by Perry 130 Replies latest jw friends
Notice the language of bondage and slavery that he uses: acceptance of absurdity and 'just-so' stories, ignoring failure, being compelled, being forced, etc.
Your using your own description which is obviously sensationalize and presumptuously biased.
Shame on you Perry, your not known to be intellectually dishonest
but if thats what you have to do to confirm your supernatural ideology of Creationism, then all can truthfully witness that for themselves.
Are there any atheists here that would like to disagree with Professor Lewontins' position?
Are we to understand that this professor took the words from Watchtower and morphed them into a disagreement with science?
I would like to disagree with him then.
If scientific claims are against someone's common sense or seem absurd, it is because that person's common sense cannot fathom physics and science properly. Common sense in the dark ages and before told men that the earth is the center of the universe and that stars were tiny.
People would love for science to deliver health and better life, and despite the fact that "science" does not promise such, it has delivered better than "faith" has in that area.
If a "Divine Foot" would actually show up in the door, we will gladly take a look. And before you insist that it has shown up, remember that for every unproven anecdote of your God's foot, I can find another anecdote of a God that is completely unlike your God.
This is the same argument that the WT (and even we ourselves) used to make when presented with JW false teachings. We would say, "Where else are we to go"
How you twist the suggestion that scientific endeavors and open evaluation of the world in which are a result of where else can we go to, is both nonsensical and blatantly dishonest to imply .
So your at a position then that humanity is better off in ignorance of the world in which we live and we should just live in accordance to the knowledge and understanding of what the ancient civilizations had acquired ?
Shame on you Perry, your not known to be intellectually dishonest
Odd, that's exactly what I think of when Perry comes to mind.
Here Perry, just to enlighten and educate you on what is intellectual dishonesty. ........
Intellectual dishonesty is a failure to apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, usually in a self-serving fashion. If one judges others more critically than oneself, that is intellectually dishonest.
Your using your own description which is obviously sensationalize and presumptuously biased.
No, I am not. These are his words, not mine. Quote:
"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.
It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." - Geneticist Professor Richard Lewontin
Professor Lewontin uses the language of bondage to an ideology that could easily have come off the pages of the Watchtower. Words like "forced" and acceptance of "patent absurdity" are part of his doctrinal statement, not mine.
Let's look at the definition of a miracle:
Those utterly committed to materialism believe that a miracle happened and this stuff lasted for 65 million years.... longer than it will take the Rocky Mountains to rise, erode and rise again.
Dinosaur Protein
Dinosaur Protein has been sequenced along with other tests that strongly suggest the presence of DNA.
However, DNA has been proven to have a half life of only 521 years, making any discoverable DNA impossible after several hundred thousand years (maybe 1 million tops)
Rotting Dinosaur Stench
When the T-rex thigh bone where the soft tissue was found was broken open the researcher remarked that the smell was exactly like a rotting corpse. World famous "Dinosaur" Jack Horner remarked that all dinosaur bones smell like that when opened.
How does a corpse rot and stink for 65 million years? Its a miracle .
"150 Million Yr. Old" Usable Squid Ink
QUOTE: "It is difficult to imagine how you can have something as soft and sloppy as an ink sac fossilised in three dimension, still black, and inside a rock that is 150 million years old."
It's a MIRACLE!!
By the way, the above drawing was done using the squid ink.
DNA Information
Certainly one of the greatest miracles that Atheists believe in is that all the information in DNA came from rocks. One cell contains enough information to fill, get this: ONE MILLION 200 PAGE text books. It's a miracle.
The Single Cell
A single cell has been compared by scientists as having the complexity of a modern city. The various parts are interdependent, meaning than one part cannot exist without the other. How did this happen? Atheists tell us its a miracle of chance.
This video was produced by Harvard University. Friends, we are in the presence of an incomprehensible intelligence. Yet, atheists scientists who cannot even produce a leaf or a twig, try to sell us their miracles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzcTgrxMzZk
So, unusual discoveries happen out of the norm in a world of variable environments.
There are new learning discoveries all the time and will continue so into the future.
One should keep in mind how distinctively separate sciences support one another particularly concerning dating time calculations.
The soft tissue fossilized dinosaur discovery has been scientifically understand to why it occurs.
Read on Perry ...
The controversial discovery of 68-million-year-old soft tissue from the bones of a Tyrannosaurus rex finally has a physical explanation. According to new research, iron in the dinosaur's body preserved the tissue before it could decay.
The research, headed by Mary Schweitzer, a molecular paleontologist at North Carolina State University, explains how proteins — and possibly even DNA — can survive millennia. Schweitzer and her colleagues first raised this question in 2005, when they found the seemingly impossible: soft tissue preserved inside the leg of an adolescent T. rex unearthed in Montana.
