Dinosaur Shocker (YEC say dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years)

What part of Death was metaphorical?
If it was a spiritual death, then all the 'people' living before Adam would then have to have been spiritually perfect beings.

Your hypothesis does not stand up to the plain text, or the metaphorical text of scripture.

Perhaps Jesus was the one that he was speaking metaphorically about. He must not have completed the work of salvation then. Which part is metaphorical?
You can't have it both ways.

There is no dispute between what we don't know or understand and what God did in creating a young earth.

This evidence should not be noteworthy, but it is. Why?

What do you mean?

I don't see why you think that this ought to make people throw up their arms in despair over the theory of evolution. It would be more related to the age of the earth and its strata. We have multiple evidences that the earth is billions of years old and multiple evidences that this strata is millions of years old. When multiple tests are pointing you in the same direction and you have one anomaly, it's more likely that you just don't fully understand the anomaly rather than being completely wrong about the whole scenario.

Likewise we have multiple evidences that evolution has occurred and species are related by common descent. The data fits together so well that it would be difficult to disprove evolution with one or two anomalies.

So, some things that would indicate evolution is not true. If evolution is not true and YEC is we would expect to see a complete mixup in the fossil record--Permian creatures fossilized with Quaternary ones, no sorting of microfossils, and no lines of evolution with increasing complexity and specialization (we see these with foraminifera, ammonites, horses, stegosauri, etc.) The genetic data would be all mixed up and we wouldn't be able to use nested heirarchies based off multiple genes to organize phylogenies. The ERV and pseudogene data that indicates common ancestry of apes and humans would be absent.

In the geologic data we would not find sedimentary rocks containing fossils overlaid with igneous rock that indicates it was formed on dry land. Since YEC say in general that fossils were laid down during the Flood, overlaying igneous rocks should be in the form of pillow lava indicating deposition under water. Since coal seams were supposed to originate from vegetation mats deposited during the Flood, we would not see dinosaur tracks across coal seams indicating these originated as peat in swampy areas. Likewise, we wouldn't see fossilized rootlines growing down into the coal from when in the swamp trees grew in it. There would not be the sharp divisions in the stone we see caused by long-term variations in the levels of certain elements, such as the drastic change from green Permian rock to red, iron-rich Triassic rock. Since all fossils are supposed to have been deposited in the Flood, every fossil should carbon date to the same recent age.

Everything that we see indicates an old earth and old universe, and all of the fossil and genetic evidence indicates evolution and common descent. What's more, observation of living animals and examination of their genomes has provided us with a huge amount of information on by what mechanisms evolution could occur. We have come to see that mutations are not universally negative and that information can be added to a genome. We can observe natural selection occuring in front of our eyes. These observations provide all of the information needed to conclude that evolution can and did happen.

Human/chimp DNA similarity continues to decrease: counting indels

by Chase W. Nelson
Summary

It is conventionally held that humans and chimps differ only very slightly in their DNA. However, new evidence suggests that the difference might be much more drastic. Mutations resulting in DNA insertions and deletions cause much of the genetic difference between the two species, but are typically not included in estimates of diversity. Moreover, areas of significant similarity are often affected by selective constraints. An increasing number of functions are also being discovered for so-called ‘junk DNA’, suggesting similarity in such DNA is not necessarily due to common descent. Additional research should aid the understanding of such important data in the debate over origins.

Creationists have long maintained that the similarity between human and chimp DNA is not all that it is touted to be. A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences could help confirm this.

It is widely held that ‘The common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) is our closest relative. Its genome sequence is about 98.8% identical to our own, and we shared a common ancestor some six million years ago.’1 The assumption that humans diverged from chimps roughly this long ago also forms the basis of the mitochondrial clock,2 which ‘continues to be widely used to “time” human evolution and population movements, both ancient and modern.’3 In the popular-level book Genome, Matt Ridley states that:

