Dinosaur Soft Tissue

by Sea Breeze 67 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  TonusOH

  Folding Ideas did a video on a site where human and dinosaur footprints were said to be found:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UDXdqqJQPE

  One thing that stands out about all of the fossilized footprints that have been found, is how unlike human footprints they seem. I mean, how difficult would it be to make your own footprint in mud to see what they are supposed to look like? But, no, they are these funny rounded rectangles with equally-spaced toes, where only the big toe is sized/shaped differently.

  I still would ask what the experts in the relevant fields are saying, but the human footprints have always been good for a chuckle. Not only do they not look like real human footprints, they don't appear to belong to any sort of primate or other animal we have discovered. Maybe Bigfoot was real?

  Edit to Add: Your other link seems to confirm my previous post-- scientists think they will have to revise some of their theories on galaxy formation, but they don't say a word about the age of the universe. These discoveries are great for science, but they are not leading us to a young universe.
• 

  Sea Breeze

  scientists think they will have to revise some of their theories on galaxy formation,

  They don't have a theory. The fact of the matter is that they were expecting to find a young still-forming universe at the dawn of time and they found one identical to the one we have now - fully formed, from the beginning - just like the bible says.
  
  It is a safe bet that many biased scientists will continue to ignore the obvious. Their goal is to protect, deflect and promote their a priori adherence to any cause except for God, as many have stated.

  This is how "science" works of the kind that you will accept:

  “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.
  [Billions and Billions of Demons - JANUARY 9, 1997 ISSUE]”

  ― Richard C. Lewontin Ph.d (Degrees from Harvard and Columbia)

  I'm not ready to accept bondage of another form so quickly after leaving a cult with similar rules for thinking! It is fascinating to me to watch you try and maneuver within your assigned constraints and claim that it's not about the evidence, but only about how people you agree with interpret that evidence. It is absurd. Evidence matters.
  

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4EDhdAHrOg&ab_channel=JasonHeadley
  
  
• 

  TonusOH

  Sea Breeze: They don't have a theory.

  Has the Big Bang theory been rejected by cosmologists? That would be news.

  Sea Breeze: The fact of the matter is that they were expecting to find a young still-forming universe at the dawn of time and they found one identical to the one we have now - fully formed, from the beginning - like the bible says.

  Wow, no. That's not what they are saying. They are saying that galaxies may have formed earlier (and therefore, faster) than they thought. They have not changed their estimates of the age of the universe, and they definitely haven't found evidence that there was no expansion or that the universe popped into existence as it is today.

  As for the Lewontin quote, what is the issue? No one needs to be convinced that the material world exists and can be studied, but there is no reliable guide to the supernatural. We cannot reliably test the supernatural; we cannot even demonstrate that it exists. One of the ways we advance in our understanding of the universe is to accept that some things that seem impossible are, indeed, possible. But they must be grounded in what we can actually test. This shouldn't even be controversial.

  Sea Breeze: I'm not ready to accept bondage of another form so quickly after leaving cult with similar rules for thinking!

  You are getting your information from sites and individuals who literally take a pledge to reject anything that doesn't fit with their dogma and who criticize people who are actually willing to acknowledge and correct their mistakes.

  Sea Breeze: It is fascinating to me to watch you try and maneuver within your assigned constraints and claim that it's not about the evidence, but only about how people you agree with interpret that evidence.

  You misunderstand. Whether I agree with them or not is immaterial. What matters is what people who know what they are talking about are saying about the science in question. It is the YEC supporters who have set themselves a specific restriction that gets in the way of accepting settled science. YEC websites eagerly accept scientific consensus when it doesn't contradict their mythology, but want to disparage it when it's convenient to them. They cannot have it both ways.
• 

  Sea Breeze

  They are saying that galaxies may have formed earlier (and therefore, faster) than they thought.

  Materialists don't have any mechanism to support such a claim and they are saying much more than that now. They have literally run out of space. Keep in mind that materialism is an ideology that competes with God, It "cannot allow a divine foot in the door" but would prefer to believe the "patent absurdity of some of its constructs" no matter what the evidence is.