"What we found was unusual, because it was still soft and still transparent and still flexible," Schweitzer told LiveScience. [See Images of a Near-Complete T. rex]
T. rextissue?
The find was also controversial, because scientists had thought proteins that make up soft tissue should degrade in less than 1 million years in the best of conditions. In most cases, microbes feast on a dead animal's soft tissue, destroying it within weeks. The tissue must be something else, perhaps the product of a later bacterial invasion, critics argued.
Then, in 2007, Schweitzer and her colleagues analyzed the chemistry of the T. rex proteins. They found the proteins really did come from dinosaur soft tissue. The tissue was collagen, they reported in the journal Science, and it shared similarities with bird collagen — which makes sense, as modern birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs such as T. rex.
The researchers also analyzed other fossils for the presence of soft tissue, and found it was present in about half of their samples going back to the Jurassic Period, which lasted from 145.5 million to 199.6 million years ago, Schweitzer said.
"The problem is, for 300 years, we thought, 'Well, the organics are all gone, so why should we look for something that's not going to be there?' and nobody looks," she said.
The obvious question, though, was how soft, pliable tissue could survive for millions of years. In a new study published today (Nov. 26) in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Schweitzer thinks she has the answer: Iron.
Iron lady
Iron is an element present in abundance in the body, particularly in the blood, where it is part of the protein that carries oxygen from the lungs to the tissues. Iron is also highly reactive with other molecules, so the body keeps it locked up tight, bound to molecules that prevent it from wreaking havoc on the tissues.
After death, though, iron is let free from its cage. It forms minuscule iron nanoparticles and also generates free radicals, which are highly reactive molecules thought to be involved in aging.
"The free radicals cause proteins and cell membranes to tie in knots," Schweitzer said. "They basically act like formaldehyde."
Formaldehyde, of course, preserves tissue. It works by linking up, or cross-linking, the amino acids that make up proteins, which makes those proteins more resistant to decay.
Schweitzer and her colleagues found that dinosaur soft tissue is closely associated with iron nanoparticles in both the T. rex and another soft-tissue specimen from Brachylophosaurus canadensis, a type of duck-billed dinosaur. They then tested the iron-as-preservative idea using modern ostrich blood vessels. They soaked one group of blood vessels in iron-rich liquid made of red blood cells and another group in water. The blood vessels left in water turned into a disgusting mess within days. The blood vessels soaked in red blood cells remain recognizable after sitting at room temperature for two years. [Paleo-Art: Illustrations Bring Dinosaurs to Life]
Searching for soft tissue
Dinosaurs' iron-rich blood, combined with a good environment for fossilization, may explain the amazing existence of soft tissue from the Cretaceous (a period that lasted from about 65.5 million to 145.5 million years ago) and even earlier. The specimens Schweitzer works with, including skin, show evidence of excellent preservation. The bones of these various specimens are articulated, not scattered, suggesting they were buried quickly. They're also buried in sandstone, which is porous and may wick away bacteria and reactive enzymes that would otherwise degrade the bone.
Schweitzer is set to search for more dinosaur soft tissue this summer. "I'd like to find a honking big T. rex that's completely articulated that's still in the ground, or something similar," she said. To preserve the chemistry of potential soft tissue, the specimens must not be treated with preservatives or glue, as most fossil bones are, she said. And they need to be tested quickly, as soft tissue could degrade once exposed to modern air and humidity.
Importantly, Schweitzer and her colleagues have figured out how to remove the iron from their samples, which enables them to analyze the original proteins. They've even found chemicals consistent with being DNA, though Schweitzer is quick to note that she hasn't proven they really are DNA. The iron-removing techniques should allow paleontologists to search more effectively for soft tissue, and to test it when they find it.
"Once we can get the chemistry behind some of these soft tissues, there's all sorts of questions we can ask of ancient organisms," Schweitzer said.
Perry,
That so called dinosaur tissue was a colony of bacteria. Common sense would tell you that something that is 4,000 years old, as young earth creationists say it is, would long ago have decomposed entirely.
Welcome.......
to Jurassic Park!
Perry is only 25 years behind on this
Are we to understand that this professor took the words from Watchtower and morphed them into a disagreement with science?
Your using your own description which is obviously sensationalize and presumptuously biased.
No, I am not. These are his words, not mine.
Okay then. What you did was backwards morph this professor's words to your version of what Watchtower's position is. You are not quoting Watchtower, you are speaking for them in a version of the quote from that professor.
Perry, be careful. It's bad enough that you handpick quotes and misapply them, but then when you speak for Watchtower as if it's their words, you confuse the issues.
Professor Lewontin uses the language of bondage to an ideology that could easily have come off the pages of the Watchtower. Words like "forced" and acceptance of "patent absurdity" are part of his doctrinal statement, not mine.
I tend to believe that the professor gives fodder to controversy with his quote. Controversy is free advertising. But of course, you find one smart creationist online and run with everything he posts, and I am sure you have found one radical evolutionist who many others can disagree with but you will run with everything he says as if it represents all thoughts by all evolutionists.
