[fishtank]

Electron microscope image of three soft bone cells from a dinosaur fossil

[Tax-chick]

I met Dr. Wile (the author) once; can’t recall where. He is a nice man.

[Theo]

Follow the evidence. If it points toward a young earth, then perhaps the earth is indeed “younger” than many say. Follow the evidence.

[Twinkie]

Years ago, I seem to remember one of the Messianic Jewish
teachers talking about the way time & eternity appears to
the Lord as opposed to how it appears to us. The way he
described it was defining the Creator as viewing his
creation from a viewpoint that is in a sort of “fanning
out” reality, so that what is to us thousands of years is
from his vantage point just a very short time.

[AndyTheBear]

I am tired of the false dichotomy here. Not every discovery has to do with whether naturalism or theism is true.

There have already been a number of occasions that species that were shown to have died out long long ago by fossil records, were found to still be around. So, it seems on the cards that a species that was thought to be extinct a long time ago by fossil records may have become extinct much more recently than we thought.

I am not sure how well this horn makes the case that the triceratops is more recently extinct than thought. But I do know its ridiculous to always make these kinds of questions about more than what they are about.

[ConservativeDude]

this is not the first time that soft tissue/blood cells have been found on dinosaur fossils in Montana.

I’m not commenting beyond that.

I’m just pointing out that...nothing more nothing less. :)

[Jan_Sobieski]

THIS CANNOT BE TRUE!!!

Why? Because we all know that Dinosaurs are Millions of years old and cells only survive for a few thousand years

We know this because the Earth's Geological layers tell us how old everything is

And we know how old everything is because the fossils in the Earth's layers tell us how old each layer is!!!


(Typical evolutionist circular argument)

[dangus]

Anyone have a scientific explanation for cells in a fossil?

[jonno]

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

Regardless of his conclusions, the sample(s) should stand on there own.

[Sheapdog]

http://www.history.com/news/scientists-find-soft-tissue-in-75-million-year-old-dinosaur-bones

[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

[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.

[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.

[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?