Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-25-2019 1:41 PM
36 online now:
Diomedes, DrJones*, dwise1, JonF, Meddle, PaulK, ringo, Stile (8 members, 28 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,198 Year: 5,235/19,786 Month: 1,357/873 Week: 253/460 Day: 5/64 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   An acutal case for a young earth?
carbonstar
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 6 (340752)
08-17-2006 8:02 AM


I am in he middle of a heated debate with a co-worker about the age of the earth. He came up to me and started to talk about how they found a "fresh" dinosaur bone with blood still on the bone. Naturally I researched this but all I could find was a couple of sources which were in Answers in Genesis and other Christian sites.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i4/blood.asp

I was curious if there is someone out there who could explain this issue to me, and could shed some light onto this elusive topic.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7195
http://www.smithsonianmagazine.com/issues/2006/may/dinosaur.php

These are some actual scientific website I could find on this subject.

Thank you


- "Only two things in life are infinate, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not so sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Modulous, posted 08-17-2006 8:43 AM carbonstar has not yet responded
 Message 4 by Belfry, posted 08-17-2006 8:39 PM carbonstar has not yet responded
 Message 5 by NosyNed, posted 08-17-2006 9:17 PM carbonstar has not yet responded
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 08-17-2006 10:36 PM carbonstar has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12590
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 2 of 6 (340756)
08-17-2006 8:37 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Modulous
Member (Idle past 215 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 3 of 6 (340759)
08-17-2006 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by carbonstar
08-17-2006 8:02 AM


For quick reference, you can take a look at another thread on the topic, which can be found here:
Blood in dino bones
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by carbonstar, posted 08-17-2006 8:02 AM carbonstar has not yet responded

  
Belfry
Member (Idle past 3196 days)
Posts: 177
From: Ocala, FL
Joined: 11-05-2005


Message 4 of 6 (340922)
08-17-2006 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by carbonstar
08-17-2006 8:02 AM


This topic is covered pretty well in talkorigins.org. Basically, the AIG people seriously distort the findings and what they indicate. No "fresh" dinosaur bone has been found with blood inside. Rather, incompletely permineralised fossil bones have been found, and when chemically processed, structures have been recovered that resemble minute remnants of soft tissue and such. To my knowledge, no intact proteins have yet been recovered from the material.

Unfortunately, popular press reports like the New Scientist one you linked to often have given the false impression that the material was "fresh" when found and practically had red blood dripping out of it. That is simply not the case.

Here are the talkorigins links:
Dino Blood and the Young Earth
Dino Blood Redux
Ancient Molecules and Modern Myths


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by carbonstar, posted 08-17-2006 8:02 AM carbonstar has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8842
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 5 of 6 (340930)
08-17-2006 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by carbonstar
08-17-2006 8:02 AM


Even if blood......
Even if blood was found as falsely described there is too much other evidence for a very old earth. One would be taking the less unlikely course to try to explain the blood preservation over a long period of time. However, that is almost as unlikely as a young earth.

The lesson for your co-worker to take from this (and many, many other things like it) is that the sources they have listened to are dishonest or ignorant or foolish. The whole YEC camp is rife with those who have a disregard for accuracy.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by carbonstar, posted 08-17-2006 8:02 AM carbonstar has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19819
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 6 of 6 (340951)
08-17-2006 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by carbonstar
08-17-2006 8:02 AM


The question is not what evidence supports a young earth, but how do they explain the evidence that supports an old earth - what evidence needs to be denied to maintain a position based on faith.

It is possible to find evidence that supports a flat earth at the center of the universe, but it is rather impossible to deny the evidence that the earth is round and orbits the sun in the outer reaches of a rather unsignificant galaxy among millions.

The young earth model has the same problems. See Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III) for some of the relevant information on evidence for an old earth that is based on actual annual layers in several different systems.

Welcome to the fray, btw, and love the noodly avatar


Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by carbonstar, posted 08-17-2006 8:02 AM carbonstar has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019