‘Apart from the fusion of chromosome 2, visible differences between chimp and human chromosomes are few and tiny. In thirteen chromosomes no visible differences of any kind exist. If you select at random any “paragraph” in the chimp genome and compare it with the comparable “paragraph” in the human genome, you will find very few “letters” are different: on average, less than two in every hundred. We are, to a ninety-eight per cent approximation, chimpanzees, and they are, with ninety-eight per cent confidence limits, human beings. If that does not dent your self-esteem, consider that chimpanzees are only ninety-seven per cent gorillas; and humans are also ninety-seven per cent gorillas. In other words we are more chimpanzee-like than gorillas are.’4

One creationist response to such arguments regarding human/chimp DNA similarity has been that ‘Chimp DNA has not been anywhere near fully sequenced so that a proper comparison can be made’,5 and that this evidence is just as easily explained (and predicted, for that matter) by the concept of a common designer:

‘Since DNA codes for structures and biochemical molecules, we should expect the most similar creatures to have the most similar DNA. Apes and humans are both mammals, with similar shapes, so both have similar DNA. We should expect humans to have more DNA similarities with another mammal like a pig than with a reptile like a rattlesnake. And this is so. Humans are very different from yeast but they have some biochemistry in common, so we should expect human DNA to differ more from yeast DNA than from ape DNA.’6

In a recent article,7 David A. DeWitt cited a study which found that the two species are only 95% identical when insertions and deletions are considered,8 showing that the estimate of divergence depends mainly on what type of DNA is being compared. A number of differences between humans and chimps were named that are difficult to quantify in an estimate of sequence divergence (that is, the differences in bases between the human and chimp genomes), including shorter telomeres in humans, a 10% larger chimp genome, and great differences in chromosomes 4, 9, 12 and the Y chromosome, for example. Indeed, DNA similarity estimates ‘do not adequately represent fine changes in genome organization.’9
Considering DNA gaps

Previous estimates of sequence divergence have focused exclusively on base substitutions in DNA—that is, one base (or one DNA ‘letter’—A, T, C or G) being replaced with another. The new calculation, resulting in much less sequence similarity, also includes insertions and deletions, or indels, (occurring when a base is added or removed, often resulting in what is known as a frameshift mutation), in addition to base substitutions. The author of the study, Roy J. Britten, stated:

‘It appears appropriate to me to consider the full length of the gaps in estimating the interspecies divergence. These stretches of DNA are actually absent from one and present in the other genome. In the past, indels have often simply been counted regardless of length and added to the base substitution count, because that is convenient for phylogenetics.’8

His findings lend support to the idea that much of the failure of DNA to hybridize between chimps and humans is the result of missing DNA due to indel events. Britten then became involved in a follow-up paper in which these initial results were confirmed; in fact, it was found that ‘the 5% human-chimp difference already published is likely to be an underestimate, possibly by more than a factor of 2.’10
Various types of mutations

Various types of mutations. Much of the difference between human and chimp DNA can be attributed to insertions and deletions (indels).

Now, Anzai et al. have published a new report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that confirms this statement. In the study, nearly one-half of the MHC (major histocompatibility complex) region was sequenced, ‘which to date represents the longest continuous sequence within this species [chimps], our closest evolutionary relative’, and has been described as a ‘rapidly evolving’ part of the genome.9 Although it has been held that human/chimp similarity in the MHC is ‘so great that the alleles must have originated before the supposed chimp/human evolutionary divergence’,11 the sequence results actually dropped the DNA similarity estimate down to 86.7%!12 Indeed, the actual difference between the two species (when counting indels) is greater than 5% by well more than a factor of two. Not only this, but ‘evolutionists now recognize that complex MHC genetic motifs can arise independently’ in primates—that is, at least some similarities that do exist are not attributable to common descent.13

