Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fresh Salamander Tissue Found in Solid Rock
ICR News ^ | December 11, 2009 | Brian Thomas, M.S.

Posted on 12/11/2009 8:38:32 AM PST by GodGunsGuts

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-241 next last
To: Wacka; GodGunsGuts
"This is a fossil with organic (carbon containing) materials, vs the normal minerals. Same situation occurs when fossils are found in coal."

As usual, you're a liar. There is nothing in the article to support your weird contra-factual interpretation. - Catch up with the truth, and learn to live with it.

101 posted on 12/11/2009 10:33:39 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: scottdeus12

Don’t waste the bandwidth. Everyone else gets it....


102 posted on 12/11/2009 10:33:39 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

Touche’


103 posted on 12/11/2009 10:34:50 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: scottdeus12
CAN EVERYONE SEE THIS....CAMEL THINKS CHRISTIANS ARE THE SAME AS MUSLIMS!!

It seems to be going around the FRevo/DC crowd.

Must be contagious.

104 posted on 12/11/2009 10:36:45 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Do you mean the original paper or BTMS*’s lying interpretation of it?


105 posted on 12/11/2009 10:37:08 AM PST by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
"Is that why they still call them 'fossils'?"

Fossil simply implies ancient preserved life. They plainly state that it is not mineralized.

106 posted on 12/11/2009 10:37:35 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; Admin Moderator

Debate is one thing, but going all RACIST??

C’mon now.. grow up.


107 posted on 12/11/2009 10:37:38 AM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Wacka

The original. The only lying interpretation is yours.


108 posted on 12/11/2009 10:39:10 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

YOU JUST SAID ALLAH AND YAHWEH (JEHOVAH) ARE THE SAME!

WE SHOULD GROW UP???


109 posted on 12/11/2009 10:39:12 AM PST by scottdeus12 (Jesus is real, whether you believe in Him or not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: metmom; GodGunsGuts

“high-fidelity organic preservation of extremely decay prone soft tissues is more common in the fossil record – the only physical record of the history of life on earth.”

So what is in the “fossil record” if not fossils?

Why do you think they don’t call it the “fresh meat record”?

Quit being so stupid about this. They are fossils, there is no fresh meat. Quit listening to GGG, he is leading you astray. Use the highly-evolved, Darwiniacally-enhanced, non-fossilized brain matter that God gave you.

Read the paper - they plainly state it’s a fossil. Why do you think they call it a fossil? Is it because it is “fresh meat”?

GGG is lying to you. His ego-driven hyper-posting spree of the past 6 months is nothing but a pathetic act - and you, and many other folks reflexively believe in him, and his Fanciful GGG Notion that faith needs to be proven by science.

He is a liar, and you are smart enough to see it if you just open your eyes.


110 posted on 12/11/2009 10:39:53 AM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: xcamel; Admin Moderator

Just what is racist here you idiot?


111 posted on 12/11/2009 10:40:12 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; GodGunsGuts
Okay, let's say for the moment that this "fossilized soft tissue," whatever that means exactly, is evidence that the salamander isn't as old as we thought. Brian writes, "Organic materials such as muscle tissue decay in days or hours under ambient conditions, as anyone can observe by leaving a piece of steak out in the open." Does that mean the salamander fossil must be only days or hours old? If not, what mechanism was able to preserve the tissue past days or hours for [however old Brian thinks it is], but not for millions of years?

It seems to me there's only two choices: either these soft-tissue fossils are as old as scientists think are but, as the original story says, "soft tissue can be preserved under a broader set of fossil conditions than previously known." Or, they are so young that no extraordinary explanation is required for why soft tissue is preserved. If that's the case, why doesn't every fossil have soft tissue inside it? Why is it so rare--why does it require microscopes to find--if the simple explanation is that it's not very old?

112 posted on 12/11/2009 10:40:33 AM PST by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: scottdeus12

You might want to go back and check that post again...

Oh.. and even if you type louder, it still won’t be true.


113 posted on 12/11/2009 10:41:26 AM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: mnehring; GodGunsGuts
In other words, these were soft tissue fossils, not "fresh meat".

