Online Devotional - Originally published 5/21/05 as
an Upward Soccer Devotional.
Fresh Dinosaur Bone Discovery Reveals the
True Age of Dinosaurs
Alan Chandler (webmaster coolspring.org)
"...since what may be known about God is plain to [man], because God has made it
plain to them. For since the creation of the world, God’s invisible
qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being
understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
Romans 1:19-20
|
|
What in the world could dinosaur bones have anything to
do with God, Jesus, or the Bible? Actually, a recent dinosaur bone
find brings into light the conflict between man's opinion of the age of
the earth and the Bible's written account of Creation. Most people
believe that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago and became
extinct from some catastrophic event, such as an asteroid striking the
earth. However, a straightforward chronology of the Bible indicates
that the universe was created only about 6000 years ago!
Fossilized bones of dinosaurs and other animals actually
contain no bone at all, but instead are mineralized deposits replacing
where the bones were when they were buried. Fossilization occurs only
under very specific circumstances, since decomposition of animals occurs
rapidly after death. Fossils do not form from decomposed carcasses.
What is the chance that actual animal tissue could be recovered after being buried for millions of years?
There is essentially no possible way that actual tissue could exist for
this amount of time without decomposing or breaking down into elements.
It would be rare to find actual animal tissue present even after just
hundreds or thousands of years, much less millions.
However, below is one account of several in scientific
literature of fresh dinosaur bones being discovered in the recent past.
This information and further references can be found at the Answers in Genesis website:
-
Still soft and stretchy
Dinosaur soft tissue find—a stunning rebuttal of “millions of years”
by Dr Carl Wieland, AiG–Australia
25 March 2005
We previously announced the discovery of what seemed to
be microscopic red blood cells (and immunological evidence of hemoglobin)
in dinosaur bone. Now a further announcement, involving the same
scientist (Montana State University’s Dr Mary Schweitzer) stretches (pun
intentional) the long-age paradigm beyond belief.
Not only have more blood cells been found, but also soft, fibrous tissue,
and complete blood vessels. The fact that this really is unfossilized soft
tissue from a dinosaur is in this instance so obvious to the naked eye
that any skepticism directed at the previous discovery is completely
“history”.

One description of a portion of the tissue was that it
is “flexible and resilient and when stretched returns to its original
shape”. The exciting discovery was apparently made when researchers were
forced to break open the leg bone of a Tyrannosaurus rex fossil to lift it
by helicopter. The bone was still largely hollow and not filled up with
minerals as is usual. Dr Schweitzer used chemicals to dissolve the bony
matrix, revealing the soft tissue still present.
She has been cited as saying that the blood vessels
were flexible, and that in some instances, one could squeeze out their
contents. Furthermore, she said, “The microstructures that look like cells
are preserved in every way.” She also is reported as commenting that
“preservation of this extent, where you still have this flexibility and
transparency, has never been seen in a dinosaur before.” It appears
that this sort of thing has not been found before mainly because it was
never looked for. Schweitzer was probably alert to the possibility because
of her previous serendipitous discovery of T. rex blood cells. (It appears
that the fossils were sent to her to look for soft tissues, prior to
preservative being applied, because of her known interest.) In fact,
Schweitzer has since found similar soft tissue in several other dinosaur
specimens!
The reason that this possibility has long been
overlooked seems obvious: the overriding belief in “millions of years”.
The long-age paradigm (dominant belief system) blinded researchers to the
possibility, as it were. It is inconceivable that such things should be
preserved for (in this case) “70 million years”.
Will they now be convinced?
Unfortunately, the long-age paradigm is so dominant
that facts alone will not readily overturn it. As philosopher of science
Thomas Kuhn pointed out, what generally happens when a discovery
contradicts a paradigm is that the paradigm is not discarded but modified,
usually by making secondary assumptions, to accommodate the new evidence.
That’s just what appears to have happened in this case.
When Schweitzer first found what appeared to be blood cells in a T. Rex
specimen, she said, “It was exactly like looking at a slice of modern
bone. But, of course, I couldn’t believe it. I said to the lab technician:
“The bones, after all, are 65 million years old. How could blood cells
survive that long?’” Notice that her first reaction was to question the
evidence, not the paradigm. That is in a way quite understandable and
human, and is how science works in reality (though when creationists do
that, it’s caricatured as non-scientific).
So will this new evidence cause anyone to stand up and
say there’s something funny about the emperor’s clothes? Not likely.
Instead, it will almost certainly become an “accepted” phenomenon that
even “stretchy” soft tissues must be somehow capable of surviving for
millions of years. (Because, after all, we “know” that this specimen is
“70 million years old”.) See how it works?
Schweitzer’s mentor, the famous “Dinosaur Jack” Horner
(upon whom Sam Neill’s lead character in the Jurassic Park movies was
modeled) is already urging museums to consider cracking open some of the
bones in their existing dinosaur fossils in the hope of finding more such
“Squishosaurus” remains. He is excited about the potential to learn more
about dinosaurs, of course. But—nothing about questioning the millions of
years—sigh!
I invite the reader to step back and contemplate the obvious. This
discovery gives immensely powerful support to the proposition that
dinosaur fossils are not millions of years old at all, but were mostly
fossilized under catastrophic conditions a few thousand years ago at most.

Do we have the faith to
believe the whole Bible, or just bits and pieces of it? Here is
evidence supporting one of the more controversial aspects of Genesis, that
Creation occurred only thousands of years ago, not millions or billions of
years ago. Doesn't that make you feel closer to God, knowing that
His hand was directly forming the earth, stars, plants, animals, and man
just 6000 years ago?
|
|