, science and religion represent two different ways of looking at the world; invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science. After all, she says, what God asks is faith, not evidence. “If you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you don’t need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that we’d never be able to prove his existence. And I think that’s really cool.”

By definition, there is a lot that scientists don’t know, because the whole point of science is to explore the unknown. By being clear that scientists haven’t explained everything, Schweitzer leaves room for other explanations. “I think that we’re always wise to leave certain doors open,” she says.

But schweitzer’s interest in the long-term preservation of molecules and cells does have an otherworldly dimension: she’s collaborating with NASA scientists on the search for evidence of possible past life on Mars, Saturn’s moon Titan, and other heavenly bodies. (Scientists announced this spring, for instance, that Saturn’s tiny moon Enceladus appears to have liquid water, a probable precondition for life.)

Astrobiology is one of the wackier branches of biology, dealing in life that might or might not exist and might or might not take any recognizable form. “For almost everybody who works on NASA stuff, they are just in hog heaven, working on astrobiology questions,” Schweitzer says. Her NASA research involves using antibodies to probe for signs of life in unexpected places. “For me, it’s the means to an end. I really want to know about my dinosaurs.”

AdvertisementTo that purpose, Schweitzer, with Wittmeyer, spends hours in front of microscopes in dark rooms. To a fourth-generation Montanan, even the relatively laid-back Raleigh area is a big city. She reminisces wistfully about scouting for field sites on horseback in Montana. “Paleontology by microscope is not that fun,” she says. “I’d much rather be out tromping around.”

“My eyeballs are just absolutely fried,” Schweitzer says after hours of gazing through the microscope’s eyepieces at glowing vessels and blobs. You could call it the price she pays for not being typical.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: crevolist; dinosaur; dinosaurs; evolution; godsgravesglyphs; maryschweitzer; paleontology; shocker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 1,701 next last
To: Elsie

Sorry, my letter's post #63. This thread is growing faster than I thought!


161 posted on 05/01/2006 10:55:22 AM PDT by ahayes (Yes, I have a devious plot. No, you may not know what it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
Oh look, an anti-evolutionist who didn't bother to read the article ...

OH?

Do you KNOW this by distance-viewing?

162 posted on 05/01/2006 10:55:40 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

Comment #163 Removed by Moderator

To: Tokra

And most people believe that God created evolution.

 
Why?  The God that most Americans 'believe' in, is like THIS:
 
 



 
Isa 48:3 ... I have declared the former things from the beginning; and they went forth out of My mouth, and I shewed them; I did [them] SUDDENLY, and they came to pass.
 

Indeed!!

Genesis 1
 
 1.  In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
 2.  Now the earth was  formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
 3.  And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
 
 
This is a GOD who creates by speaking; but; how LONG did it take?
 
Now Jesus was a man who had God-like powers.  Was HE God?   The Book says so.......
 
 
 
 
NIV Colossians 1:13-17
 13.  For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves,
 14.  in whom we have redemption,  the forgiveness of sins.

 15.  He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
 16.  For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.
 17.  He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
 
 
NIV Revelation 4:11
 11.  "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being."
 
 
NIV Revelation 10:6
 6.  And he swore by him who lives for ever and ever, who created the heavens and all that is in them, the earth and all that is in it, and the sea and all that is in it, and said, "There will be no more delay!

 
Notice that when this man speaks, things happen RIGHT NOW!   Not after some times passes and the body heals itself.
 
 
 
NIV Matthew 8:2-3
 2.  A man with leprosy  came and knelt before him and said, "Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean."
 3.  Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!" Immediately he was cured  of his leprosy.
 
 
NIV Matthew 21:19
   Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.
 
 
NIV Mark 1:41-42
 41.  Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!"
 42.  Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured.
 
 
NIV Mark 5:41-42
 41.  He took her by the hand and said to her, "Talitha koum!" (which means, "Little girl, I say to you, get up!").
 42.  Immediately the girl stood up and walked around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished.
 
 
NIV Mark 10:51-52
 51.  "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him.   The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see."
 52.  "Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.
 
 
NIV Luke 5:13
  Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!" And Immediately the leprosy left him.
 