You're speculating, mnehring. The article that you linked to says "According to the University College Dublin geologists, the muscle tissue is organically preserved in three dimensions, with circulatory vessels infilled with blood." It doesn't say infilled with organic minerals creating a stone replica of blood. These articles clearly go much farther than lauding the details that have been captured in the fossilization process. They are clearly indicating the preservation of soft tissue.

You're allowing your faith to get in the way of the facts.
114 posted on 12/11/2009 10:42:16 AM PST by Sopater (I'm so sick of atheists shoving their religion in my face.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

NotLOLing, xcamel. You likened FR’s Christians to the Taliban several times upthread...and you did so after specifically being told by the mods to knock it off on previous threads.


115 posted on 12/11/2009 10:42:47 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

I’m not going to repeat your RACIST post... that’s up to the ‘powers that be’ to straighten out.


116 posted on 12/11/2009 10:42:56 AM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

You’ve been exposed.

You claimed Allah and Yahweh are the same.

Your words, not mine.

No wonder you trash Christians like you do. This your own personal jihad?


117 posted on 12/11/2009 10:43:49 AM PST by scottdeus12 (Jesus is real, whether you believe in Him or not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: scripter

ping


118 posted on 12/11/2009 10:44:02 AM PST by latina4dubya ( self-proclaimed tequila snob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“Fossil simply implies ancient preserved life. They plainly state that it is not mineralized.”

They do not state that.


119 posted on 12/11/2009 10:44:31 AM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: scottdeus12

Your false pride and faked indignation will be your downfall. God is patient.


120 posted on 12/11/2009 10:45:13 AM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; xcamel; Admin Moderator; All
Once again, these threads break down into name-calling and demeaning accusations.

Is this REALLY what JimRob wants for his site?

This is EXACTLY the type of thing the DUmmies look for from FR and exploit as radicalism on the right.

But I suspect that reason will not win out in the political arena if our religious beliefs are going to be the measure of our conservatism.

121 posted on 12/11/2009 10:46:46 AM PST by Pistolshot (Brevity: Saying a lot, while saying very little.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

“Your false pride and faked indignation will be your downfall.”

BS. You’re a fraud.


122 posted on 12/11/2009 10:47:09 AM PST by scottdeus12 (Jesus is real, whether you believe in Him or not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Wacka

Aren’t you the one claiming to work for some company doing minor lab work? If so one would think you knew what a fossil is at the very least.
But even 2 is yards ahead of 5 as the Darwinism of the Dustbins is being revealed to be.


123 posted on 12/11/2009 10:48:06 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

You’re a complete liar and moron.

Nothing I have ever posted is racist. You obviously don’t even know what simple words mean.


124 posted on 12/11/2009 10:48:18 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

You ARE a lib. Racist? where did that come from? Oh, yes, that is how the race baiters respond to terms such as a Tar-Baby.

Race card (however inappropriate) played in effort to silence. T^ext book Sharpton/Jackson technique.


125 posted on 12/11/2009 10:48:52 AM PST by RoadGumby (Ask me about Ducky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot

People point out an obvious lie propagated by the OP and the article he linked to, as is the style for the OP and we get called names for pointing out his lying.


126 posted on 12/11/2009 10:50:22 AM PST by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot; xcamel; Admin Moderator; All
"Is this REALLY what JimRob wants for his site?"

No, he told xcamel to take a hike if she didn't like it here, but obviously she has no respect for him or anyone else.

127 posted on 12/11/2009 10:50:40 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
See the link in #12 that details exactly how the fossilization process occurred. It says that bio films lined the soft tissue, creating a preserved structure. At that, the exact phrase used is: sulphur-rich organic residue is attributed to sulphurization of organic molecules within the tissue .It doesn't say in any way that this is "fresh meat" as what ICR implied. The use of "Fresh Meat" is simply an adjective used in some articles like saying it is an 'explosive discovery', not a scientific term.
128 posted on 12/11/2009 10:50:47 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

Are you sober today? Your posts have been even less coherent than usual.


