Posted on 12/11/2009 8:38:32 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Researchers have described remarkably well-preserved tissue discovered inside a salamander fossil. The fully intact muscle tissues also had blood-filled vessels, and they had not been mineralized like most fossils. This “fresh meat” find is depicted as the “highest quality soft tissue preservation ever documented in the fossil record.”[1] But given its assigned age of 18 million years old, it shouldn’t be there at all...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
But they did put it on paper in mostly the form it is in today.They kept it alive during the dark ages.If it wasn’t for scribes copying it, it would be lost in written form.
Is the bible only the Old Testament. What about the New Testament?
Oooo, they put it on paper? What a great idea!! Why didn’t the early Jews and Paul figure that one out?
Your question is sophic.
Correct me if I'm wrong, GGG, but you don't ping the FR evolutionists to these threads, do you?
Do they not find them on their own?
Sorry, no. Its the original article that I have been quoting.
From the article:
"We noticed that there had been very little degradation since it was originally fossilised about 18 million years ago, making it the highest quality soft tissue preservation ever documented in the fossil record"
Are you kidding me! Not!!!
I did. That’s how I posted the links from the articles.
I explained it already. Finish reading after that sentence. It described it two different ways.
Yes, by all means ignore the scientists who made the discovery, best to go with the safe ICR twisting of the news release so as not to challenge and pre-conceived notions.
After all, good science starts with a conclusion and works backwards, finding and twisting some facts and rejecting others all in the pursuit of supporting the pre-ordained conclusion, right?
I expect that if you advertised as "Fresh Salamander", and sold something in the condition of what was found inside that rock, you'd be guilty of fraud.
“The longer this is allowed to go on, the more that will find other venues to express themselves.”
Good, go find a venue compatible with your dogmatic embrace of ignorance. Don’t go away mad, just go away. Freerepublic is growing by hundreds per day, and we won’t miss your coven of liars for a moment.
“I expect that if you advertised as “Fresh Salamander”, and sold something in the condition of what was found inside that rock, you’d be guilty of fraud.”
I have converted fresh meat into fossil-like material on my grill before. Perhaps I should have buried it in the backyard for a period of time to restore it’s freshness.
To answer your questions, I really don't care what conclusions you draw from handpicked parsing of articles. It's your faith. Calling it the 'truth' and then saying the debate is over is what is wrong. An intelligent being will look deeper, ask more questions, search for answers. It's mans nature to be that way. Using faith to measure the value of another POLITICALLY is what I disagree with.
In the end we, as unworthy sinners, strive to be the best person we can be before our judgment.
MEGA DITTOS!
“My comment was about the fossil find of soft tissue becoming more common.”
Just to clarify, you do understand that “fossilized soft tissue” is still a fossil - and not actual meat.
The folks at ICR, and GGG don’t seem to get that.
So possibly the fossils are much, much less than millions of years in age and tissue preservation even at this lessor age is not common.
Does the preservation then, lend its self to an age of millions of years and some sort of truly extraordinary explanation or to just thousands of years with a rare (you need a microscope) but not so extraordinary explanation?
Well, what is the explanation? The age of the fossil is not just assumed to be millions of years, nor is it somehow based on how much tissue was left. To use the presence of soft tissue to challenge all the other evidence for how old the fossils are, you need, among other things, some explanation for what can preserve tissue for some thousands of years that wouldn't work for some millions of years. And why, for other animals thought to be thousands of years old, we find entire mummies, but for animals thought to be millions of years old, we only find microscopic fragments of organic material.
The real Church that Jesus Christ founded did that 400 years before the RC church existed.
Although the term's provenance arose in African folklore (e.g., the gum doll Anansi created to trap Mmoatia, the dwarf), some Americans now consider "tar baby" to have negative connotations revolving around negative images of African-Americans.[3] In recent years, several politicians who have publicly used the term have encountered some controversy, mocking, and censure from African-American civil rights leaders, members of the popular daily media, and other politicians.[4][5][6][7][8][9][10]
In an interview, Toni Morrison said the following of its use in her book, in an acting of reclaiming: "Tar Baby is also a name, like 'nigger,' that white people call black children, black girls, as I recall…. At one time, a tar pit was a holy place, at least an important place, because tar was used to build things…. It held together things like Moses' little boat and the pyramids. For me, the tar baby came to mean the black woman who can hold things together."[11]
It is what it is.
citations at wiki.
If FR is growing, then why do the Freepathons last longer and longer?
Also what is the source of “hundreds per day”?
Most privately owned web sites keep their number of regular members as a trade secret.
LOLOLOLOL!!!!! Last I checked it has been the evos saying that the debate is over with respect to origins, and the Creationists and IDers who have been trying to open the debate up. This guy is DILLUSIONAL!
And separating the MORALS of the religions you decry gives us liberalism. And that is what I disagree with.
In the end we are unworthy sinners (hopefully saved by Gods grace by our Faith in His Son), striving to walk as He would.
And aren’t we supposed to be WITNESSES in Christ instead of defining who and what is religious?
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.