 
NIV Luke 5:24-25
 24.  But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins. . . ." He said to the paralyzed man, "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home."
 25.  Immediately he stood up in front of them, took what he had been lying on and went home praising God.
 
 
NIV Luke 8:44
  She came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak, and Immediately her bleeding stopped.
 
 
NIV Luke 13:12-13
 12.  When Jesus saw her, he called her forward and said to her, "Woman, you are set free from your infirmity."
 13.  Then he put his hands on her, and Immediately she straightened up and praised God.
 
 
NIV Luke 18:42-43
 42.  Jesus said to him, "Receive your sight; your faith has healed you."
 43.  Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus, praising God. When all the people saw it, they also praised God.
 
 
NIV Acts 9:33-35
 33.  There he found a man named Aeneas, a paralytic who had been bedridden for eight years.
 34.  "Aeneas," Peter said to him, "Jesus Christ heals you. Get up and take care of your mat." Immediately Aeneas got up.
 35.  All those who lived in Lydda and Sharon saw him and turned to the Lord.
 
 
NIV Matthew 8:13
 13.  Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go! It will be done just as you believed it would." And his servant was healed at that very hour.
 
 
NIV Matthew 15:28
 28.  Then Jesus answered, "Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted." And her daughter was healed from that very hour.


 
Now if this same personage, who does things in an instant;  how LONG would it take Him to CREATE all that we find around us???


164 posted on 05/01/2006 10:58:37 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

Of course you will. You wouldn't want to allow any thoughts into your head that may make you doubt your folk tale...

I could probably find a "scientist" that will claim the world is flat, too. That doesn't make it right....


165 posted on 05/01/2006 11:00:13 AM PDT by 2nsdammit (By definition it's hard to get suicide bombers with experience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred
"Now you know what... if a scientist actually proposed a theory that was different from Evolution but explained what we see in the fossil record and what we see today that is perfectly fine."

The fossil 'record' is an 'interpretation of evidence', not evidence itself. Do you not know the difference?,/p>

There are so many out-of-order fossils that 'reworking' has to be regularly invoked to explain them. Apparently, fossil can be 'reworked' either up or down!

http://dml.cmnh.org/2001Oct/msg00394.html

That and 'overthrusting' to explain pre-Cambrian limestones on top of Cretaceous shale.

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/12fos10.htm#Lewis%20Overthrust

Now how's that for explaining anomalous evidence? Just make it say whatever you want it to!

The 'fossil record' is so mixed up that various theories have to be invoked to 'fix' it where it doesn't agree with the TOE.

166 posted on 05/01/2006 11:01:00 AM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

"...Now if this same personage, who does things in an instant;  how LONG would it take Him to CREATE all that we find around us???"

An instant. Doesn't match Genesis. What's your point?


167 posted on 05/01/2006 11:04:07 AM PDT by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: ahayes

I see you're spreading the same old misrepresentations about Setterfield's work that have been around since the beginning.

Go here to see all of these objections answered. Nothing gets 'fried' except some misconceptions about cdk.

http://host380.ipowerweb.com/~setterfi/discussionindex.htm


168 posted on 05/01/2006 11:04:24 AM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Chiapet

"Isn't it amazing how it appears that all cultures developed codes of law without the assistance of the Bible?"
Why yes, things like this had previously amazed me as too until I understood mankinds' need for revisiing history.

Here's another poser - how did language originate? Did it start with 1 language or many? Possibly you've heard that Hebrew is/was the most highly-evolved of all known languages? Science used to laugh at the Biblical idea that man is composed of dust until recently.

Also which is more amazing - the dates on your research items or the dates ascribed to evolution? Just as we do today, mankind has always done, leave behind some trace of their existence. So please show me anything mankind recorded that is over 10,000 years old. I won't consider anything using dating theories that contain assumptions (i.e. cave painting on a '65 million year old rock').