129 posted on 12/11/2009 10:52:34 AM PST by Liberty1970 (Democrats are not in control. God is. And Thank God for that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot
Seeing how you are one of the instigators, that means a lot coming from you!

C'mon, just come out and admit your real agenda, namely: you don't want the Christian Right--a major pillar of the Reagan Coalition--to have a place at the table within the conservative movement, thus insuring that the GOP always loses.

130 posted on 12/11/2009 10:52:46 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: RoadGumby

Xcamel doesn’t know what a tarbaby is (she is one too).

She doesn’t understand any debating slang.


131 posted on 12/11/2009 10:52:53 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Just a stinking lib by any other name.


132 posted on 12/11/2009 10:54:19 AM PST by RoadGumby (Ask me about Ducky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Cry to daddy again when everyone doesn’t agree with you.

This is getting to be a tired tactic. Grow some skin. Have more faith in your own belief or is it so weak that it would be destroyed by some name calling?

JR has more important things to do than to run here and shut up his crying kiddies.


133 posted on 12/11/2009 10:54:29 AM PST by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Liberty1970

I was thinking the exact same thing myself!


134 posted on 12/11/2009 10:54:56 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Wacka
"Cry to daddy again when everyone doesn’t agree with you."

More stupid BS from you? I'm shocked!

Address this crap to xcamel, she is the one that 'cried.'

135 posted on 12/11/2009 10:58:12 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Wacka

What do you know of Faith?

What IS your Faith?

You enter a thread about information that SUPPORTS Faith and begin throwing stones. Then you have the audacity to question anothers Faith? You and xcamel belong more at DU than anywhere else.

“Look there is a post we don’t like!!! Let’s go try to shut them up!!” Re-examine yourself and go to where there are more like you. (LGF? DU? SanFran?)


136 posted on 12/11/2009 11:00:23 AM PST by RoadGumby (Ask me about Ducky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: xcamel; Admin Moderator

Xcamel is an admitted, documented, FR-hating troll. xcamel brags over at DC that she hates this place, claims that the only reason why FR lets creationists post is because of money, has nothing but disdain for FR’s posting policies, ignores repeated warnings to avoid Creation/ID threads, she regularly trashes FR on other sites, she brags about how her deliberate disruptive behavior has yet to get her banned, and she promises to increase her disruptive behavior in direct proportion to what she is allowed to get away with on FR.


137 posted on 12/11/2009 11:00:31 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Yes, my voice should mean as much to further conservatism, not just your agenda, to shut down free-will and thought.

What you want is your way. Period.

Our conservatism is based on your belief. Period.

If we don't think as you do, drink the same kool-aid as you do, we are not conservatives. Period.

The Christian Right is the one of the foundations of the conservative principles, but not the only one.

We, as conservatives LOSE, because the left uses the radicalism you display to paint all conservatives with the same brush.

138 posted on 12/11/2009 11:01:50 AM PST by Pistolshot (Brevity: Saying a lot, while saying very little.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: xcamel; Admin Moderator

Also, if you check our respective posting histories, you will notice that creationists do not follow around LGF-liberal-xcamel from thread to thread trying to instigate flame wars...it is quite the other way around.


139 posted on 12/11/2009 11:03:01 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“Their use of the term “fossilized” simply means encased in rock in this case.”

You’re going to have to do better than that. Find a source where the person who has examined the specimen says in simple language that they are the actual cells that were alive when the dinosaur was alive.

With photos.


140 posted on 12/11/2009 11:03:20 AM PST by PLMerite (Ride to the sound of the Guns - I'll probably need help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I have read many articles and papers on this find, and it seems their is a bit of confusion about what to call “fossiled” any more, seeing how they are finding so many “fossils” with soft-tissue still intact.

Is it painful going through the mental contortions to twist the original article so severely to reach what you (and ICR) do?

READ THE SOURCE ARTICLE. It's not intact soft-tissue; it's fossils with the soft-tissue detail preserved! Typically when most organic matter is fossilized, most of the fine, cellular-level details are obliterated. What's exciting is that we've found a few that had such details intact IN THE STONE OF THE FOSSIL.

Seriously, just go and read the source article; I even quoted AND BOLDED the relevant portion for you. It's a complete fossil, no soft-tissue at all, and never claimed.

Your whirlwind contortions notwithstanding...

141 posted on 12/11/2009 11:07:59 AM PST by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the Sting of Truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot

not just your agenda, to shut down free-will and thought.

Yet, what is the level of 'conflict' seen in a Creationist thread, vs that in an evo thread? As a rule, Creationists won't waste much time there. But, let a Creationist thread be posted, (especially by GGG) there will be a wild-n-wooly free for all led by the usual group of malcontents..

The attempt to silence (think liberal projection tactics here) are those of evo-types disrupting in the Creationist thread, not vice-versa.

IF you enter a Creationist thread, surpise! you may find someone that disagrees with your evo ideas. Funny how that works.

Sad that a belief in the Bible is called 'radicalism', especially by someone that professes to be 'Conservative'.

142 posted on 12/11/2009 11:09:16 AM PST by RoadGumby (Ask me about Ducky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I am having a hard time seeing where the confusion lies.

It is obvious that the soft tissue was fossilized. It is not longer "soft". How often do they dig up a dinosaur and find his hamstrings still attached? It is a "rare" find to have "soft" tissue still around... even if it still isn't soft.
143 posted on 12/11/2009 11:12:53 AM PST by IronKros (Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition. ~Adam Smith, The Wealth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot

Oh please. We don’t follow your fellow evos around trying to start flame wars, you follow us. We don’t force anyone to read our threads, but for some reason you feel compelled to read them. We don’t claim you have to believe biblical creation to be a Christian, but your fellow disruptors constantly claim that’s what we believe. We don’t go running around calling everyone liars who we disagree with, but that is your fellow evo-atheists’ standard tactice. Get real.


144 posted on 12/11/2009 11:13:31 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer

My comment was about the fossil find of soft tissue becoming more common.

I didn’t make that clear.

Neither did the article make clear how the soft tissue was preserved. It said that it was *organically preserved* and then it made some comment about organic tissue being preserved, so there was some ambiguity there.

However, I would certainly not call it *fresh*. In this case, I do have to say that the adjective of *fresh* is somewhat inappropriate. There ought to have been a better choice of words so as not to leave the impression that it was undecayed or unpreserved in any way..


145 posted on 12/11/2009 11:13:46 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Neither did the article make clear how the soft tissue was preserved.

The ICR article didn't but if you scroll to the bottom of that article under their references, one of those articles goes into detail about it. (the link I posted in #12)

146 posted on 12/11/2009 11:14:50 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Your posts are in News/Activism.


147 posted on 12/11/2009 11:14:55 AM PST by IronKros (Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition. ~Adam Smith, The Wealth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: IronKros

Read #1.


148 posted on 12/11/2009 11:15:26 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
Fossilized soft tissue seems not overly difficult to understand, it's preserved tissue, blood , muscle, etc. Why that some tissue is preserved while others are not really is the big question that is being raised by these discoveries, isn't it? And so far the answer is not clear so the offering of two possibilities is a false choice.

If the scientists believed the fossils were just some thousands (I am not of the YEC persuasion) of years old the novelty of such finds would be far less but since they assume millions of years of age and thus preservation of actual tissues improbable if not impossible, something extraordinary is called for.

No one really know how long soft tissues can be preserved but what has been found is not ho-hum it died last year either.

So possibly the fossils are much, much less than millions of years in age and tissue preservation even at this lessor age is not common.

Does the preservation then, lend its self to an age of millions of years and some sort of truly extraordinary explanation or to just thousands of years with a rare (you need a microscope) but not so extraordinary explanation?

149 posted on 12/11/2009 11:16:15 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

How is twisting the words to meat your agenda “Defense of Religious Freedom”?


150 posted on 12/11/2009 11:16:41 AM PST by IronKros (Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition. ~Adam Smith, The Wealth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-241 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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