Young-Earth Creationist Wins Lawsuit

Proslogion ^ | 10-4-16 | Dr. Jay L. Wile

[Boogieman]

“why doesn’t (didn’t) Armitage simply make the sample(s) available for others to study?”

Who said he hasn’t?

[Mechanicos]

The Decreasing Speed of Light - Dr. Barry Setterfield (long video) In Sum Atomic Time has been slowing down and was estimated to be about a thousand times faster when the earth was created.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdTlOVTDbNU

2 Peter 3:8

[jonno]

“Who said he hasn’t?”

Do you know if there is anyone else looking at his sample(s)?

[Agamemnon]

Ummm...at the risk of sounding ignorant - why doesn’t (didn’t) Armitage simply make the sample(s) available for others to study?

One's ignorance is generally placed on display when one comments on an article before one has taken the time to read it (a familiar habit of too many here on FR).

As quoted from the article:

"Obviously, this kind of find is amazing. Not surprisingly, he and his colleague, Dr. Kevin Lee Anderson, wrote a report on their discovery so that other scientists could learn from it. The report was published in the peer-reviewed, secular journal entitled Acta Histochemica."

"Students would come down to his lab and ask to see the dinosaur cells. They would talk to Mr. Armitage about his discovery and ask him what he thought it meant. He would tell them that he thought it meant the Triceratops fossil couldn’t be millions of years old."

FReegards!

[Amendment10]

Thank you for referencing that article fishtank. Please note that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

While I’m glad that Dr. Wile won his religious expression case, the problem that I have with what the article presents is that it did not mention Dr. Wile's 14th Amendment protections.

More specifically, this case is a good example of a state appropriately losing a court battle for abridging the constitutionally enumerated rights of a citizen which the states expressly prohibited themselves from doing when they ratified the 14th Amendment.

14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

However, the limits of the 14th Amendment’s (14A) protection’s were also clarified in part when the Supreme Court clarified the following about the scope of constitutionally protected rights when it decided United States v. Cruikshank. In that case the Supreme Court clarified that constitutionally enumerated rights protect citizens only from the actions of the federal and state government’s, not individual citizens.

So while Dr. Wile’s 1st Amendment enumerated religious and speech rights were properly protected by 14A from low-information, anti-religious expression agents of the state in that case, it remains that business owners can still tell Muslim customers not to wear burka’s into their stores because of security concerns for example, or refuse service to gay people who visit their stores imo.

[abigkahuna]

I am of the same opinion. I do believe that the Earth is old...maybe 4.5B y.o. I also believe that it is possible the some pockets of creatures existed until recent times, i.e. before the end of the Late Wisconsin Ice Age. I also subscribe to the theory that the last ice age ended due to a cosmic event, whether it was a comet or asteroid strike, a cosmic event began the period of melting ice from around 12,800 years ago to around 11, 600 years ago. During this period North America was wiped clean of just about all mega fauna. Perhaps this three horned lizard co-existed with the three species of mammoths living in North America.

The good Doctor should be re-instated. While of course I believe the Earth was created...how else did we get here...I think dating is a legitimate line on inquiry, along with honest disagreement. Good for the Doctor on his court case.

As for the three dino cells...very interesting indeed.

[Boogieman]

I would assume there are, since he released controversial findings. If you want to know though, you probably should ask him.

[SkyDancer]

Beat me to it. I was just looking at the posts before I posted that very same circular reasoning they use.

[The Truth Will Make You Free]

Not long after that, the Darwinian Inquisition struck. He was fired from his position at California State University Northridge. ... According to him, one faculty member stormed into his lab and shouted:

"We will not tolerate your religion in this department, or your creationist projects either!"

Perfect demonstration of a closed, biased mind. Sounds like Clinton voters.

[Agamemnon]

I am of the same opinion. I do believe that the Earth is old...maybe 4.5B y.o. I also believe that it is possible the some pockets of creatures existed until recent times, i.e. before the end of the Late Wisconsin Ice Age. I also subscribe to the theory that the last ice age ended due to a cosmic event, whether it was a comet or asteroid strike, a cosmic event began the period of melting ice from around 12,800 years ago to around 11, 600 years ago. During this period North America was wiped clean of just about all mega fauna. Perhaps this three horned lizard co-existed with the three species of mammoths living in North America.

