Paradise Cafe Discussions - A Place For Bible Research And Christian Encouragement

God created the great huge reptiles; (Genesis 1:21)




http://s8int.com/dinolit1.html

Secular historians such as Pliny the Elder, Marco Polo, and Ambroise Pare make references to dragons that lived at the same time as man. English bible translations use the term dragon to refer to many of such great huge reptiles; Sometimes, even metaphorically to refer to Azazel (Satan). "Dinosaur", is actually a new term created in the eighteenth century.

Tyrannosaurus Rex blood cells, blood vessels, and connective tissue;



http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005...tissue.asp

It is interesting to note that T. Rex is dated older than the basalt level. In other words, T. Rex existed in a world that contained only a granite lithosphere (this point becomes relevant once you reach the science of the flood {not included here}). How could blood cells, blood vessels, and connective tissue last 68 MILLION years? The bibles account of dinos living a few thousand years ago is far more reasonable.

Hi Mars,
I thought you might find the rebuttal of the claims made by Young Earth Creationists regarding the alleged T-Rex blood cells/tissue find, interesting?
atb
Derek

Creation Science Rebuttals
Creation Magazine
T-Rex Blood (Sensational Dinosaur Blood Report)
Volume 19, Issue 4, September 1997



Review by Greg Neyman

© Answers In Creation

First Published 12 June 2003



Way back in 1997, young earth creation science ministry Answers In Genesis published a report about an astonishing find of red blood cells in the bone of a Tyrannosaurus Rex.1 This truly would be a remarkable find, if true. Since it was published, their report has been disproved by the main paleontologist involved, the famed Dr. Jack Horner. Here is his email response to one individual inquiring about this subject.



>Hi Adrian,.....Young Earth Creationists are like the "Flat Earth" people of

>last century, they latch on to pieces of straw, ignoring the bale.

>

>No cells have been found in any dinosaurs, but the remnants of red blood

>cells have been hypothesized on the basis of Heme, a kind of iron produced

>biologically. The discovery of heme, by my graduate student Mary

>Schweitzer, in a skeleton of T-rex (Not SUE, however, but the Museum of the

>Rockies Wankel T-rex) indicates that the remnants of cells can be

>preserved.

>

>1. Was it really blood? NO

>

>2. Does it mean anything? It means that under optimal conditions the

>fossil record can preserve some very interesting things that make it

>possible to hypothesize the nature of extinct organisms.

>

>Jack



Numerous other people have called the Answers In Genesis report into question, so much so that they produced a followup article.

I’m not going to critique their articles, because they do not carry any significant evidence in support of young earth creation science (check them out yourself if you like). However, I want to point out what I have always said about young earth proponents…it doesn’t matter what you say, or how good your scientific argument is against their theories…they will NEVER admit that they are wrong. If they can’t come up with some lame article to explain away the old earth evidence, they will merely claim that “even if we don’t have all the answers, God does. And He, in His good time, may raise up godly scientists to discover them.”2 In short, they are never wrong!

Carl Wieland and his creation science colleagues have produced numerous error-filled scientific reports (due mainly to the fact that they are not scientists…see my article about this). Their presuppositions rule out any possible truth to their work. However, I thank God for them, and for the many other young earth theorists, for much spreading of the Gospel has been done by them. Unfortunately, their passion for their work stems from their misinterpretation of the Bible, which has led to their dogmatic position on creation. Even if shown the truth, they would refuse to believe it.

I have been, and will continue, to pray for their ministry. The purpose of Answers In Creation is to support old earth creationists, not to “convert” young earth believers to old earth belief. May they continue to win souls for Christ…we in the old earth camp will do the same. However, we do pray for a change in their hearts, that they would recognize that we are not the “enemy” that they make us out to be.

-----------------------

1 Creation Magazine, Volume 19, Issue 4. Published on the web at answersingenesis.org/Docs/4232cen_s1997.asp



2 Young earth theorist Jonathan Sarfati, in The Yellowstone Petrified Forests

Hi Derek

Greetings brother.

Christian love and appreciation,

gogh

Good to see you brother Derek!!!

The biggest issue I have with AIG is there hanging on to this absurd idea of 24-hour creative days.
:insane:

That said, I do credit them for their noble efforts.

I read once (in a VERY reputable publication) of some grad students in Taiwan, or near there, doing research on some dinasour eggs recently found (I believe they were Raptor eggs). One of the students accidentally dropped one and broke it open; the inside was STILL wet. The article noted that it seemed quite improbable that the egg could have been more taht 12,000-years old.

Great article, but I cannot find it now. Will keep looking through my old magazines.

Hi, Derek I would not call that a rebuttal.

Whether the earth is young or old is irrelevant as to whether or not man lived at the same time as the dinosaurs.

I personally place the creation of the dinosaurs at about 14,072 years ago... and dying out at about 4,378 years ago (from the flood).

Adam was created 6,034 years ago thus man and dinosaur lived together for 1,656 years.

Heme the oxygen carrying component of blood was found in OTHER fossils (without the blood)... so the rebuttal you are referencing is actually not a response to the recent find of actual blood cells that you can SEE with your own eyes.

Hi Mars,
I am just pleased I wasn't around at the time to get chased by a T-Rex! :)

Hi Mars,
One cannot, with any degree of certainty, use ancient writers as reliable sources when it comes to dragon's etc. The medieval bestiary's were full of such mythical creatures.

The early Christian writers referred to the Phoenix and thought it a reality and a symbol of the resurrection. It is interesting to note the Bible is free from such nonsense.

Perhaps as you grow older, like me, you will learn keep possibilities in the 'possible box' and keep your 'certainty box' firmly locked up until its required. :) ;)

Hi TD,
It is good to see you too.

Well, the bible contains the word dragon in many places.. and even using the word to describe actual creatures.

Hi Mars,
Was the Bible referring to T-Rex?

Well "tanniyn" is actually a word that refers to all lizard monsters... the first of which were created in the fifth day.

But dinosaurs were not created until the sixth day. But they are still called "tanniyn" too.

"Behemoth" was probably the Brachiosaurus;

"Leviathan" may have been the Kronosaurus;

Hi Mars,
Here we depart into personal opinion and speculation again. Some authorities believe those two mentioned refer to the Hippo and the Nile Crocodile.