  Materialists sources are starting to admit the evidence shows that matter got turned into stars "at the time of their formation". That is what creationists have been saying for years and now materialist sources are saying the same thing! It's hilarious.

  
  University of Texas:

  "According to calculations by another UT Austin astronomer Michael Boylan-Kolchin, if some of the galaxies observed by JWST are as big and as early as initial estimates say, it would seem to signal that all available matter in the universe at the time of their formation got turned into stars found in these galaxies. That’s pretty unbelievable, but his study, and other discoveries of galaxies seemingly too big too early, suggest that the standard model of cosmology... might need an overhaul".

  “If the masses are right, then we are in uncharted territory,” Boylan-Kolchin said. “We’ll require something very new…One of the most extreme possibilities is that the universe was expanding faster shortly after the Big Bang than we predict, which might require new forces and particles.”

  Materialists will have to "overhaul" their materialistic theories not just tweak them a bit. Or, some may invent "new forces and particles" to try and rescue the "standard model of cosmology".
  
  We all have the same evidence. And, because of that, the list of absurdities that must be accepted or invented to support materialism is growing by leaps and bounds in multiple sciences such as cosmology, genetics and paleontology.

  For instance, you said: "One thing that stands out about all of the fossilized footprints that have been found, is how unlike human footprints they seem".

  For people chained to an ideology like materialism such as yourself, these images look UNLIKE human footprints. For everyone else with a free and clear mind, these images look JUST LIKE human footprints.
  
  
  

  

  

  
• 

  SydBarrett

  
  
  
• 

  TonusOH

  Sea Breeze: Keep in mind that materialism is an ideology that competes with God

  This is what Lewontin was referring to. The theist presupposes god, then demands that science put this presupposition on the same level as the things that science is able to observe and test. You have it backwards: God is an invention designed to compete with scientific discovery and advancement.

  YECs are constantly making claims about science that they clearly don't know enough about (or are deliberately lying about, for the small handful who understand the science). The researchers you quote are willing to admit that their theories may need to be changed. They still need to study these images and make sure they understand what they are seeing, precisely because they do not have presuppositions to defend.

  And, again, this would affect their theories on galaxy formation, not on the age of the universe.

  Sea Breeze: For everyone else with a free and clear mind, these images look JUST LIKE human footprints.

  No, really. They look like cartoon footprints. Compare them to actual human footprints and the difference is so stark you'll wonder how anyone could fall for it. YECs fall for it because they want for it to be true. If they treated these finds the way scientists do, they'd recognize them as either fake or misidentified. I guess you can describe them as "chained to an ideology."
• 

  Sea Breeze

  This is what Lewontin was referring to. The theist presupposes god, then demands that science put this presupposition on the same level as the things that science is able to observe and test.

  No, it is not. Not only has your commitment to materialism caused unreasonable conclusions regarding science, it has also created selective illiteracy when reading the English language: He says: "materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door ".

  Contrary to what you state, it is the materialist that is chained to his presupposition, at the expense of his rationality.

  Creationist believe we must be rational, truthful & anchored in reason and logic. Why? because the believer has a duty and a longing to be like his father God, the giver of logic and truth. "God cannot deny himself".

  The Materialist has no such moral imperative, and so can be as irrational and absurd as he or she likes in their interpretations without violating any tenet of materialism.

  "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... and mystifying" ― Richard C. Lewontin Ph.d (Degrees from Harvard and Columbia)
• 

  TonusOH

  Sea Breeze: No, it is not. He says: "materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door ".

  He is saying that science can only test and experiment on the material world, thus there is no place for the supernatural in science. Creationists agree with this, given how often they admit that science is limited to the material/natural world. So I don't see where the issue is. This is like 'limiting' yourself from jumping off a cliff.

  Sea Breeze: Creations believe we must be rational, truthful l & anchored in logic.

  ...unless what they learn or discover is in conflict with their presupposed beliefs, in which case they must adhere to the presupposed beliefs, no matter how untrue or irrational or illogical they are. The materialist simply rejects those presuppositions, which is a much more rational and logical approach. After all, if presuppositions could be verified, they stop being presuppositions.