Sunday, April 20, 2008

Dino DNA Anyone?

In Science, 25 March 2005, Mary Higby Schweitzer (North Carolina State University) announced the recovery of “soft tissue” from marrow in fossilized leg bone of a 68 million-year-old Tyrannosaurus ( MOR 1125).

Since that discovery three years ago, not a single mainstream “scientist” (including Schweitzer) has asked the obvious question: “If soft tissue hardly survive a thousand years, might it be possible that dinosaur remains may not be 68 million-year-old?

Since MOR 1125, there have been three other independent “soft tissue” confirmations, two tyrannosaurs and a hadrosaur.

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.... Who changed the truth of God into a lie” (Romans 1:20-25).

Saturday, April 19, 2008

The Path Science Follows

Despite media hype, Johanson's most recent discovery is actually the most discrediting evidence to date for Lucy as mankind's precursor. Not only does it confirm that she had a very ape-like skull with a cranial capacity only one third that of modern man, it also reveals that Lucy's species failed to exhibit evolutionary change! Johanson's radiometric dating indicates that the species had only 3 million years to evolve [into man], yet he determined a period of at least 1 million years during which no [evolutionary] change occurred! Johanson’s all too casual response "This raises many new questions….”

Hopefully, as they prepare for the coming year, teachers will not be intimidated by curriculum constraints, but will research the "evidence" in their texts regarding evolution. How appropriate to encourage students to scrutinize evolutionist dogma, challenging them to critique its compliance with scientific method. But most important, remind them that the path science takes in converging to the truth is as much a function of the personalities involved as the reality revealed.

Neanderthal Man

Skeletal deformities due to age, disease, arthritis, or natural racial variation are apparent reasons human remains have been erroneously classified as Neanderthal.

Evolutionists still regarding Neanderthal Man as a missing link find it a difficult position to maintain with the accumulation of new data: "Modern Homo sapiens Preceded Neanderthals on Mount Carmel..." is the editorial line of an article in the April 93 Scientific American . The mystified author summarizes: "The results have shaken the traditional evolutionary scenario, producing more questions than answers."

Peking Man

An assortment of skull fragments was the meager evidence that allowed 1927 evolutionists to envision Peking Man. When releasing information to the press, they neglected to mention that modern human remains, contemporaneous with Peking Man, had also been found during excavation. When scrutiny became more intense in later years, the "evidence," except for a few plaster casts of questionable accuracy, mysteriously disappeared. Today, most experts agree that Peking Man was merely an ape consumed as food by modern humans.