[Junior]

Thank you. Unfortunately, none of your sources appears to be corroborated via peer review, and one of them is anecdotal at that. I vaguely remember the hoopla surrounding the idea of unfossilized material deep within the T-Rex bone; I also remember when it was announced the material was most likely external contamination as it more readily resembled fungus rather than vertebrate remains.

[DittoJed2]

Most likely and Was are two different things. At least I provided some writings by the scientists who observed these things (and no, the country music singer was not a scientist but the geologist he was with was)and other information from scientists interpreting the data. Of course, it is possible that dinosaurs of some types still live, pterodactyls, plesiosaurs, etc., There is eye-witness testimony to this, archaeological evidence, and some literary evidence that backs up the contention that they lived more recently than 65 million years ago. But, as JennyP said, a living dinosaur would not upset the evolutionist's faith that the dating of fossils is incorrect. Rather, it would just be that a species has survived millions of years. This makes presenting any evidence impossible, because evolutionists readily dismiss evidence from creationists as flawed. Creationists don't dismiss all of science, just evolutionary models. Yet, creation scientists are treated as non-professionals even though some, such as Dr. David Menton, are highly honored by their secular institutions.