New Dinosaur Species Found in India

Indeed. And I strongly assert that God does it this way for the good purpose that people should come to Him by faith and not by sight.

Great reply Aric..this penchant for "Absolutism"..when it is known..that construct forms for dating..and theory foundation are everything from innacurate..to stubborn Ostrich posturing against the obvious.
In one aspect..the "Electric Universe" model is upsetting all forms and norms flung upon us for the past decades.
The ..[accretion planet formation]...this and that is Billions of yrs old..is being overturned.

same for c-14 dating..here is a brief excerpt from a chat site.

Past, present and future together Consider then. Radiometric dating methods (those measuring geologic time by rate of radioactive decay) have been used to date formations that could be associated with Noahâ€™s Flood. These dates supposedly prove these formations are millions of years old rather than thousands. Yet we find that different methods can yield radically different results. As The Science of Evolution explains: â€œSeveral methods have been devised for estimating the age of the earth and its layers of rocks. These methods rely heavily on the assumption of uniformitarianism, i.e., natural processes have proceeded at relatively constant rates throughout the earthâ€™s history . . . It is obvious that radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be. Age estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often quite different (sometimes by hundreds of millions of years). There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological â€˜clockâ€™â€ (William Stansfield, 1977, pp. 80, 84). The potassium-argon [K-Ar] dating method, used to date lava flows, also has problemsâ€”as shown by studies of Mount St. Helens. â€œThe conventional K-Ar dating method was applied to the 1986 dacite flow from the new lava dome at Mount St. Helens, Washington. Porphyritic dacite which solidified on the surface of the lava dome in 1986 gives a whole rock K-Ar â€˜ageâ€™ of 0.35 + OR - 0.05 million years (Ma). Mineral concentrates from this same dacite give K-Ar â€˜agesâ€™ from 0.35 + OR - .06 Ma to 2.8 + OR - 0.6 Ma. These â€˜agesâ€™ are, of course, preposterous [since we know the rock formed recently]. The fundamental dating assumption (â€˜no radiogenic argon was present when the rock formedâ€™) is questioned by these data. â€œInstead, data from this Mount St. Helens dacite argue that significant â€˜excess argonâ€™ was present when the lava solidified in 1986 . . . This study of Mount St. Helens dacite causes the more fundamental question to be askedâ€”how accurate are K-Ar â€˜agesâ€™ from the many other phenocryst-containing lava flows worldwide?â€ (Stephen Austin, â€œExcess Argon within Mineral Concentrates from the New Dacite Lava Dome at Mount St. Helens Volcano,â€ Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, Vol. 10, No. 3, 1996, pp. 335-344). In laymanâ€™s terms, these volcanic rocks that we know were formed in 1986â€”less than 20 years agoâ€”were â€œscientificallyâ€ dated to between 290,000 and 3.4 million years old! Such examples serve to illustrate the fallibility of the dating methods on which many modern scientists rely so heavily.

I beleive our perception of how things were formed is being undone by the Electric Universe model....our attempt to date our Earth is way off...so too our dating of Homonids.
Science however is right in its assay persuit...here the Churchy crowd should "Shut -up"!..their moronic claims are not even on par with the data..even if it is out vast time spans..the claims do not match the facts.

The Pure Hebrew of Genesis..or Beresheit..does not say 6 24 Hour days for Creation..nor does it say..1 day =1000 yrs.
This is the re-dactl B.S. of the Gnostic handlers post 200 A.D.

Science has found protocals at work whereby our DNA is re-written like a program..continuously to keep our form intact in a universe of corruptive eenrgy and chem realities...this strongly hints at Intelligent design.
Our Earth ..the Solar System...it may not be the accretion model..and 4.5 billion yrs..but it certainly is not some goofy claim of 6000 or less.

Dinosaurs..like "Staurikosaurus"...from the Triassic period...a Velociraptor...periods of time before the group was so named in the Cretaeceous.

