Posted on 04/29/2013 8:13:56 AM PDT by kimtom
"... A recent discovery by Dr. Mary Schweitzer, however, has given reason for all but committed evolutionists to question this assumption. Bone slices from the fossilized thigh bone (femur) of a Tyrannosaurus rex found in the Hell Creek formation of Montana were studied under the microscope by Schweitzer. To her amazement, the bone showed what appeared to be blood vessels of the type seen in bone and marrow, and these contained what appeared to be red blood cells with nuclei, typical of reptiles and birds (but not mammals). The vessels even appeared to be lined with specialized endothelial cells found in all blood vessels.
Amazingly, the bone marrow contained what appeared to be flexible tissue. Initially, some skeptical scientists suggested that bacterial biofilms (dead bacteria aggregated in a slime) formed what only appear to be blood vessels and bone cells. Recently Schweitzer and coworkers found biochemical evidence for intact fragments of the protein collagen, which is the building block of connective tissue. This is important because collagen is a highly distinctive protein not made by bacteria. (See Schweitzer’s review article in Scientific American [December 2010, pp. 62–69] titled “Blood from Stone.”)
Some evolutionists have strongly criticized Schweitzer’s conclusions because they are understandably reluctant to concede the existence of blood vessels, cells with nuclei, tissue elasticity, and intact protein fragments in a dinosaur bone dated at 68 million years old. Other evolutionists, who find Schweitzer’s evidence too compelling to ignore, simply conclude that there is some previously unrecognized form of fossilization that preserves cells and protein fragments over tens of millions of years. Needless to say, no evolutionist has publically considered the possibility that dinosaur fossils are not millions of years old. ....."
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
No. I'll repeat I believe that God is the Creator and He breathed life into Man, i.e. gave him a soul.
If you believe every word of the Bible is a fact to be taken literally, that's fine. I must then assume that you believe the Lord Himself is lying in Matthew 26:26. And in Mark 14:22. And in Luke 22:19. Or is that an area of the Bible that should be taken figuratively? Three separate times, from the mouth of our Lord Himself?
Parts of Genesis are written as history. Ex: the narratives are historical, the geneologies are historical.
Moses had more than an understanding of a shepherd. "Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was powerful in speech and action."
Moses had an elite education by the time he was 40.
I’m asking for the “young earth” explanation of how the elements were created.
problem:
who says a rock "looks" millions of years old?? No one would know. The use of isometrics in dating is based on assumptions.
Everyone is; obstinacy is a weakness present in every human being. This is not necessarily evidence of error however.
And my retraction occured one post after my initial one. Hardly as obstinate as I've seen others demonstrate, if I may say.
How old does the canyon formed after Mt St Helens “look”?
One of the favorite statements by these guys is “the evidence says...”.
No, it doesn’t. Your interpretation of the evidence, tainted by presuppositions, is what “says”.
That reference to “bronze age shepherds” shows the arrogance inherent in Humanism.
“We’re smarter ‘n them, now.” That’s humanism.
It’s also fraught with presuppositional evolutionary assumptions. This is assuming the consequent, or circular thinking.
Are you being ignorant, or just funny?
Christ was making reference to the last supper that we now celebrate, also known as communion.
I find it truly fascinating the way some people will cherry pick Scripture to make a point. It’s as if you want to claim that Christian scholars have been continually stupid for almost 2000 years.
Good point.
It’s as if Mt St Helens doesn’t even exist.
The most devastating thing that has happened for the old earth theorists, was Mt St Helens blowing a huge hole in their monopoly of information.
No arrogance on my part. It’s simply fact that bronze age shepherds didn’t write history books. Or science books.
One (or more) did write sacred scripture which I revere.
This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. She’s horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. “They treat you really bad,” she says. “They twist your words and they manipulate your data.” For her, science and religion represent two different ways of looking at the world; invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science. After all, she says, what God asks is faith, not evidence. “If you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you don’t need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that we’d never be able to prove his existence. And I think that’s really cool.”I read the article and it does not provide any supporting evidence for her allegations regarding Christians who "accused her of hiding the true meaning of her data", how they "treat you really bad,” or exactly how her words have been twisted and her data manipulated. If she had provided an example or two of such treatment instead of just her philosphical/theological musings about the difference between faith and evidence, it is not reported.
Cordially,
Be specific.
God created Heavens and the Earth. That encompasses the
known elements (building blocks)
If you are hinting at apparent age(?) that is different.
Yes, and a good study; Mt St Helens.
I think God is giving us the “evidence” so they openly have to deny the truth.
They ignore it like the left ignores the Gosnell trial.
Ahhh , natural selection........they naturally select the data that supports their view, oh I see!!!
“..day bibles like the NKJV and NASV are the most accurate bibles on the planet...”
I prefer KJV
it matches my Greek interlinear.
You answered. Specifically.
The answer is “ex nihilo”.
The elements were created from nothing through the spoken Word of God.
That’s the answer.
And why would your opinion be superior to Stephen's who considered Moses' Egyptian education the reason he was "powerful in speech and action"?
Both educations were vital in forming Moses' character for the task ahead. He was not deficient in understanding history; he was not "just a shepherd".
Yes, indeed.
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.