Hadrosaur Soft Tissues Another Blow to Long-Ages Myth (first T. rex, then another T. rex, now this!)

ICR ^ | May 12, 2009 | Brian Thomas, M.S.

[GodGunsGuts]

Hadrosaur Soft Tissues Another Blow to Long-Ages Myth

by Brian Thomas, M.S.*

Recently-discovered dinosaur soft tissues, and even blood cells, represent some of the biggest hurdles for long-age evolutionary belief. Soft tissue was found in the femur of a large Tyrannosaurus rex about a decade ago, and more was discovered in another T. rex a few years later. And recently, soft tissues with proteins were found in a hadrosaur from Montana...

[tpanther]

And what kind of practical joker God explains things but really didn’t mean them after all?

He explained he made human beings just below the angels, it seems to me we’re not hairless apes, rather created in His image and there’s a steep drop-off between humans and apes, (nevermind angels and humans!)

[allmendream]

As easily as one would be a Christian dental teacher and say “God has no place in dental instruction”.

As a teacher I taught science to people of many different religious persuasions. If I make Christianity a prerequisite for attaining an understanding of Science I make something that is universal to any spiritual beliefs and make it sectarian.

There is a reason science is accepted worldwide by people of all religious faiths, while Creationism is a belief of a small subset of the statistically less educated.

[tpanther]

But, if you look hard enough, long enough, and with some emotion... you will find what you set out to find.

---

I think that’s been kind of the point, it’s sad that there are people with multiple God hang-ups that demand children think like they do, on faith, not on science and call it science. And this is exactly what’s happened with the NEA and various other liberals demanding the theory of evolution and global warming be treated as fact, no dissent allowed, no intelligence allowed, the debate is over, etc. etc. etc.

[tpanther]

So if a child asks her dentist why did God make me with baby teeth and later I’d have adult teeth your position is there’s no place for God in dentistry, instruction or otherwise...got it.

[allmendream]

Explaining the purpose of baby teeth needs no invocation of divine will any more than all other features of life the universe and everything.

If the instructor said something about God as the explanation (i.e. “because God did it”) the student would learn nothing of value as it either already aligned with the students belief, or it contradicted it.

The real world utility of invoking divine providence as an explanation for physical phenomenon is negligible at best.

There is a reason why technological advancement is tied to science and not theology.

[varmintman]

The thing which ultimately undoes many of these seemingly unkillable shibboleths is simple human laughter. The story of the emperor walking down the street butt naked is well known, as is or should be the story of how the KKK met its demise through the agency of the old radio Superman show; the Klan in anything other than its present comical and non-dangerous form met its end in the form of being laughed out of existence.

I predict the same thing is going to happen to Chuck Darwin, evolution, and evoloserism and all the little evolosers dug in at the NSF, the Smithsonian etc. etc. and these soft tissue finds in dinosaur remains has to be the beginning of the end.

[tacticalogic]

It’s a good thing GGG has you to follow me around and wail about “Projection”.

[varmintman]

One thing to keep in mind is that these new dinosaur findings are only one slice of bread in what should be called the basic evolutionite time sandwich; i.e. the slice which says how much time you actually have, which turns out to be thousands rather than tens of millions of years.

The other slice of bread in the sandwich is the Haldane dilemma, which basically indicates how much time you'd need for any sort of an evolutionary scheme to create our present biosphere even if that were possible, and you'd be talking about quadrillions of years and not tens of millions.

[tacticalogic]

Try to pay attention...circular logic, something you're intimately familiar with, is what's being debunked here.

They're arguments are equivalent to arguing that the label on a bottle of water that says how many ounces are in it is an exercise in circular logic because an ounce is defined as being the weight of a given volume of water.

[ClearCase_guy]

I’m reading this with my mouth hanging open. Your nonsense just blows me away. I don’t think you understand the concept of “circular logic” at all.

[tacticalogic]

I’m reading this with my mouth hanging open. Your nonsense just blows me away. I don’t think you understand the concept of “circular logic” at all.

You can think whatever you want. If you want me to think that too, then you'll have to do better than sit there with your mouth hanging open.

[GunRunner]

The bottle example made perfect sense to me. Someone claimed that we date fossils by the age of the rocks, and that we date rocks by the age of the fossils.

This is of course untrue, and is akin to saying that we know 12 oz. is 12 oz. because the label says it is.

Is your mouth hanging open at the Geocentrists who showed up on this thread; you know, you ones you didn't believe existed and were a fabrication of opponents of creationism?

[Salamander]

It’s funny *now* but realizing at such a tender age that *something* told to me by a respected expert just doesn’t jibe was rather disturbing.

[I was a *total* science junkie at the time and his crapaganda sorely disillusioned me. It was probably what kicked off the “Oh yeah? Prove it!” attitude I carry to this day]...:))

[ConservativeDude]

Certainly no surprise to me, after the many mammoths that I have seen with skin and connective tissue remaining on parts of their legs.”

For real? Are you a professional or amateur archeaologist? Can you share more about your first-hand experiences? This is fascinating stuff, for sure.

[valkyry1]

arguments are equivalent to arguing that the label on a bottle of water that says how many ounces are in it is an exercise in circular logic because an ounce is defined as being the weight of a given volume of water

Good try but the truth is it is far from that 

[dmz]

But scientists do a lousy job of explaining the proper role of theory.
_____

I think you are confusing the scientists and those media figures discussing their work.

[tacticalogic]

Good try but the truth is it is far from that

Feel free to demonstrate. Later on, maybe we'll have someone come along using mischaracterized quote mining to argue that "science isn't about truth", and make the whole thing moot.

[Ancesthntr]

Notice that I mentioned that Schroeder is not a Darwinist. He has done his job as both a scientist and as an honest human being and examined the facts. Given his scientific education, I place more weight (LOTS more weight) on his disagreement with evolutionary theory than that of someone who simply reads Genesis and says "G-d created man and all of the animals and other creatures from scratch, IT SAYS SO IN THE BIBLE!"

That latter approach is pure faith with no reason, which is, IMHO, every bit as bad as a stance that the Bible is a complete fairytale with no examination of the facts. In other words, you must have BOTH faith AND reason - one without the other leaves you short. G-d gave us the capacity to believe things on faith, and also the capacity to reason - one would think that there's a purpose behind that dual capacity. Unreasoning faith has literally murdered millions (billions, if you count unborn descendants of those murdered), and I am quite confident that such is NOT what G-d intended or wanted (though, of course, we MUST have free will for existence to have any meaning, so they happened despite G-d's intentions and/or desires).

[dmz]

This not some hypothetical argument, it is included in the historical account of creation delivered by God to man in His Word.

Talk about your circular arguments. Using the Bible as a means to prove what is stated in the Bible is the most circular reasoning present in this or any other crevo thread.

What do you have, by way of evidence, that God actually handed the Bible down? You know, the kind of evidence you routinely request of evos.

[valkyry1]

//Feel free to demonstrate//

Your way overstretched analogy? I dont know that I can demonstrate to you what is obvious to others.