Author Topic: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago  (Read 13045 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« on: August 08, 2014, 08:13:42 am »
True science is a process... continuous curiosity, discovery, debate.

A recent archaeological discovery that throws a wrench into the conventional theory of evolution has reportedly cost a California professor his job. Mark Armitage, a former scientist at California State University, Northridge (CSUN), was reportedly fired after claiming to have unearthed a dinosaur fossil that still contains soft, flexible tissue, suggesting that it can't be millions of years old.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/046315_dinosaur_fossils_soft_tissue_wrongful_termination.html#ixzz39krGqaZU


T. Rex Soft Tissue Found Preserved
Hillary Mayell
for National Geographic News
March 24, 2005

A Tyrannosaurus rex fossil has yielded what appear to be the only preserved soft tissues ever recovered from a dinosaur. Taken from a 70-million-year-old thighbone, the structures look like the blood vessels, cells, and proteins involved in bone formation.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0324_050324_trexsofttissue.html
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline Iguana

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2014, 02:39:39 pm »
I read both articles. I don't see why it would challenge the evolution theory. In the National Geographic article, one of the discoverers says "Finding these tissues in dinosaurs changes the way we think about fossilization, because our theories of how fossils are preserved don't allow for this [soft-tissue preservation]".
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline eveheart

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,315
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #2 on: August 08, 2014, 03:17:53 pm »
A recent archaeological discovery that throws a wrench into the conventional theory of evolution has reportedly cost a California professor his job. Mark Armitage, a former scientist at California State University, Northridge (CSUN), was reportedly fired after claiming to have unearthed a dinosaur fossil that still contains soft, flexible tissue, suggesting that it can't be millions of years old.

GS, who is suggesting that this soft tissue discovery is "throwing a wrench" into the conventional theory of evolution? That "wrench" has been flying for many decades.

Basically, Creationists believe dinosaurs are thousands, not millions, of years old, so that their existence starts with the Abrahamic Bible's date of creation and ends with the Flood. Creationist scientists challenge the standard method of carbon-dating by coming up with their own calibration of carbon-dating so that every find fits in with Biblical dates. Everything, including the rocks of our Earth, are re-calibrated to fit a creation event around 7,000 years ago.

Of course, there is no paleolithic era in the Creationist's view.
"I intend to live forever; so far, so good." -Steven Wright, comedian

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #3 on: August 08, 2014, 06:22:48 pm »
What I understand from the new evidence of soft tissue being preserved is there are possibilities:

- the process of fossilization may have to be rethought.
- the assumed dinosaur dates of hundreds millions of years ago may have to be rethought.
- the entire dating scheme may have to be rethought.
- Why should those fossils with soft tissue be hundreds of millions years old?  How about tens of millions?  Or just millions?  How about hundreds of thousands?  How about tens of thousands?

Many, many things come to mind.
Firing fellow scientists who may question the hundreds of millions of years mantra shows narrow mindedness in what should be respectable scientists who they themselves turn out to be hundreds of millions of years ago dogmatic nuts themselves.

To be scientific is to continuously be amazed and to question things in the light of new evidence.

How about a reaction of "Holy shit... we've got soft tissue... freaking amazing!"


« Last Edit: August 08, 2014, 06:35:30 pm by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline Iguana

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2014, 06:35:23 pm »
I agree with that.

Now, has he been really fired? That media says "Mark Armitage, a former scientist at California State University, Northridge (CSUN), was reportedly fired", so it would need some further confirmation because it is rather astounding.

Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2014, 06:43:08 pm »
Seems Mark Armitage was fired.

And this is a blog post that supports his firing.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongods/2014/07/28/mark-armitage-creationism-and-bad-science/

And this writer's belief shows how dogmatic he also is, witness:
"To my knowledge it is impossible to become a doctor if you subscribe to Land’s Theory rather than Pasteur." (germ theory only)

Note the use of the word "impossible"... and that all doctors MUST be dogmatic followers of the "germ theory".


Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline Iguana

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2014, 06:50:13 pm »
Ah, but according to the blog you linked, "Mark wasn’t fired because he discovered something that was challenging evolution.

He was fired because he showed a completely lack of intellectual honesty and was misrepresenting discoveries in order to make a personal profit as a speaker of creationism."
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2014, 06:57:15 pm »
Yes, that is what the side of the firer is saying.

It may be up to the court to decide who is right.

Maybe we can go back to the science.

The allegation that C14 dating says 22k - 39k years ago?