The human genome contains two MHC Class I genes, the MICA and MICB, yet chimpanzees contain only one gene at this location, the Patr-MIC. According to evolutionary speculation, a 95-kb deletion occurred between the two human genes, forming the hybrid chimpanzee gene ~33–44 million years ago, by far predating the commonly held divergence date between the two species of 6 million years. Because the two ends of the chimpanzee gene seem to match up with the beginning of the human MICA and end of the human MICB genes, it may seem reasonable that common ancestry is feasible. However, even some humans contain a single gene at this location (called the HLA-B*4801 allele) very similar to the one found in chimps. The study notes that it ‘is quite intriguing that an equal-sized deletion involving this very same region and genes (MICA/B) has happened at distinct points in time in several different primate species’.12 Yet it is also claimed that other such similar changes in DNA structure cannot be attributed to convergence, but must be due to common ancestry! Clearly, similar ‘mistakes’ can arise independently in separate species (as expanded upon by Woodmorappe13). The hypothesis that a Designer would create the same structures for the same functions seems to explain the data much more easily. As noted by Woodmorappe,11 strong selective pressures must have existed in order to prevent the MHC similarities between primates from being scrambled over supposed millions of years, further weakening the evolutionary scenario.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v18/i2/similarity.asp

So you believe humans are no better than rodents? LOL

"the ID contingent seems far more gentlemanly than the Darwinians."

So you noticed that too?

See - isn't it great how we can believe whatever we want?

While I don't know enough science to take sides.....

Do you know enough about various religions to take a side?

The environment changes and if the organisms in it don't have traits that fit, they are unable to reproduce effectively.

Then the Welfare state will win!

"2. The mainstream scientific orthodoxy is really lying to us about the age of dinosaurs and the acutal age of the earth because they have chosen evolution as their religion and can't face up to the fact that finding soft tissue in fossilized bone throws their orthodoxy into question."

I will go with 2.

Is that like saying to God, "Prove yourself," when He has told us that He already has through His invisible qualities?

I don't know, but there ARE instances in the bible where people do just that!

NIV Judges 6:36-40
36. Gideon said to God, "If you will save Israel by my hand as you have promised--
37. look, I will place a wool fleece on the threshing floor. If there is dew only on the fleece and all the ground is dry, then I will know that you will save Israel by my hand, as you said."
38. And that is what happened. Gideon rose early the next day; he squeezed the fleece and wrung out the dew--a bowlful of water.
39. Then Gideon said to God, "Do not be angry with me. Let me make just one more request. Allow me one more test with the fleece. This time make the fleece dry and the ground covered with dew."
40. That night God did so. Only the fleece was dry; all the ground was covered with dew.

NIV Malachi 3:10
   Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the LORD Almighty, "and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it.

NIV Romans 12:2
   Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good, pleasing and perfect will.

NIV 1 Thessalonians 5:21
   Test everything. Hold on to the good.

NIV 1 John 4:1
   Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Now the about have to do with obedience. There are many OTHER instances recorded where God was 'tested' out of DISobedience, and He was not pleased!

Sorry, but the burger I had last night at TGI Fridays had to be at least 10 million years old.

And the bun was practically primordial. We won't even discuss the fries.

The organism is only DNA’s way of making more DNA’.

OOoops!!

We meant...

The organism is only DNA’s way of making more modified DNA’.

--EvoDude

Basically it is a Canadian goose....

So; did it forget to get back on the boat when it's vacation was over?

Yes, I am easily mislead. I actually believe humans were created as humans. Silly me!

(it neither swims nor flies but its feet have adapted for climbing)

And we ALL know that CLIMBING is a MUCH more efficient method of transportation than flying!

The chimp genome is published, the human genome is published, you can compare them yourself.

I'm a believer!!!

Fascinating, thanks.

We are very, very similar genetically to chimps.

ATOMICALLY, we are EXACTLY chimps!

Every one of the atoms used to create THEIR bodies is found in OUR bodies!

That's a cold, hard fact.

How you shoehorn your hunter gatherer creation myth to adapt to it isn't our problem.

NIV 1 Peter 1:17-21
17. Since you call on a Father who judges each man's work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear.
18. For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers,
19. but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.
20. He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.
21. Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.

NIV 1 Corinthians 2:7
No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.

NIV 2 Timothy 1:8-10
8. So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of me his prisoner. But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God,
9. who has saved us and called us to a holy life--not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time,
10. but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

NIV Titus 1:1-4
1. Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ for the faith of God's elect and the knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness--
2. a faith and knowledge resting on the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,
3. and at his appointed season he brought his word to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior,
4. To Titus, my true son in our common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.

Just how did these ignurt ~~goat-herders~~ (Oops! hunter gatherer) have such a concept as 'before time' anyway???