Paleontology Shaken: Organic Molecules Found in 66-Million-Year-Old Dinosaur Bones

You might learn to supplement ancient authority with referential process.

They find dinosaur bones in rock that has been there and for 10 to million and 100 a million years god has nothing to do with it this has scientifically prove so keep you so called god out it. It has no plce in this forum and niether do you. Thank yoy. Not.

How did religion end up in this conversation? If your not a scientist then it’s probably a given that almost all of you have no idea what your talking about. Anthony and Eric are prime examples of uneducated fools , who obviously speak before thinking, and possibly inbred genetics. Maybe science should hypothesize on those 2 clowns genetic sequence. 😂😂😂😂

Truth requires evidence, which you have non.

“2000, Bob Harmon, chief preparator of paleontology at the Museum of the Rockies, discovered a Tyrannosaurus skeleton in the Hell Creek Formation in Montana. After a two-year retrieval process, Jack Horner, director of the Museum, gave the femur bone to Schweitzer. Schweitzer was able to retrieve proteins from this femur in 2007. Schweitzer was the first researcher to identify and isolate soft tissues from an ancient fossil bone.”
This type of incident was investigated and reported almost 18 years ago. Not an unexplainable, nor newly recent, phenomenon.

Says the one starting with the conclusion of “my book is true” and working backwards. Wow, dead things look dead, jaw-dropping evidence. In the flood story is so obvious and true, why do all the creationist outlets have to lie, quote 50 year information, and take quotes so out of context that the devil would call it dishonest.

Just because you don’t understand the methods used to date the Earth and fossils, like radiometric dating and sedimentary layers, doesn’t mean they’re not true. In fact, the same underlying theories used in dating are used in other industries, like nuclear power and the fossil fuel industry. All creationism has contributed to the world is ignorance and Ken Ham’s midlife crisis boat.

Before you answer, go look up “young Earth heat problem” and let me you how Noah and the gang survived like a billion hydrogen bombs during his pleasure cruise.

The flood narrative is entirely implausible. Elderly Noah and his immediate family would have had to gather hundreds of thousands of species of perfect pairs of male and female insects alone, from every part of the globe, before the deluge. How would they have travelled? How would they have crossed the seas between countries like Australia and the middle East? In what, even if they could collect them, would they have stored the animals to take them to the ark? They would have literally had to go to every square kilometer on the planet, to collect and return each species pair to the ark. That’s over 510 million square kilometers. Put another way, that’s over HALF A BILLION square kilometers. Having acquired all the other millions of creatures, kept them for 40 days (of the flood) as perfect breeding pairs, appropriately feeding them, even the carnivores, and then returning them to all those parts of the world from which they came, and where they are able to find appropriate food and climate for their types, what is meant having a classification system to remember which animals came from where from the smallest mates and spiders to the elephants and rhinoceruses. The death of any animal, even a tiny insect, would mean the end of that species forever. Would a god who has just wiped out millions of human beings really operate in this way with one small family? Some fish require fresh water, others require salt water, but a flood would have made all the water on the planet brackish, a mixture of salt and fresh, and would have killed huge numbers of fish species, as any fish breeder knows. Fish and other waterlife that live uniquely in small lakes and water courses would have been washed away into the zillions of gallons of brackish water that covered the earth, so how would they ever have found their way back? Then we have to consider the fate of all the plants, flowers, trees etc drowned under 40 days of brackish flood water. After the flood, the massive death of swamped vegetation would have left nothing to eat for all the herbivores, and therefore the whole food chain would break down.
Even if the creatures that were returned (impossibly) could reproduce, we know that a species which relies on one breeding pair, in natural environments, always goes extinct. We have much evidence for this in recent times. But now I’m talking about evidence and you don’t require that. Just your legendary account from the entirely pre-scientific Iron Age. Noah and his family covering that HALF A BILLION square kilometres, in some primitive and unexplained way, without maps or compasses or GPS or any way of effectively recording what they’re doing and knowing where they’ve been already, or how they would possibly know when they had actually acquired all the species of the earth, before any classification system had been invented by Linaeus etc. and with no feasible way of holding their collection while they returned all the animals, perfectly hydrated, despite the many millions of them, to where the ark was being built. That would come across enormous numbers of rotting human carcasses. Isn’t such a god great? Well, no. The flood narrative is preposterous and only believed by those who believe it as an act of faith to hold too, despite its impossibility. Believing an account for belief’s sake is not an act of faith, it’s an act of incredulity that contradicts intellect, evidence and intention. The intention of a god who would do such ludicrous things to brutally wipe out the human race, apparently including hordes of babies and children made in his own image, and yet preserve all other species, only to find that the one family he preserved were as perverse and prone to evil as all those he had drowned. So the omnipotent god who can be outside of time and see everything that’s going to happen does something extremely cruel, ghastly and impossible, knowing the outcome will be rubbish? I wish you well with your beliefs. Perhaps you should go back to basics and ask yourself WHY you base your entire personal philosophy on this unreasonable nonsense.