Kinda throws conformity..evolution..to the wind.
Science is awesome...but Intelligent design remains.
constantly new models arrise to challenge the old..with the enevitable tantraums.
Both crowds...science and creation should just chill..they both are being undone by the new discoveries...
both groups looking the ASS right off.
better to just oogle and marvel at the wonder of it all...
carry another binder of looseleaf for all the data changes sure to come : )

I am from the Creation/Intelligent Design camp and thus the challenge was not addressed to me --- however I believe there are a few things which would get the attention of the science community. For instance:
1. If the sound waves in the Cosmic Background Microwave Radiation which were captured when light formed and went its way actually said something from Genesis in an ancient Hebrew dialect, e.g. “In the beginning, God created” or “Let there be light” etc. --- then I believe the rabbis and Christian theologians would be asked to the table to help figure it all out.
2. If the research into biogenesis/abiogenesis or the big bang concluded that there was a substantial algorithm necessary to initiate life or the universe, e.g. process, conditionals, recursives, autonomy, symbolizations – then I believe the intelligent design scientists would be asked to the table as well.
3. If the scientists were faced with an undeniable miraculous event which specifically tied back to the Bible – something stronger than the Bible Code or the Shroud of Turin -- then they would question materialist epistemology altogether.

Personally, I do not believe God will allow any of this to happen – or reveal Himself so directly before the time comes. I say this because it would work against faith and would be inconsistent with the Word in 1 Cor 1:21-29 and Matt 13:10-11.

First, to DittoJed, thank you for your thoughtful and civil comments. Although I am of the evolutionist camp [to a point-- see below], I am sorry that some have responded to you in a discourteous way.

Although I am spiritually in a different place from both you and Alamo-Girl-- I am a Jew, not a Christian, and I am a theistic evolutionist-- I share some of Alamo-Girl's sentiments.

Specifically, I believe that God created the heavens and the earth; that, in the moment of that creation, He created the laws of nature; and that, since that time, he has acted consistently within those laws to achieve His ends. (As the Talmud says, "all miracles were performed in a natural way.") I thus think that Intelligent Design theory might well at some time find stronger evidence of God's design in our universe. But, as others have posted, it is extraordinarilly unlikely that there will ever be evidence for the literal truth of Genesis 1; it contradicts too many of the observations we have already made. But God did not give us the Torah to teach us history or science; He gave us the Torah to teach us how to live our lives.

LOL! That's just what I had in mind ;)
Thanks for looking it up and posting it.

Similarly, it's too late to prove the phlogiston theory of fire. It's already been conclusively shown to be wrong.

It has? Source please!

At least the luminiferous aether is still not dead.

Thank you so very much for your post! I too regret any discourteous remarks made to DittoJed.

I am very glad that we are close in how we view things.

I understand that most in the theistic evolution camp do not see God "tinkering" with Creation after He set it in motion. On that particular point we disagree in that I believe He has tinkered with it; however, being all-powerful and outside space/time He might have also removed much of the evidence.

Even so, I am still wondering about some things as vague evidence of tinkering: punctuated equilibrium, the rise of functional complexity and the Cambrian explosion, i.e. no new body plans thereafter despite mass extinctions.

If Adam inserted identical retroviruses in his own genome and into the genomes of the higher primates, he is indeed a fiend, and I'm ashamed to have him as an ancestor.

ROFL!!!

I am in tears here RWP.

Here are some young earth evidences from Answers in Genesis:

And here is a point by point refutation many of the items of the list from Answers in Genesis: The Meritt Faq

If Adam inserted identical retroviruses in his own genome and into the genomes of the higher primates, he is indeed a fiend, and I'm ashamed to have him as an ancestor.

As long as you don't say he was drunk.

Thank you for your courteous reply! I try to remain civil, unless someone has been less than civil. I may not always succeed at that , but I try.

