It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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.
..........These morphological data indicate that material persists in fossil bone which is intimately associated with the mineral phase, but that upon demineralization retains morphological aspects of the original organic and cellular components of bone, such as fibrous texture (matrix), transparency, flexibility, suppleness, hollow lumen (vessels) as well as intravascular and intracellular components. From the limited samples examined thus far, no single environmental component has been identified as a predictor of soft tissue preservation. However, the specimens from which soft tissues are recovered predominantly derive from fluvial sandstone environments, and none were recovered from fossils preserved in terrestrial mudstone (MOR 1128) or marine sediments (UF123664 and WCBa-20), although in the latter, fragments of possible crystalline osteocytes were observed. However, specimens preserved in sandstones (MOR 1125) and sands intermixed with muds (MOR 555 and UA 9044) show soft tissue preservation, although preservation varies greatly within each specimen.
Originally posted by skycopilot
reply to post by chiron613
Ever been to Paluxy,TX? There is a Dinosaur Valley State Park there, and in a creek or river bed are footprints - Very large dinosaur footprints in rock. And Oh, yeah, human footprints also. This is well known, and the info is in many books (but not in NGeo, the Smithsonian, and other sy-fy government shills of misinformation.)
In other words, human and "dragons" (which is what they were called before the mid-nineteenth century) co-existed. And it was thousands, not miilions of years ago.
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]
Originally posted by ziggy1706
Thats what bothers me the most..casue ti dosnt click or make sense. flesh eating carnivores, wtih razor sharp machette teeth, predators, turned into little chirp chirps who eat only bread and insects...