Posted on 09/16/2009 9:03:13 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Fresh Fossil Feather Nanostructures
by Brian Thomas, M.S.*
Bird feathers can contain pigmentation for a wide range of colors, with specific molecules reflecting certain hues when light touches them. They also can display “structural” colors, where the thicknesses of layers of cells and connective tissues are fine-tuned to refract certain colors.
Scientists recently described structural coloration that is still clearly discernible in well-preserved fossil feathers. Why do these fossil feathers have their original cell structures laid out in the original patterns if they are millions of years old?
In 1995, paleontologists Derek Briggs and Paul Davis provided an overview of fossil feathers from the 40 or so places on the globe where they were known to exist.1 Among their findings was that 69 percent of feather fossils are preserved not as impressions, but as carbon traces. This was verified by comparing the proportions of carbon in both the surrounding carbonaceous rock and the fossil within it, to the proportions of organically-derived carbon from the same items. They found that there was more organic carbon in the fossil than in the stone.
At that time, the researchers thought the carbon came from bacteria that had degraded the feather material and then remained placed in the feather’s outline. But 13 years later, Briggs and other colleagues showed clear evidence that these “bacterial cells” were actually melanosomes―the same microscopic, sausage-shaped, dark pigment-containing structures in today’s bird feathers―from the original feather.2
This means that the organic carbon in the melanosomes somehow avoided decay for millions of years, which contradicts “the well-known fact that the majority of organic molecules decay in thousands of years.”3
Briggs and his colleagues recently described fossil feathers from the German Messel Oil Shale deposits, which are famous for their remarkably well-preserved fossils. These not only contained organic carbon from melanosomes (not bacteria), but the melanosomes were still organized in their original spacing and layering. Thus, the “metallic greenish, bluish or coppery” colors that can be seen from different viewing angles, producing an iridescent sheen, may very well be similar to that of the original bird’s plumage.4
Biologists already know that “in order to produce a particular [structural] colour, the keratin thickness must be accurate to within about 0.05 μm (one twenty thousandth of one millimetre!).”5 Although the keratin had decayed from these fossil feathers, its layers of melanosomes remained laid out in similarly precise thicknesses. Thus, not only was the color preserved, but the melanosomes were still organized to within micrometers of their original positions.
Evolutionary geologists maintain that the Messel Shale was formed 47 million years ago. But with these colorful feather fossils—which retain not only the original molecules inside their original melanosomes, but also the architectural layout of these structures—evolutionists must invent some kind of magical preservation process that simply isn’t observed in the laboratory or in nature.
Without the assumption of millions of years, however, the fossil data begin to make much more sense. Fresh-looking fossil features point to a young world.
References
* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.
Article posted on September 16, 2009.
I really don't know where you got this impression. There are real live Geocentrists right here on FR, and I'm not one of them.
You have no more evidence that any form of life evolved on the earth than you do for it to have been delivered or engineered by extraterrestrials.
Sure we do. There are entire libraries filled with evidence for evolution.
Christians aren’t the only ones who believe in a creationist scenario either...
Muslim filth believe in a creationist scenario, but so do some of my good Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist friends. (I don’t have any Muslim friends, nor do I care to.)
No, there are pictures of old fossils, but no evidence to support their origin was from the earth exclusively...
No, evolutionists ASSUME it happens based on the fossil record. It's a matter of interpretation.
Nobody ever observed macro-evolution, even with all the deliberate attempts to make it happen.
How can scientists (with a straight face) expect us to believe something happened by accident that they can't even make happen on purpose. For all the years of attempts by man to manipulate genetics, from selective breeding to the more intricate work with genetics these days, they still haven't caused the kind of species changes they say occurred that would be needed to populate this planet with the variety we see today.
“When will the evos realize that Creationists and IDers are not the same?”
Which ones are going to hell? Is it just “evos”, or are “IDers” going too? How many “creation science” articles must you write before you get to go to heaven?
Do you think God needs your help on earth, or do you take it upon yourself to represent Him?