169 posted on 05/01/2006 11:05:14 AM PDT by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: ahayes
Some of the tougher biopolymers (especially chitin, lignins and proteins) may degrade very slowly in a fossil. Some arthropod fossils from 25 million years ago contain a small amount of chitin (3), although insects preserved in amber from about the same time period show complete diagenetic alteration (fossilization) in spite of the superb morphological preservation (4). Likewise, in spite of the excellent morphological preservation of this fossil Dr. Schweitzer clearly states that it is unknown at this time whether the actual original cellular and organic material is present. The preservation of intact organic material from a long-extinct species would be a wonderful scientific find, however it is most likely that Dr. Schweitzer and other molecular paleontologists will have to settle for studying the typical biomolecule degradation products found in fossils (5). It may actually be that some fraction of organic matter was preserved, and the supplemental material Dr. Schweitzer published indicates that this may be true as the sample extracts showed some affinity for antibodies against bovine osteocalcin and chicken type I collagen. This leads to the exciting possibility of extracting collagen or other structural proteins from the T. rex sample and comparing these to avian proteins to help clarify the evolutionary relationship between birds and theropod dinosaurs. However, it is unfortunately more likely that the sample will prove to be fully mineralized and lacking any utilizable amount of untransformed biomolecules. If this is so AIG will have egg in its face after its trumpeting of the T. rex sample as "unfossilized soft tissue" ("Still Soft and Stretchy," 25 March 2005).

I wonder has she done MALDI-mass-spec on some of the material, yet. That would be a pretty good indication of the state of the organic material.

170 posted on 05/01/2006 11:05:36 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: ahayes

Ahh.. I can see that you did. Have you gotten a response from them?


171 posted on 05/01/2006 11:05:41 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
“They twist your words and they manipulate your data.”

I'm shocked. Shocked!!

172 posted on 05/01/2006 11:06:39 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Unresponsive to trolls, lunatics, fanatics, retards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Is there any way we can clone these cells to reproduce the animal?

I for one would like to see a park dedicated to cloned species of such animals.

173 posted on 05/01/2006 11:07:34 AM PDT by R_Kangel ("He who lives in glass houses should never invite "He who is without sin" into his house!!!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Nope. :-( It's been 6 weeks and they're ignoring me. Dave says they might reply in a month or so.


174 posted on 05/01/2006 11:07:58 AM PDT by ahayes (Yes, I have a devious plot. No, you may not know what it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

Searching for the ‘magic bullet’
Why do creation-defenders often seem to be too quick to jump onto the latest ‘evidences’?
by Ken Ham

In 1986 a number of leading creationist researchers decided that the evidence of supposedly human and dinosaur footprints, found together at the Paluxy River in Texas, had serious problems. They decided that, pending further research to establish the correct interpretation of the prints, they could no longer be safely used as evidence supporting the fact (based on the biblical account of creation) that man and dinosaur lived at the same time.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v25/i2/bullet.asp


175 posted on 05/01/2006 11:08:38 AM PDT by js1138 (somewhere, some time ago, something happened, but whatever it was, wasn't evolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science.

Ha ha ha.

After all, she says, what God asks is faith, not evidence. “If you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you don’t need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that we’d never be able to prove his existence. And I think that’s really cool.”

A thoroughly modern Millie, even to, unbeknownst to her, her modern definition of faith. An example of what happens when religion and philosophy are no longer seriously studied.
176 posted on 05/01/2006 11:11:42 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
By Helen Fields

I honestly thought it said "by Helen Thomas", and that this was from The Onion.

177 posted on 05/01/2006 11:12:43 AM PDT by P8riot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hurly

Actually, I corresponded w/ Mr. Chadwick on this issue a coupld of years ago and he confirmed that you must *assume* the history of a rock in order to 'interpret' the pollen correctly.

Not knowing the history and guessing makes 'pollen dating' as irrelevant as any other dating method.

That's what the 'scientists' won't tell you.


178 posted on 05/01/2006 11:12:53 AM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: RoadTest
What she looked at was only a few thousand years old, but if you worship EvolutionCreationism, you can't MUST believe it.

The creationists are just as dogmatic (actually MORE dogmatic) than the "evolutionists" they accuse of being dogmatic. (say that 3 times very fast.)

179 posted on 05/01/2006 11:13:44 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
“They twist your words and they manipulate your data.”

I'm shocked. Shocked!!

What exactly was the misrepresentation?

180 posted on 05/01/2006 11:14:30 AM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 1,701 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson