Some tissues have been preserved by a natural mummification process. When exposed, of course they might start to smell of decay.
Have They Found Noah's Ark ? - Again.....
by BluesBrother 120 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
-
-
betterdaze
you all know how we humans love big dramatic stories.
Noah's Ark is REAL I tell you! Real! Because I read it in an old book...
~Sue -
Perry
Dinosaur Soft Parts
by John D. Morris, Ph.D.Photos of the discovery were made widely available to newspapers, magazines, and websites by Science magazine, but refused ICR for use in this article. (See Origins Issues - 0506.)
The recent discovery of dinosaur soft parts (see page 5) has spawned much interest among scientists. The deposit in which the Tyrannosaurus rex fossil was found is dated at 70 million years. Not only were blood cells found, but soft and pliable tissue as well, including flexible blood vessels. Paleontologist Mary Schweitzer, who made the discovery in Montana, exclaimed: "Finding these tissues in dinosaurs changes the way we think about fossilization, because our theories of how fossils are preserved don't allow for this."The fossil was entombed in a porous sandstone, with the surity of penetration by groundwater. Since biological material is quickly broken down in the presence of water, it seems inconceivable that organic material could have avoided decomposition for so long, raising the possibility that the formation is misdated. While not "proving" the young age for the fossil, the discovery is obviously much more compatible with recent rapid burial and fossilization than with an age of millions of years. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how soft tissue could have lasted even 5,000 years or so since the Flood of Noah's day when creationists propose the dinosaur was buried. Such a thing could hardly happen today, for soft tissue decays rather quickly under any condition. Clearly, non-uniform processes must have been involved.
Faced with the implications of this discovery, secular evolutionists are scrambling to suggest a way soft tissue can be completely preserved in pristine condition, for they dismiss the possibility of young age. But unfortunately, Christian leaders who likewise hold to long ages are joining them in the search. Why must Christians fight this evidence? Shouldn't they welcome the possibility that the Bible is correct as it appears on the surface? Yes they should, but so strong is the commitment to millions and billions of years among many Christians that contrary evidence must be explained away.
-
JWoods
Excuse me, but what do Dinosaurs have to do with this Noah's Ark hoax?
-
BurnTheShips
ICR is not a reliable scientific publication.
Indeed, it is hard to imagine how soft tissue could have lasted even 5,000 years or so since the Flood of Noah's day when creationists propose the dinosaur was buried
Mammoth tissues have been found and sequenced that are far older than 5000 years.
BTS
-
THE GLADIATOR
It will take more than Perry's parrot returning with dinosaur tissue in its beak, to convince me.
-
Perry
The fact that Carbon-14 dates for dinosaur bones (and carbonized wood associated with dino strata) are only thousands of years old suggests that something is wrong with the oft-repeated claim that dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago. It also tells us that the Geological Time Chart needs to be updated and revised: especially since the possibility of contamination from surrounding soil was eliminated. In addition, many of the samples were sent to different labs for comparison dating.
For those that have a closed mind.... nothing will convince.
-
BurnTheShips
Carbon-14 dates for dinosaur bones (and carbonized wood associated with dino strata)are only thousands of years old
Carbon-14 dating is not used for such old fossils. They are dated by other means, including other radioactive isotopes with longer half-lifes.
For those that have a closed mind.... nothing will convince.
Indeed.
BTS