He just pings me when he uses the list of polls for support of creation being taught in schools.
Parents who homeschool their kids are taking on a huge and active responsibility for their children's educational future. I think its a self fulfilling prophecy that if you take the average study habits and grades of a group of homeschooled kids versus the average study habits and grades of public school kids, the homeschoolers will win every time; the subject matter is really irrelevant.
I assume math, grammer, geography, and most other subject matter are pretty much identical to what is taught in all school settings; public, private, and homeschool.
One small facet of education, in this case evolution vs. creationism, is unlikely to negatively affect a rather powerful force in the child's academic life, that being the commitment of the parent.
Now, there's obviously a problem for the homeschooled kid if he shows up to a college geology class and writes a paper that says all rocks are less than 6,000 years old. But even if the homeschooled kid flunks geology, is it really going to affect his whole academic career?
Unlikely.
He/she is still more likely to be successful on average than the public school kid.
“arrogant godless turds”
You mean folks that bring facts and peer-reviewed science to a discussion, right?
Huh? I'm talking about evolution, not the basis for the origin of life on Earth. Evolution is neutral; it is only concerned with what happened after life began.
No, the assumption, or theory, concerns how evolution happens, not whether it happens. We know it happens, we're just trying to figure out how.
How can scientists (with a straight face) expect us to believe something happened by accident that they can't even make happen on purpose.
As has been explained several times here, there's nothing accidental about evolution. Post 161 has a good example.
Ok, we get it. Anyone who disagrees with you must be a “liberal”......
Now move on to your next argument.
Which is exactly the point about teaching creation in public schools.
There are several factors involved. The first is that not everyone is going into a scientific field, much less one that requires a working knowledge of the ToE. That knocks out a huge percentage of kids who really need to know it.
Then there is the issue of teaching evolution accurately. That presumes the textbooks are accurate and the teacher is qualified to adequately teach the subject. Strike two.
Then there's the student factor. Presuming that the kid didn't sleep during that day of class, wasn't sick, wasn't doing homework for another class, the student must have comprehended it, and remembered it.
All for subject material that generally covers 3-4 days tops, of one course in one year of high school.
The emphasis that is put on the teaching of the ToE is way disproportionate to the actual need, but considering how the ToE is being used by the liberal God hating elements like the atheists and ACLU, it would be better to drop the whole thing.
For the controversy surrounding the teaching of the subject, it'd be better to just eliminate it from the curriculum altogether and just let anyone who needs to know it learn it at the college level.
But again, the point is that teaching creation is not going to hurt the students academic career as much as many of the evos direly predict. Which means that that is not enough justification to keep creation out of schools.
Teach all. Or none.
“God’s grace forgives all sin.”
Except, perhaps, disagreeing with a “creation science” article posting on FR.
What's likely is that the student, homeschooled or not, who doesn't *believe in* the ToE is just going to spit back what his prof wants to hear and go on his merry way.
I’m not sure if this is what I read before, but this certainly seems to convey what I refered to earlier. Read the following carefully...I’d be curious to know whether you read it the same way I do.
http://zapatopi.net/kelvin/papers/on_the_origin_of_life.html
PS But I will agree with you on one point. Lord Kelvin does seem to have been an old earth creationist of sorts. Indeed, he almost strikes me as a proto-IDer, except for the fact that he actually identifies the design as the God of the Bible.
So, Muslim creation, Hindu creation, ancient Greek creation, and Wiccan creation?
No, let's stick to the science.
Like I said, he's not likely to fail in his/her entire academic career if he/she fails a geology class.
Its the study habits and the commitment of the parents, not the material.
Evolution, the theory, is called more properly, “The Origin of Species.” That was Darwin’s title.
Yes; note that it was not called “The Origin of Life”.
The speed of light through a vacuum is a constant. It's a pillar of physics. It's what "c" stands for in E=mc2.
Some wacko young earthers think that "c" isn't actually a constant -- and that light used to travel much faster than it does today. That defies the laws of physics and is unsupported by any actual evidence.
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.