Posted on 08/14/2009 5:28:11 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Paleontologist Mary Schweitzer’s discoveries of soft blood vessels, proteins, various blood cells, and even DNA inside fossilized dinosaur bones have been met with extreme skepticism from the scientific community. It has been well established that such biological structures and molecules should not last beyond a few tens of thousands of years, and could not possibly survive millions of years. So why are they there?
Scientists have made multiple attempts to debunk Schweitzer’s findings...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
:o)
:o)
You would think the thought would at least be entertained by them. Nothing doing.
Yeah, I have a hard time believing “carbon dating.” Especially since they have found soft tissue from an animal that’s supposed to be millions of years old. Perhaps carbon dating is all wrong? Perhaps some pockets of dinosaurs lived until fairly recent times?
Welcome back.
Did you walk on the glaciers?
Same bunk, different day.
Well, technically, they are called dragons. ;-)
There are reports from pretty much every single culture on the planet about “dragons” up until just a few hundred years ago.
So, why not just make the short mental leap that what we call dinosaurs today were called dragons that people saw and recorded in just bout every single culture?
The Bible has several references to creatures that fit descriptions of dinosaurs that scientists are identifying
Leviathan
Behemoth
Tanniyan
We know that was only a few thousand years ago.
Why does science have no desire to explore this?- tie it in with historical record keeping and documentation from multiple sources -
Gilgamesh ( sumerian- BC 3000)
Alexander the great- saw one in a cave in india
Vikings - spoke of many sea dragons.
Chinese have much lore about dragons.
Italy
France
Arabia
Egypt
ethiopia
All these countries and more have lore about dragons that they cared enough about to record in documents that have lasted to this day- not in some peasants shack, but royal documents, etc...
For some reason, Science wants to refute all folks opinions that they disagree with (from every corner of the globe and across many years) because they refuse to acknowledge that they arent using the scientific process to find the truth. They are using it to prove something they already believe ( and failing miserably really)
Seems a little bit like Obamas campaign against folks who disagree with him.
;-)
Additionally, soft tissue from millions of years ago when dinosaurs supposedly died out- ?
C’mon. Talk about having faith in something unsupportable.
GodGunsGuts
The fallacy in this argument is that creationists believe the universe is only a few thousand years old. If that is the case, by what basis could they possibly claim that soft tissues could NOT survive millions of years under the right conditions? Under their system, they have absolutely NO frame of reference by which to make that claim. If there has never been millions of years to test a claim about what processes occur over millions of years, they cannot accurately make the claim. It becomes *pure*, 100% conjecture - worse than any claim ever made by an evolutionist. Especially if they are to remain consistent in their belief that the universe is only a few thousand years old.
Do you see that?
Junk science at its finest.
See #31
Would you be surprised to learn that Mrs. Schweitzer herself denies that her research points to 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.1
The kicker? She decribes herself as a Christian.
At least she doesn’t seem to falsify her data to fit into her evolutionary framework.
Well said, and what we get from liberals like alogre and Chrissy-Fit Matthews is "the debate is over" and "settled science" concerning mand-made global warming and evolution respectively.
Scum collects around drains.
Welcome back GGG. It seems the days of blind belief in Evolution are drawing to an end. The fossils that are being found will surely cast doubt in current dating techniques in the heart of a true scientist. These findings are truly remarkable and cast a bright light in a scientific world that has been shrouded in darkness.
I would like to think that libs and Palin detractors would get their arses handed to them by the locals.
I have a suspicion that GGG and the rest of his crevo’s are one in the same or they can’t think for themselves. I went looking for posts from the others while GGG was away, and not a peep out of most of them.
Science is not like religion. When a scientist makes a discovery, he publishes it and lots of scientists jump to replicate and/or disprove the find. Religion, OTOH, just accepts what the preacher says on Sunday.
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.