CITE! ... Assertions are cheap and tawdry. * sigh *
Evolution is *FACT*! .. Even huge numbers of your Christian brethren understand that you are out-of-touch with Truth and Reality. … As just one example, here’s >10,600 U.S. Clergy agreeing with Darwin's Theory of Evolution ( ToE ):
http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/clergy_project.htm
One sentence of the CLERGY OPEN LETTER reads:
“To reject this truth (ToE) or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children.”
You have been indoctrinated and your mind-set is being skewed to believe what is not there and disbelieve what is. I’m not trying to sway you about your ‘God’, but you OWE IT TO YOURSELF to study beyond whoever’s teaching you now... It took the Church an amazing 359 YEARS to fully atone that they were wrong about Earth being the center of the Universe. *YOUR* church/school appears to have an identical mind-set… TO YOUR *OWN* DETRIMENT.
The biblical ~6,000 years... was discarded by science with Charles Lyell’s 'Principles of Geology' in 1830 -- a close friend of Darwin’s and a major influence on his ToE, BTW.
2007-07-04 17:50:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
3⤋
First, the vast majority of dinosaur "bones" are actually fossils. The bone material has been completely replaced by non-organic minerals, creating a solid "cast" of what was once there.
However, some "fossils" aren't completely fossiled and organic material remains inside. This is the case of many fossils from Hell's Creek. These are the fossils in which the soft tissue and blood cells you talk about have been found.
If that is indeed what they are, and they are remains of the actual dinosaur, the answer as to how this can happen is simple. Organic material often needs certain organism and conditions to cause it to degrade. When something dies, it decomposes primarily due to bacteria and fungai which break it down and consume it. The bones must have existed in conditions which simply didn't allow for the mechanisms of decomposition to completely destroy all of the tissue, and the process of fossilization was sufficiently slow, or did not last long enough to completely fossilize the bones before they were found.
65 million years is a very very long time for tissue to stick around but if nothing is acting to get rid of it, it sticks around.
2007-07-08 00:44:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by minuteblue 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Anything when kept in a completely inert situation (ie air-tight etc) can remain undisturbed for millions of years, and I think you'll find the majority of dino blood or dna found has been in amber, which creates such an inert situation. The occasions of dino blood surviving in fossils (which are formed when the bone actually breaks down and is replaced with rock) are very rare anomalies, essentially the exception to the rule that all rules have.
2007-07-05 00:53:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by Taliesin Pen Beirdd 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
So, let me make sure I'm getting you. You are implying that we can accurately date everything we find EXCEPT millions of bone samples that don't fit into your narrow view of the world.
Tell you what, I'll play ball. Dinosaurs existed thousands of years ago. Why is there no mention, writings, cave drawings, anything to imply that they were there. We are finding dinosaur bits everywhere, but there are no records of them (other than the fossils, of course). Now, based on what we found, it is safe to assume that many dinosaurs are larger and stronger than other animals. Why weren't they used or eaten? Then there's the mass extinction problem. If there was something that wiped them all out, how can there already be millions of thriving species populations? If it didn't effect us, what sort of selective killer is out there?
Find a good, reliable source for your question. And, post it please. I'd greatly like to see it
2007-07-05 01:00:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tom L 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
Even Darwin said that Evolution would be proven true in the future by the billions of yet undiscovered intermediate species (missing links) that would have to exist for evolution to work.
Update 2007: Theres a guy in China with a dremmel tool etching feathers on a lizard fossil and claiming to find the missing link from dinos to birds.
Evolution "Scientists" have committed so many frauds trying to prove evolution. (Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man ect.)They have no credibility with me and I am not all that religious.
For evolution to be true the missing links would have to be the overwhelming majority of the fossil record but instead they are either extremely rare or non existent.
2007-07-05 12:57:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Please read further.
They found blood elements in a dinosaur dated to have died 65 million years ago.
The dinosaur was buried in conditions that prevented its bones from being converted to mineral, as is the case with most fossils. The interior of the bones are preserved largely in their original form.
2007-07-05 00:52:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Buddha says : The universe is eternal. It existed from eternity and will exist further. Further he said that every inch of this earth has been a grave at some point of time or another. Someone had died on every inch.
Also we take different bodies after every death i.e. reincarnation which means that at some point of time we (humans ) could have been in the bodies of dinosaurs.
That explains.
2007-07-05 05:53:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Evolution is right. Creation is right. Here's how;
1) Biblically, God made the heavens and earth and allthings in 6 days. Now,God is omnipotent, and is older than the heavens and the earth, so how do we know that his "6 days" was not 65 million years by todays standards of a "day"?
2) Biblically,Adam was created from clay. Now anyone who has tried to make a man outof clay can tell you that it doesn't instantly go from a lump of clay into a shape of a man.It has to be moulded, formed and changed in several stages to create the final image. Now, overlay the images in your head of clay being moulded into a man with those evolution of man diagrams you've seen in schools. Kinda similar,no?
Think about it................
2007-07-05 01:04:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Interesting...
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7195
quote:
===============================
Palaeontologists have extracted soft, flexible structures that appear to be blood vessels from the bone of a Tyrannosaurus rex that died 68 million years ago. They also have found small red microstructures that resemble red blood cells.
===============================
2007-07-05 00:55:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Cornelius 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Why do you care about dinosaurs? Old news I would say.
The news today is that a living goddess can lose her status just because she left her country to promote a documentaty about living goddesses…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070703/ap_on_re_as/nepal_living_goddess
Maybe the news should be about Jesus…
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8461754114455236037
2007-07-05 01:14:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by Howard 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your scientific knowledge is really impressive! You have single-handedly demonstrated that nearly every other scientist in the world misunderstands paleontology, physics (including radiocarbon dating), biology, DNA, and geology. You are a scientist, right?
2007-07-05 00:59:30
·
answer #11
·
answered by Don P 5
·
2⤊
1⤋