Thanks for the video link grumley; I always appreciate your posts.

rex, I agree with your statement, but I think you are wrong about SOME on the other side. Its pretty much an iron wall in academia. You either adhere to this doctrine on this side of the wall or else. If one suggests a hypothesis on the other side of the wall, then they are completely disbanded.

I think the Intelligent Design scientists are a bit more open minded and would like to have a place at the table as for as ID is concerned, but modern academia won't allow that.

Okay, so if the earth is young, let's carbon date some of this dinosaur soft tissue and it should be less than 10,000 years old. Carbon dating work on relatively young organic material.

The guy in the video sort of betrays why he can't believe in an old earth. From 1:50 minutes to the end he basically says that for evolution of non-life to a living thing it would take a long, long time. That is his unfounded fear. Regardless, it doesn't matter how much time you give it, you can't get life from non-life.

When do we get to the "Gap" theory?

Waggler, you and I have had this discussion on another thread long ago. When you post, I pay attention and read what you say because I respect you. But, you keep putting the topic back to the age of the earth (old earthers and young earthers), you have made points about an old earth that I can certainly not disagree with; however, I have made posts that you can't argue with either. I though do not accept that the earth is millions of years old, but rather thousands or tens of thousands. One, or perhaps both of us is correct; I don't know.

But this is not a topic about the age of the earth, but rather dinosaurs. There is evidence coming out since 2010 that dinos have soft tissue. In your above post, you say then we should C-14 date those dino bones. Well, believe it or not ID scientists have already sent their specimens off to academic labs known for accurate C-14 dating. Like all labs, they did not need to know what they were dating, they just need the specimen and date it. Well, guess what, the dino bones got a C-14 date! How is that possible if they are 65+ million years old and C-dating only works to about 50K years due to the half life of Carbon?

Well, it must be a sampling error then if that date was correct. The sample was contaminated so they say. Mainstream science shrugged this off as kook creationists up to their old habits. But the question remains.
So to lay the cards on the table, the ID/Creation scientists went to every museum in the world and and asked them to put their money where their mouth is and allow some of their dino specimens to be Carbon dating.

Guess what! They were continued to be called kooks because nobody in their right SCIENTIFIC mind would subjugate a specimen that is already known to be millions of years old to Carbon dating. So the debate will continue.

On the other hand, when I'm having some beers with my atheist evolutionist friends, Their explanation to me was that some along the lines of "there is no use in arguing with a pig; for he he will get you down in the mud and make you look stupid" Something along those lines.

Regardless, I am not stupid and neither or you. There are questions that need answering, and it is my OPINION that mainstream science and academia is deliberately distorting the TRUTH.

The DINO bones speak for themselves.

HA!

There you are Mark. Given your previous posts on this thread, even you don't won't to dabble with this topic. To many mainstream Christians cannot fathom the the thought of humans and dinos living together. Can't have a preacher believe in such nonsense. I mean that with the absolute utmost respect for you Mark. I love you contribution here.

[quote=wildlifeartist1]young earthers are my favorite just so miss lead by 1/4 truths if that is even a thing? dinos and people existing at the same time really----and on the ark ...yup
don't you think they would have been talked about buy everyone on the earth. --even before the floooood let alone after oh hey look theres an allosaurus ---RUN----
O never mine those sharp teeth are for eating watermelons
panda bears have sharp teeth and they just eat bamboo ya and 12 molars to grind it up and a digestive system to handle it
where is all the evidence like drawings ,sculptures more literture stories of battels being eaten by dinosaurs anything...
how about eating them taste like chicken well they should they are birds now.
you know when science gets it wrong who figures it out and fixes it scientist [/q
Pretty rabid response. I wonder if you are willing to respond to my previous question from yesterday?

i was juast wondering about what you hold to be christian and what kind of studies you have had? You said you were a christian for 30 years and serious study for the past 10.

Chancey,
You said:
But this is not a topic about the age of the earth, but rather dinosaurs. There is evidence coming out since 2010 that dinos have soft tissue. In your above post, you say then we should C-14 date those dino bones. Well, believe it or not ID scientists have already sent their specimens off to academic labs known for accurate C-14 dating. Like all labs, they did not need to know what they were dating, they just need the specimen and date it. Well, guess what, the dino bones got a C-14 date! How is that possible if they are 65+ million years old and C-dating only works to about 50K years due to the half life of Carbon?

