It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dinosaur Study Backs Controversial Find

page: 11
51
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by mewize
The tissue is still testable because it is only a few thousand years old. The animal died in the flood of Noah and evolutionists are hopelessly searching for a way to work around creation-evidence just like they do every other time they misinterpret such obvious clues that explain our origins

God did it just like He said He did in the Bible. When you come to grips with this fact, everything in the Universe begins to make sense is spite of ourselves...


Why weren't there any dinosaurs in the ark? Did Noah disobey God?




posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by christianpatrick

Originally posted by mewize
The tissue is still testable because it is only a few thousand years old. The animal died in the flood of Noah and evolutionists are hopelessly searching for a way to work around creation-evidence just like they do every other time they misinterpret such obvious clues that explain our origins

God did it just like He said He did in the Bible. When you come to grips with this fact, everything in the Universe begins to make sense is spite of ourselves...


Why weren't there any dinosaurs in the ark? Did Noah disobey God?


Hes going to tell you god didn't tell him what animals to bring he sent them to Noah if your going to dispute the bible at least read it. Next there was never a world wide flood two basic fact disputes it 1st he would not have been ab led to take adequate breeding stocks to save more than a couple species if there is only 2 Left of any species there extinct. second there is no way the entire world would have repopulated its animal life and where ever you go on the planet there is animals.

I do believe however there was a large flood throughout the middle east and to them that was the entire world!



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers
Well what proves that God created it? It is not as if something proving Evolution wrong immediately proves that God did ANYTHING! That would take an entirely new theory in and of itself!

All we would be left with if Evolution is proved wrong is NOTHING!

God has ZERO proof for ANYTHING!

It is not an Evolution / God debate! Creationism would prove absolutely JACK SQUAT about the existence of God!

Get your nose out of the Bible and into a Science book!

The book of Genesis is not irrefutable proof for the explanation of how everything was created.


[edit on 31-7-2009 by TurkeyBurgers]


I think you might have to start considering that neither is religion, or science correct. They are two ways of looking at the same thing. Now let's put the creationism theory aside. Because the people with their eyes open know that it just is not feasible with the evidence we have today.

The point is neither science nor religion is going to get you any answers at all, it is the combination of science and spirituality, quantum physics, that will help us solve the problems of the world. We have to be aware that not only what we can hear, see, taste, smell, and touch exists, and there are things our there that are within our immediate grasp, and we just can't seem to reach out and get them.

We are all connected as one, and when we all become aware of this oneness all questions can be answered. I vote for a pure unity in all cultures ideas and answers into one big massive encyclopedia of knowledge.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by skycopilot
reply to post by Scooby Doo
 


The reason this has been rejected by popular science is that it is IMPOSSIBLE for proteins to remain INTACT for MILLIONS of years. This is based on simple science - or the KNOWN decay rate of the peptide bonds.

There simply is no presevative that could do this - ask a mortician.

So the only other SCIENTIFIC answer is this scrap of tissue, while being authentically that of a T-Rex, is simply THOUSANDS, and not millions of years old.


Radiometric dating tests the sediment below and above where the dinosaur bones are buried. This is how fossils are dated. Both the soil above and below T-Rex bones are 65 million years old.

This is irrefutable proof of the age of dinosaur bones. Unless you are trying to argue God slipped the bones under 65 million year old sediment everywhere in the world dinosaur bones have been ever found, your assertion is baseless and absurd. I challenge you to explain this.

Now, if you cannot understand a concept as simple as radioactive decay ratios, why should we take seriously any comments you have with regard longevity of proteins inside the core of fossilized bones. You're a fan of the decay of peptide bonds. What about the radioactive decay ratio of Uranium 235? If you'll excuse me, I'd much rather trust a published scientist who has had his findings independently confirmed.

[edit on 13-8-2009 by andrewh7]



new topics

top topics
 
51
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join