Have you ever considered interpreting your data and observations through the lens of the possible occurrence of a catastrophic global flood, which included violent geologic upheavals throughout the the Earth as described in Genesis and is also the same tradition found in many ancient non-Judeo-Christian cultures?

FReegards!

[jonno]

Unfortunately, there is another familiar (read: “bad”) habit here at FR - members shooting their foxholes mates assuming they are the enemy.

Yes, I had already read your snippet. However, having students come down to your lab to “take a look” is not the same as having the samples studied by another team of scientists.

Fwiw, I would be thrilled to have these samples proven to be relatively new.

[AndyTheBear]

Was this particular horn found in in a layer that geological dating determined to be ancient?

It is indeed possible that some of these dating methods are not as reliable as they are argued to be. But seems to me there is only a conflict if the same samples appear to be young by tissue and old by strata, or if a young by tissue sample is so similar to an old by strata sample that it was not feasible they could be that far apart in history.

I will agree, that anomalous data should serve as a warning not to get too cocky when making nice neat little models about what happened in the past. But I am just saying there is no reason to expand such evidence to the nature of the universe all in a rush.

[Boogieman]

“it is possible the some pockets of creatures existed until recent times”

The fossil wasn’t found in strata dated to that time period though, it was found in strata dated tens of millions of years old. So, the only possibilities are:

a) there is an unknown process that allows cells to be preserved, unfossilized, for tens of millions of years without decaying

or

b) the geologists and evolutionary biologists are wrong in their dating assumptions

The facts simply don’t leave much room for any other possibilities here.

[tumblindice]

http://www.journals.elsevier.com/acta-histochemica/

A little help. Using the Search function at the peer-reviewed, secular publication cited in the article you posted, I’m finding Marks and Armitages, but no Mark Armitages.
Am I missing a link (heh) in your article or would you post a link to his article in Acta-Histochemica?

[tumblindice]

And/or author Kevin Lee Anderson.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Yup, exactly what ICR et al is about: prove the theory at all costs.

Exactly how science works - including TOE and Climate "science"

[Agamemnon]

Are students not considered "others" - to quote the term you used? You instantly assumed that the samples were not made available for study by "others" (one expects the curious students are studying - no?)

If other scientists were curious enough to seek out his materials for their own study, they could start by reading his peer reviewed publication, and they could pick up the phone and make an appointment to see them just as easily as anyone else can - no?

If you are really curious yourself why don't you give him a call and see how available he is to show you his findings without first assuming he wouldn't be willing to show you what he has.

Discoveries like this are neither isolated nor are they new.

Scientists Find Soft Tissue in T-Rex Bone (AP 3/24/2005)

FReegards!

[Graybeard58]

Maybe the person was on the wrong thread?

***********************

Or “posting while drunk” _ It happens.

[Hostage]

A collection of respected eminent scientists of great reputation has appeared during different times in different places to express a belief that a creative force had to exist that preceded everything observable because without it nothing inferred in science could stand up.

In their logical and scientific reasoning, they state that the creative entity behind all of existence must NECESSARILY BE TIMELESS AND DIMENSIONLESS as a singularity.

[Boogieman]

“Was this particular horn found in in a layer that geological dating determined to be ancient?”

Yes, it was excavated from the Hell Creek Formation in Montana, which is dated to Upper Cretatceous/Lower Pleistocene era by standard geological dating, and which has produced a wealth of other fossils.

“It is indeed possible that some of these dating methods are not as reliable as they are argued to be. But seems to me there is only a conflict if the same samples appear to be young by tissue and old by strata, or if a young by tissue sample is so similar to an old by strata sample that it was not feasible they could be that far apart in history.”

The problem is going to be second one you listed. There are thousands of similar dinosaur fossils pulled from the same formation, that scientists date to be tens of millions of years old. If this fossil is only thousands of years old, then they all must be only thousands of years old. That includes ankylosaurs, raptors, tyrannosaurs, etc. It’s one of the most prolific fossil beds for that geological era. They would all have to be running around a few thousands years ago if the formation dates from that period.

“But I am just saying there is no reason to expand such evidence to the nature of the universe all in a rush.”

Well, it’s not as if this is the first soft tissue sample found that challenges the idea that these kinds of fossils are millions of years old. It’s probably the best sample yet, but it’s far from the only one.