Two points, 1) Yes, this should be about dinosaurs, a very fascinating subject; however, young earthers always want to use the topic of dinosaurs to justify their earth age ideas. That's where we get derailed.
2) I did not say we should carbon date dino bones; I said we should carbon date the soft tissue. You can't carbon date fossilized bone (rock), but you could carbon date the organic soft tissue, and if it is as the young earthers believe, this soft tissue should yield a date of less than 10,000 years.

It kind of irks me a bit when young earth organizations will quote secular scientists when it supports their particular argument, but then paint them in a sinister light when they don't agree with them.

I'll bet everyone on here believes the science that says O.J. killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

I believe the science that Oj killed Nicole and Ron.
I do not however believe the "science" about climate change and the end of the world.
The one thing that science must rely on is that everything now is the same as even 6000 years ago- ie the rate of carbon decay is a constant. However, a pre-flood world could have had a vastly different rate of decay.

Waggler my friend, you are running yourself in circles with this topic.

I'm pretty certain that the stuff inside the bone has a very high probability of being the same age as the bone itself.

^^^^^^
My point exactly; therfore by using carbon dating on the organic soft tissue you will then know how old the mineralized bone is. Why aren't they carbon dating the soft tissue? Maybe they have??

There was sure signs that dinosaurs were talked about much and walked here with man and then evolved into dragons. If it wasn't true, how could they have made the movie Dragonheart ? Dragons were real, they was everywhere until they became extinct from over hunting. Wasn't it a flying dragon that Noah sent out to search for land?

It was my carnal side made me post this poke the bear Chancey.
Your posts are always respectful and edifying to believers (as we are called to be), yet engaging and thoughtful. Which is called debate, argument, or apologetics... all of which Neo-atheists consider babble and proselytizing but then again modernists consider any poke of their bear to be an affront to their faith in whatever they believe in. So they mock and scoff as mockers and scoffers have done since the time when Adam and the women made from his rib set their own course apart from fellowship with their Creator.

Oh, and I believe the earth is as old as the Bible records, formed in days we don't know the duration of (I affirm literal days),
and that Christians do the world no good when Christians do the things of the world such as "presupposition."
So we turn to God's Word for clarity...
not to make our name great to the world by shouting that we know something but rather that we are falling in love further with the someone Who's name is above all names!

So, as scientists and theologians debate the age of the earth we know there are 75 clearly defined generations listed in the Bible - from Adam to Jesus - helping us KNOW that Jesus was of human descent from the seed of David through Mary (Eli was her progeny in the physician's recording in Luke 3:23) and that Jesus is the Seed of the Woman written of/prophesied in Genesis 3:15. The Savior who fulfilled the 500 prophecies and Law of the Old Testament prophets.
THAT is the narrative plot of the ENTIRE biblical story and so when we debate how old creation is, we must not miss WHO created it. And WHY!
For God's Glory, not ours.

So as a scientist and theologian, academically trained in both 40 years apart, me and mine will keep our focus on what happened to a 33 year old on a cross on May 13, @ 3:00 PM, 33 AD when He said "It is finished." The Greek word written by the Apostle John in 19:30 to describe the crucifixion scene was tetelestai, which was written in the Greek passive voice, meaning the action was done TO JESUS.
By who? Well, 700 years before the crucifixion on May 13, 33 AD, the prophet Isaiah wrote of this suffering servant and all that would occur.

And all of this is the story of how much God loves those who He makes.
It's foolishness to the unbeliever because who would send their son to die for sinners? I wouldn't. Would anyone on this forum arguing about how long ago dinosaurs roamed?
If it's thousands or millions of years, does it really matter to a family sitting in the PICU with their child?
Or to the family trying to figure out how to deal with an abusive member?
Or to the family so addicted to their mobile devices they don't even know each other?

I know God is slow to anger, long suffering, and abounding in love because their hasn't been another flood to start over.... and over..... and over again.
Like I/you/us deserve just about every day.

I like dinosaurs. I had plastic ones as a kid and I play with some still with the grand kiddos.
How old the real ones or the plastic ones are, I DO NOT care, because the real joy is in front of me when I have my grand kiddos to play alongside, all the while knowing how all this is held together.

Blessings brother!
Mark

I've always thought the creation story, including the dino's, was about who created the earth. Without belief in the Creator there's no belief in the Son of the Creator. As for the ark, man has the ability to carry both male and female of every species in something I would figure as small as a briefcase, why then would God not have the ability to do the same on a ark?

For the last week I've been digging a water pit. We are down about 50 feet and finding fossils. I've found see shells pressed into rock and found some leaves which I assume is seaweed. What I find hard to beleive is that there's 50 feet of overburden on top. Lots of power in the glaciers move that move that much much dirt. Climate is real but it is a natural occurrence.