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

Smithsonian Magazine ^ | May 1, 2006 | Helen Fields

[jennyp]

[2nsdammit] "You will see the same stuff over, and over, and over.."

[mls9852] Well, that's what evolutionists do!

[Mamzelle] What about the skull photos, and the Dreary Old List of Definitions?

What the heck - it's been a while. Besides, Mamzelle & mlc9852, I notice neither of you STILL have participated in the survey yet...

Which of the following are "just an old ape" and which are "just an old human"? Try it, it's fun!

Fossil hominid skulls. Some of the figures have been modified for ease of comparison
(only left-right mirroring or removal of a jawbone). [CLICK HERE] for larger photo.
(Images © 2000 Smithsonian Institution.)

• (A) Pan troglodytes, chimpanzee, modern
  
• (B) Australopithecus africanus, STS 5, 2.6 My
  
• (C) Australopithecus africanus, STS 71, 2.5 My
  
• (D) Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, 1.9 My
  
• (E) Homo habilis, OH24, 1.8 My
  
• (F) Homo rudolfensis, KNM-ER 1470, 1.8 My
  
• (G) Homo erectus, Dmanisi cranium D2700, 1.75 My
  
• (H) Homo ergaster (early H. erectus), KNM-ER 3733, 1.75 My
  
• (I) Homo heidelbergensis, "Rhodesia man", 300,000 - 125,000 y
  
• (J) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Ferrassie 1, 70,000 y
  
• (K) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Chappelle-aux-Saints, 60,000 y
  
• (L) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, Le Moustier, 45,000 y
  
• (M) Homo sapiens sapiens, Cro-Magnon I, 30,000 y
  
• (N) Homo sapiens sapiens, modern

We know that A) is a modern chimpanzee and N) is a modern human. Everyone agrees that M) was a modern human as well. Your challenge is to fill in these blanks:

Fossil	Just an ape	Ape-like transitional	Human-like transitional	Just a human	Not related at all to apes or humans
B	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
C	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
D	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
E	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
F	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
G	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
H	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
I	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
J	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
K	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]
L	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]	[_]

The Responses So Far:

Person	A Pan troglodytes (modern chimp)	B, C Australopithecus africanus	D Homo habilis	E Homo habilis	F Homo rudolfensis	G Homo erectus	H Homo ergaster	I Homo heidelbergensis	J, K Homo sapiens neanderthalensis	L, M Homo sapiens sapiens (Cro-Magnon, modern human)
Mainstream scientists	ape	ape-like trans	ape-like, human-like trans	ape-like, human-like trans	ape-like, human-like trans	human-like trans	human-like trans	human-like trans	human-like trans, human	human
Bowden, Malcolm	ape		human		human		human			human
editor-surveyor	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	human	human
Gish, Duane (1979)	ape		human		human		human			human
Gish, Duane (1985)	ape		ape		human		human			human
Luskin, Casey	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	human	human	human	human	human
Mehlert, A. W.	ape		ape		human		human			human
Menton, David	ape		human		human		human			human
Michael_Michaelangelo	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	ape	human	human
MississippiMan	ape							ape		human
Taylor, Paul	ape		human		human		human			human

[Elsie]

...that Hitler was acting on God's behalf in punishing the Jews....

So...

...are you saying that God NEVER used other people to punish the Jews

[2nsdammit]

"Claiming to understand that which is not understandable and ridiculing all who disagree."

Just because you cannot or will not understand, does not make something not understandable.

There is absolutely nothing esoteric about the concept of evolution by natural selection. Some of the specific details of the science which supports it, like the physics behind radiometric dating for instance, may be a bit tough, but the concept is pretty simple, really.

[GourmetDan]

Yes and the evos will always ignore the point when it is scored and merely move to some other, equally invalid claim such that it is merely one long, never-ending argument and you have to prove them wrong at each and every point or they will claim victory.

Never mind that you have repeated shown them to be liars.

