This is one of the most interesting discoveries of the millennium: An un-fossilized T. rex bone. Soft, stretchy tissue, blood vessels and even blood cells discovered in the semi-fossilized remains of a long-dead T. rex in Montana. (Top picture shows apparent red blood cells in vessel and soft tissue, bottom shows soft tissue)
Watch 15-minute 60 Minutes Interview with Paleontologists Dr. Jack Horner and Dr. Mary Schweitzer from 2010
This and many other similar findings beg a question that evolutionists are trying to avoid: how old are these remains? Instead, Horner and Schweitzer have sought to answer the question: how could soft tissue and blood cells be preserved for over 70 million years without having completely decayed 2000 times over like forensic science predicts? Dr. Schweitzer says that this find shows how much we don't know about decay rates in organic material. However, there is plenty of observable, solid evidence (as Ian Juby points out, people are jailed and executed based upon this science) that these proteins could not survive tens of thousands of years, let alone 70 million (Start Genesis Week video at 6:35 mark). This is why scientists never thought to look for soft tissue! Even in a completely dry environment, the survival of proteins beyond 40,000 years has been thought to be impossible. Until now.
Instead of accepting this as evidence of the dinosaurs in question being killed recently (say a little over 4000 years ago as the Bible indicates) scientists like Schweitzer are scrambling to explain how the preservation of organic material could survive 70 million years. Why can't they consider this as evidence the of dinosaurs living more recently? The theory of evolution dictates that they HAD to have lived 60-80 million years ago. Evolution requires deep time to explain the arrival of complex life from nothing. Please don't try to tell me, "Well, Carbon 14 dating proves they are millions of years old!" This is one of the most uninformed arguments I have heard. Because C14 has a half-life of 5,730±40 years, if the dinosaurs were any older than 100,000 years we would find no measurable C14 in them. But when C14 IS measured in dinosaur remains, we DO find C14 in them. (1) Evolutionary scientists will always claim that the fossils must have been contaminated and reject the evidence that the fossils actually are young. Not only do evolutionists tend to throw out evidence contrary to their theory, they also don't look for it. Dinosaurs are never C14 dated because evolutionary scientists believe any C14 found would be a result of contamination. In case you didn't watch the interview, they had to cut it in half because it was too heavy for the helicopter to lift it off the cliff-side in one piece. It took a logistical necessity to justify cutting open the T. rex bone that yielded the soft tissue, not scientific inquiry. "The problem is, for 300 years, we thought, 'Well, the organics are all
gone, so why should we look for something that's not going to be
there?' and nobody looks." Dr. Schweitzer said in an interview with Live Science. Evolution is not good science, but a roadblock to good science!
Personally, I almost admire how Jack and Mary managed to keep the 60 Minutes interview from ever approaching idea that the bones might not actually be 70 million years old. They marvel at the idea of the material lasting so long and are quick to assure their watching peers that they are all about deep-time and evolution. Yes, evolutionist believe that the birds you see today actually ARE dinosaurs that never went extinct. No, you don't have to believe their fairy tale. The Bible says things are created and reproduce according to their kind; this is what we see now and can observe in the fossil record. It is observable and repeatable, unlike evolution.
Of
course, since the 60 Minutes interview took place over 3 years ago, Jack's
dino-chicken should be available for pubic viewing in 2 years! Don't
tell your kids though, because I am afraid they would only be
disappointed. My hypothesis, based upon God's Word, is that he will only
have a chicken (perhaps with a slightly malformed hind-end) when all is
said and done.
You may
say "Big deal, they found soft tissue in ONE dinosaur bone!" No, many,
many like findings have been discovered (2). This is remarkable since it
is considered sacrilege in the community to cut open fully in-tact bones considering organic material was thought to be long-gone. Interestingly, you don't even need to cut into them to be able to observe how fresh these remains are:
Excerpt from Discover Magazine article by Barry Yeoman (read full article):
Once, when she (Dr. Schweitzer) was
working with a T. rex skeleton harvested from Hell Creek (Montana), she noticed
that the fossil exuded a distinctly organic odor. "It smelled just like
one of the cadavers we had in the lab who had been treated with
chemotherapy before he died," she says. Given the conventional wisdom
that such fossils were made up entirely of minerals, Schweitzer was
anxious when mentioning this to Horner. "But he said, 'Oh, yeah, all
Hell Creek bones smell,'" she says. To most old-line paleontologists,
the smell of death didn't even register. To Schweitzer, it meant that
traces of life might still cling to those bones.
She had already seen signs of exceptional preservation in the early
1990s, while she was studying the technical aspects of adhering fossil
slices to microscope slides. One day a collaborator brought a T. rex
slide to a conference and showed it to a pathologist, who examined it
under a microscope. "The guy looked at it and said, 'Do you realize
you've got red blood cells in that bone?' " Schweitzer remembers. "My
colleague brought it back and showed me, and I just got goose bumps,
because everyone knows these things don't last for 65 million years."