The defenders of Mark shows evidences of why they think the datings should be questioned:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/expelled/mark-armitage-possibily-the-latest-victim-of-darwinist-inquisition/

http://www.uncommondescent.com/news/cocktail-c14-dna-collagen-in-dinosaurs-indicates-geological-timescales-are-false/

http://www.uncommondescent.com/creationism/cocktail-falsifying-darwinism-via-falsifying-the-geological-column/

I love debates like these.  It is science vs science.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2014, 09:45:31 pm by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline eveheart

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,315
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #8 on: August 08, 2014, 10:36:36 pm »
I love debates like these.  It is science vs science.

This particular debate is not science vs science, it's science vs one particular religion, the same religion that said the Earth was the center of the universe.
"I intend to live forever; so far, so good." -Steven Wright, comedian

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #9 on: August 08, 2014, 11:16:16 pm »
i can filter out the dogmas from both camps.
They show great science.
Read the links.
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue CONFIRMED: VIDEOS: Mary H. Schweitzer !!!
« Reply #10 on: August 09, 2014, 10:14:02 pm »
scientific community attack and deny dinosaur soft tissue and blood vessels findings

soft tissue in dino fossils-nothing in science can allow this to be millions of years old

Modern Science Challenged Dinosaur Soft Tissue Discovered

Here you have it guys and gals.

Soft tissue confirmed in 2009.

See for yourself.

Now to dig up some more information what has transpired and what else they have discovered and studied.

July 21, 2014
http://biologos.org/blog/not-so-dry-bones-an-interview-with-mary-schweitzer

Stories by Mary H. Schweitzer in Scientific American
http://www.scientificamerican.com/author/mary-h-schweitzer/

--- FUNNY COMMENT ---

Hal Jordan
3 months ago
 
"if she said the truth,
that dinos are not millions of yrs old,
her career would be over,
they lie & are paid well for it,
if they found 1 living they would say
wow dinos have life spans of 65,000,000 yrs amazing!
what a joke?"


----- Great Comment ---------

Charlie Panosh
1 year ago
 
If the hard evidence shows what "can't be" then, obviously, the presumptions prior to observing the evidence are flawed. Good science is willing to throw out assumptions which don't fit the evidence - not throw away the evidence which doesn't fit the assumptions. As for this T-Rex, it must not have been millions of years old. Fossilization can take place very rapidly. Look what happened after Mt. St. Helens less than 30 years ago.

-----

My own personal take on this proven to be true of dino soft tissues... dinos are NOT THAT OLD as current palaeontology postulates.

This chart is WRONG.  Needs to be re-thought.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2014, 11:03:22 pm by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, Skin, Last Meal Video + Mummified!
« Reply #11 on: August 09, 2014, 11:13:05 pm »
T.R.U.T.H. about the Dinosaurs: Soft Tissue

T.R.U.T.H. about the Dinosaurs: Soft Tissue

Dino with SKIN mummified!

Dinosaur with skin discovered

67 million years old? He he he.
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Dinosaurs Still Alive in African Jungle Today

(Short Video)

Full video 45 min here: http://youtu.be/6q-mqnuD4qw

Published on Aug 28, 2012

All of the Dinosaurs may not have been wiped out . . .

Among this vast wilderness, much of it unexplored, some believe there could be a monster that is a living relic, deep in the jungle. This huge creature is said to prowl the land, and lurk beneath inland waters. The natives call it Mukele Umbembe - One that stops the flow of rivers. It is a creature with a long neck and a snake like head. They say it has a body as big as an elephant with four legs, claw like feet and a long tail. - Most of these accounts suggest it is a semi-equatic animal, that spends most of its time in the rivers that run through the jungle. Could it be true?

----

I am more willing to believe in the villagers and the scientists who went physically on the FIELD than that desk bound sceptic in the end of the video.

Science is exciting when you keep learning something new!  All new to me!

Happy to share it with all you guys and gals!
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline Iguana

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #13 on: August 09, 2014, 11:48:26 pm »
Yes, Edwin, I did read the interview (quotes below) and had a look at the articles on Scientific American. I skipped the videos, it's too time consuming and I prefer to read. Yes, it's interesting, but then what? Even if not all dinos died 65 millions years ago and some perhaps survived until recently, what’s the matter? It doesn’t invalidates at all the evolution theory, as far as I can see.