That's just how the game is played.

I mostly engage in it so that like-minded people can benefit from my sources and experience to strengthen their witness. There's no 'proof' around this, only assumptions and inferences. There is nothing technically inferior about the YEC position. It all rests on belief, on both sides.

Once you realize that, you don't have to fear the ridicule of these people any more. That is really their only weapon and we know about 'weapons'.

[Elsie]

But I have to rely on what the Bible actually says.

And then the "But what does the Bible actually MEAN?" crowd will jump all over you.

[2nsdammit]

Yes.

[Liberal Classic]

Some other claims by Setterfield:

In your reply about the formation of the geological column, you said- "In other words, the geological column has been formed over a 3000 year period since Creation. A similar statement can be made for radiometric ages of astronomical bodies, like the Moon, or meteorites." The Bible says the Flood lasted for about one year. So how could it have been formed "over 3,000 years"?

Setterfield: ...it is established from the physics of the situation that some atomic processes, including radiometric decay are light-speed dependent. More correctly, both light-speed and radioactive decay are mutually affected by the increasing energy density of the ZPE. Thus, as light-speed is smoothly dropping with time, so is the rate of radioactive decay upon which radiometric dates are dependent. The redshift data reveal that the bulk of this decay has occurred over a 3000 year period during which predicted radiometric ages dropped from 14 billion years down to a few thousand years on the atomic clock. More particularly, the Cryptozoic strata formed over a period of 2250 years, while the Phanerozoic strata formed over a period of 750 years...

The asteroid impacts that ended the Mesozoic would have been expected to wipe out the dinosaurs. Yet a few dinosaurs were still there up to 2 million atomic years after the impact. They cannot account for this. However, the redshift data explains why. The speed of light at that point in time was about 500,000 times its current speed, so that 2 million years were just 4 years of actual time - soon enough after the catastrophe and the changing conditions it brought...

Are there any pre-Flood rocks that we can find today?

Setterfield: On the data I am using from the redshift, the Flood occurred about 700 million atomic years ago. The oldest earth rocks about 4.4 billion date from near the birth of Noah or a little earlier on the redshift correction. If the redshift correction is used, the Sturtian diamictites are the beginning of the Flood. Any rocks which are prior to the Sturtian diamictities would be pre-Flood.

[GourmetDan]

It wasn't meant to account for the YEC.

Merely to show how poorly isochrons are at deriving alleged dates.

[Elsie]

The selection phase ...

Eh... Maxwell Smart here chief. What's the plan?

[2nsdammit]

Yes. The God I believe in would never commit genocide.

If you hear God telling you to kill someone, it is time to get psychiatric help.

[Elsie]

You guys do provide us with fertile ground for discussion.

That's the plan!

[mlc9852]

"when certainly the loss of a close family member may have shaken his faith as much as anything."

Darwin didn't know people would die?

[Elsie]

You guys do provide us with fertile ground for discussion.

Of course!

We want to see who gets the number of the Beast!

[2nsdammit]

Give one "point scored" on this thread which is remotely scientific which was not countered with a rational, scientific answer, or the bebunking as a hoax.

[mlc9852]

I don't do surveys or polls. They are all rigged.

[mlc9852]

What beast?

[2nsdammit]

Well, you shovel enough BS to fertilize it, that's for sure.

[js1138]

Yes. The God I believe in would never commit genocide.

Two words: Flood. Joshua.

[Elsie]

You got the NUMBER!!

---

It's unfair to construe Darwin's loss of faith as the sole result of his scientific work, when certainly the loss of a close family member may have shaken his faith as much as anything.

Are you taking parsing lessons from CG? There was NOTHING in my post of Darwin quotes that mentioned EITHER of these ideas.

Now if you wish to do some research into his writings and come up with some data; then I'll consider your conjecture.

[Elsie]

You sure you're not just a troll?

Are sure you don't need Jesus as your Savior?