Remember, this is not about the age of the dinosaurs, it is about "exceptional preservation"; everyone knows these things don't last 65 million years! Of course Dr. Schweitzer had a hard time publishing her findings since this evidence is toxic to the evolutionary theory. However, now that these discoveries have been made and published, even more similar discoveries are bound to happen. Now, this doesn't mean we will use good, unbiased reason and science to interpret the findings, but for those of us free from the evolutionary mind-set, we can just smile (or weep) as the others twist, squirm, and invent new fairy tales to try and make the evidence fit into their worldview. Fresh dinosaur bones fit quite nicely with the Genesis creation and flood account. Massive dinosaur fossil beds like the Morison Formation that cover most of the Rocky Mountain states bear witness to a massive watery burial of dinosaurs. The evidence is rock-solid, except for the parts that still have not fossilized. ;-)
2 Peter Chapter 3 says that in the last days scoffers will come deliberately forgetting that: (NIV) 5...long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.
The next verse is a clear warning to those who purposely forget the global flood, a judgement by God upon his creation when it had turned against him:
7By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
Some of us are more stubborn than others, but God is patient with us and wants all to turn to him:
8 But
do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like
a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare.
11 Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives 12 as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. 13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.
What will happen to you when you die? And upon what authority do you base your decision? Is it just a hunch or a feeling that you will make the cut and get into heaven? Perhaps you don't believe there is a such person as God or a such thing as heaven. If God's word is true, you have no excuse; the "invisible" attributes of the Lord are clearly seen through his creation. The stakes couldn't be higher for you. YOU have to make the decision whether to take things into your own hands before a righteous, all-powerful and Holy God, or you can tell Him you are insufficient without the saving power of Jesus and ask Him to forgive you. The Bible makes it clear what God's plan for salvation is; we need to admit our sin and accept that HE is God of us and this universe. A good judge won't dismiss a criminal guilty of a crime because the defendant was a good person most of the time. Why would a just God do so with us when we have broken the supreme law, God's law? Rather, because of his great love for us He sent His Son, Jesus, to pay our penalty (which is death) so that we may be forgiven of our crimes and be united with our Creator as designed from the beginning. You have a lot to lose or gain personally, won't you open your eyes and heart to ask God to reveal Himself to you? I promise you will never regret it.
(1)
Check out my iPhones and Radiodating post or my Why I don't Believe in Evolution post to see why Radiodating is also skewed toward always giving long ages.
(2)
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html#ixzz2n4ixMVfY
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/3075717/1952 full
Schweitzer interview with Live Science: http://www.livescience.com/41537-t-rex-soft-tissue.html
Soft tissue in Triceratops horn: Armitage & Anderson, Acta Histochemica, Feb 13, 2013, DOI 10 1016/j acthis 20013.03.001
The scientific community, society and even many churches have accepted that the earth is billions of years old and evolution by natural selection and chance have brought about the world that we know today. Where is the evidence for this conclusion? What does the Bible actually say? Let's start a respectful conversation.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Update
I will continue on with my new series as I find the time, doing the research required to write a decent article about those topics takes a lot of time. Time that I don't find very frequently. So, when I have the time, I will be writing those posts about why we can trust the Bible as true. But if and when I get snippets of time I will be posting interesting (at least I think they are) articles and videos as I stumble across them.
Thanks for reading!
Thanks for reading!
Monday, December 2, 2013
NY Times Article--Scientific Community
The anti-creation crowd loves to throw out that science is an objective method that follows the trail of data, wherever it leads, to arrive at the facts. This is true in textbooks only; whenever people, money, egos, and prestige get involved, all bets are off. Read this article I stumbled across in the New York Times discussing how science is subject to bias, fraud and misconduct just as any other man-made institution is.
Article
It really would be nice if all data was considered, all presuppositions were left out, all agendas were checked and science just provided grounded conclusions that did not try to reach beyond its limits. However, what we see is a lot of motivation for scientists to appease political agenda (get more grant money) and maintain their school or organization prestige (don't ever suggest intelligent design!). Peer review is a great idea, but can easily become peer pressure if deliberate care is not taken to avoid this.
Are you putting more stock in the fallible ideas and postulation (postulation is a huge chunk origins science) of man or in the written word of God, the creator of the universe? When examined in a historical, scientific and philosophical light, the Bible checks out and provides a very reliable account of the history of our planet.
And no, the Bible is not peer reviewed. God has no peer!
Article
It really would be nice if all data was considered, all presuppositions were left out, all agendas were checked and science just provided grounded conclusions that did not try to reach beyond its limits. However, what we see is a lot of motivation for scientists to appease political agenda (get more grant money) and maintain their school or organization prestige (don't ever suggest intelligent design!). Peer review is a great idea, but can easily become peer pressure if deliberate care is not taken to avoid this.
Are you putting more stock in the fallible ideas and postulation (postulation is a huge chunk origins science) of man or in the written word of God, the creator of the universe? When examined in a historical, scientific and philosophical light, the Bible checks out and provides a very reliable account of the history of our planet.
And no, the Bible is not peer reviewed. God has no peer!