As she says rightly: “So, that leaves us with two alternatives for interpretation: either the dinosaurs aren’t as old as we think they are, or maybe we don’t know exactly how these things get preserved. We’ve known for a while that skin gets preserved. It’s the same with anything controversial—for example, it was decades ago now that somebody first proposed that continents move, and everybody laughed and said that shouldn’t be possible. Nowadays if you say that isn’t true you’d be a laughingstock. DNA, too—nobody wanted to believe that DNA was the carrier of biological information because it’s too simple a molecule.”

Quote
Not So Dry Bones: An interview with Mary Schweitzer
http://biologos.org/blog/not-so-dry-bones-an-interview-with-mary-schweitzer
One thing that does bother me, though, is that young earth creationists take my research and use it for their own message, and I think they are misleading people about it. Pastors and evangelists, who are in a position of leadership, are doubly responsible for checking facts and getting things right, but they have misquoted me and misrepresented the data. They’re looking at this research in terms of a false dichotomy [science versus faith] and that doesn’t do anybody any favors. Still, it’s not surprising they’ve reacted this way—the bone that I first studied I got from Jack, and when I gave him our initial results he was rather angry—I called him a few times and by my third call he said, “Dammit Mary the creationists are just going to love you.” But I said, “This is just what the data say— I’m not making it up.”

… I do go to pretty conservative churches. One time I was visiting a church and the pastor got up and started preaching a sermon about people not being related to apes, and he started talking about this scientist in Montana who discovered red blood cells in dinosaur bones—he didn’t know I was in the audience—and it was my research he was talking about! Unfortunately, he got everything wrong. I just got up and left. I don’t feel that I’m discrediting God with the work I’m doing, I think I am honoring him with the abilities he’s given me.
That last paragraph made my day! So funny!
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #14 on: August 10, 2014, 12:00:03 am »
Yes, Edwin, I did read the interview (quotes below) and had a look at the articles on Scientific American. I skipped the videos, it's too time consuming and I prefer to read. Yes, it's interesting, but then what? Even if not all dinos died 65 millions years ago and some perhaps survived until recently, what’s the matter? It doesn’t invalidates at all the evolution theory, as far as I can see.

I am not about "invalidating" evolution "theory"
I am not religious today.  Never religious ever.

I am about stating the OBVIOUS need to RE-THINK the "assumption" of hundreds of millions of years old.
In the face of ASTOUNDING EVIDENCE.

This chart is WRONG.  Needs to be re-thought.


Back to the drawing board!

« Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 12:05:28 am by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue - T-Rex BLOOD CELLS - Pro Video BBC 2013
« Reply #15 on: August 10, 2014, 12:02:32 am »
Dr Mary Schweitzer discovers T-rex blood cells - Horizon: Dinosaurs: The Hunt for Life - BBC Two

FULL VIDEO HERE: BBC Horizon - Dinosaurs: The Hunt for Life (2013)

Preview:

Dr Mary Schweitzer discovers T-rex blood cells - Horizon: Dinosaurs: The Hunt for Life - BBC Two

Published on Aug 22, 2013

More about this programme http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b039grrx Mary's first discovery, what looked like the blood cells of a 68 million year old T-rex.

2013-2014

Duration: 1 hour

The hunt for life within the long-dead bones of dinosaurs may sound like the stuff of Hollywood fantasy - but one woman has found traces of life within the fossilised bones of a T Rex.

Dr Mary Schweitzer has seen the remains of red blood cells and touched the soft tissue of an animal that died 68 million years ago. Most excitingly of all, she believes she may just have found signs of DNA. Her work is revolutionising our understanding of these iconic beasts.

Wooo hoooo....

Stop being obsessed against the creationists!

Aren't you guys excited about these NEW SCIENTIFIC discoveries?

I know I am excited!  You should be too!
« Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 12:13:09 am by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue - All Dinos had Feathers?
« Reply #16 on: August 10, 2014, 01:38:24 am »
In the movie above, Dr. Mary Schweitzer compares t-rex arms to ostrich arms with feathers.

- she finds out her specimen is a female t-rex and it was pregnant.
- she extracts proteins
- she extracts red blood cells
- she extracts some dna

sequencing of dna yet to be done

she is looking for better fossils in the gobi desert.

----------

A new find in Siberia raises the possibility that all dinosaurs had feathers, not just the later ones that scientists think ultimately evolved into birds.

http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-07-25/was-t-rex-actually-pink-and-covered-feathers

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/07/140724-feathered-siberia-dinosaur-scales-science/

----------

I am so excited about these videos.  I'm like a kid again immersed in SCIENCE PORN!

It is past 1:30am and I just have to sleep.

Good night everyone!
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline eveheart

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,315
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #17 on: August 10, 2014, 02:31:57 am »
Stop being obsessed against the creationists!