I find the work being done by I.D. proponents very interesting. I also think a few Y.E. Creationists are a bit sloppy in some of the evidence they choose to use. I don't say either group is 100% right on their interpretations of evidence, but I believe the Genesis account. For Alamo Girl, I disagree with most theistic evolutionists on theological grounds. That is, death was a part of the curse that came on Adam. Before that time, the New Testament indicates that there was no death. The Old Testament doesn't allow for death prior to Adam either. If you have death prior to Adam, then there wasn't a curse due to sin and frankly I don't see how God's creation could have been "very good". You would have no need for redemption from a curse, since there wouldn't be a curse.

For Lurking Libertarian, I respect your Jewish Beliefs, but believe Moses took the creation story literally as evidenced not only by is editing of the book of Genesis but also evidenced by the 4th commandment itself. We can agreeably disagree here.

Dang it! I don't even want to know how he manipulated his germ-line with the "methods" available back then.

Phlogiston theory has in no way been disproven. Vade must have awoken with too much of the black bile this morning. Deliver this jar of leeches to his abode at once!

Regarding the hard task, there is a lot of evidence archaeological, historical, etc., that suggests the Bible is accurate.

Regarding the harder task, 500 years of scholarship has not discredited Creation. Evolution has only been popular around 140 years. And, creationists have provided evidence that flies in the face of evolution. I understand that this group does not accept this evidence, but many scientists have and have accepted at least some form of Creation as a possible scenario.

Regarding the hardest task, I would say that many of the techniques of evolution have not worked all that well. Take Radiometric dating for example. Its numbers are all over the map and frequently one dating method doesn't work with another. Another, and more core issue is science has never been able to take absolutely nothing and make nothing a living organism. You can't take a bunch of minerals, squish them together, and make life. You can add other living matter and "create" something living, but you have to start with something that is already there. You also don't have "kinds" of creatures, such as humans and apes, being able to reproduce after one another. You can mate types of horses and get more types of horses. You can mate dogs and get dogs. These things probably had a common ancestor. But just because there is physical similarity between different kinds does not mean that they have the same ancestor.

As far as the Biblical claims being opposed to the Old Evidence, I would have to see some examples before I could address the subject.

Thank you so much for sharing your views!

Evidently, the difference between us hinges on this: in your view, the Creation passages refer to the physical realm and in my view, the Creation passages refer to both the spiritual and the physical realm.

I gather that Eden is in the spiritual realm due to Genesis 2:9 placing the tree of life in the center of the garden of Eden and Revelation 2:7 placing the same tree in the center of paradise. In Genesis 3:22-23 Adam is banished from paradise/Eden to keep him from eating of the tree of life, i.e. be immortal.

My view is among a collection of Freeper views on the subject on this thread. I would appreciate it if you'd make sure your view is adequately represented in the collection.

Thanks!

Vade must have awoken with too much of the black bile this morning.

Yes. Probably a viscous flux of the liver. There's a lot of that going around.

Do you find yourself reaching for your reading glasses to read the directions on your bottle of Advil?

There are directions on a bottle of Advil?

I believe that the garden had both physical and spiritual implications. Man began to physically die after the fall (along with creation which Romans 8 says groans for its redemption), but also, spiritual death entered the scene. It was to redeem man from both the curse of physical death and spiritual death that Christ died. Physically, those who have died will be raised to new life and will die no longer. Spiritually, the dead in Christ will live eternally with Him.

P.S. Thank you for the link to the other thread. I am interested in reading it.

An earlier poster said that dinosaur fossils aren't really necessary to evolutionary theory. There is evidence that dinosaurs are recent (which is what started this post-war), including non-fossilized bones, bones with possible blood cells still in them, and archaeological records which indicate that humans lived with them.

The unfortunate part of this is that outside of creation/ID websites, the authors of the articles tend not to agree with the interpretation given. The specific references you gave just happen to be articles that are too old to appear on the internet, or in the journal archives. I can't find a reference to them in anything published in the last ten years.

I'll give it a go the next time I can get to a library and see what the story was.

Oh come on! When have you ever been wrong?

I've blotted those incidents out of my memory. ;-)