The basic Creationist premise is that the physical world was created less than 10,000 years ago, and that the account creation and human generations in the Abrahamic Bible is the underlying fact to be used to date all natural phenomena. It's not a matter of "obsession" to reject that premise, as most scientists and religious communities do. I consider Creationist science to be a weak attempt to make the evidence fit the conclusion.

In the movie above, Dr. Mary Schweitzer compares t-rex arms to ostrich arms with feathers. ... A new find in Siberia raises the possibility that all dinosaurs had feathers, not just the later ones that scientists think ultimately evolved into birds.

Do your homework, GS - or find a better source for "revelatory" information. The comparison between the structure of dinosaur arms and bird wings can be found in any elementary biology textbook.

"I intend to live forever; so far, so good." -Steven Wright, comedian

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #18 on: August 10, 2014, 07:09:02 am »
What I meant was for all of you guys and gals to stop thinking of me as some creationist nut.  Of which I will never be and never have been.  This is why I make clear that I was never religious ever in my life.  Seems I was born with zero religious tendencies.

The theory I favor is QUANTAVOLUTION. Which I see as a more logical "evolution".

And I still say the entire dating of fossils need to be RE-THOUGHT.

As far as my homework on the t-rex arms and ostrich arms with the feathers... that was something Dr Mary Schweitzer doing her homework as is being presented in the FULL SHOW of the movie above: BBC Horizon - Dinosaurs: The Hunt for Life (2013)

So come on you guys... who has been watching these videos?  Are you feeling the SCIENCE PORN yet?

All this is hard core evidence based science, the world of palaeontology in a REVOLUTION.

And it is so funny, the likes of Dr. Mary will hold sternly (publicly) in the "belief" about that 65 million years ago ++ old assumption because if you want your funding and recognition kept intact, you must toe the line.

Well ha ha.  Revolution is HERE.  Science PROGRESS.  See how her initial discovery some 7+ years ago to today 2014 has progressed.

Seems it was Dr. Mary who was responsible for all this DINOS are BIRDS revolution.

Next for Dr. Mary is getting new and better fossils in a manner to be able to extract more soft tissue and sequence DNA.

And Dr. Mary is setting the TREND for other scientists to do so.  This movie is MAINSTREAM MEDIA...  BBC high class production.

Jurassic Park the movie for REAL in the future!

Ahhhh... SCIENCE PORN. 

I just woke up.... good morning!
 
« Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 07:34:37 am by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline cherimoya_kid

  • One who bans trolls
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,513
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, C14 is 22k - 39k years ago
« Reply #19 on: August 10, 2014, 08:28:15 am »
*sigh* ROFL

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils Have Soft Tissue, Red Blood Cells, DNA... Watch the Videos!
« Reply #20 on: August 10, 2014, 11:22:34 pm »
I skipped the videos, it's too time consuming and I prefer to read.

All you who read this thread SHOULD WATCH the VIDEOS...
... guaranteed to give you SCIENCE GEEK ORGASMS if you haven't come across the new discoveries in the dinosaur world. (2005 to 2014 discoveries)
... reading mere typed text in this topic will never suffice. never suffice.
... if you have not watched the videos above, then you cannot be involved in any relevant conversation in this topic.
... the videos are THAT important.  So you go find the time to watch them.  So worth it.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 11:38:49 pm by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
PALEO GROUP
Searching for a better understanding of earths history

DINOSAUR BLOOD

SUMMARY

    Dinosaur blood, collagen, and soft tissue material has been found in increasing frequency inside dinosaur bones. This should lead to the conclusion that dinosaur bones are not that old. The unreasonable assumption that all dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago has blinded most scientists to the fact that some dinosaur bones are relatively recent within the span of human existence.


The Paleo Group has a keen interest in anomalies of science. They often mark the beginnings of some new phase of discovery in science.

Scientists recently broke open a dinosaur bone by mistake and discovered soft tissue, blood cells collagen and vessels inside the bone. They have also used acid on dinosaur bone and after dissolving the hard material they are left with this soft tissue material. This experiment was repeated many times to be sure the effect and results were real and repeatable. This anomaly was discovered by the world famous paleontologist Jack Horner and his associates.The recent discovery of blood inside dinosaur bone is such an anomaly.  There should be NO collagen or soft tissue left after 30,000 to 100,000 years let alone millions of years!

After all if dinosaur bones are 65 million years old there is no way that blood could survive that long without decomposing into smaller molecules. If you look in all the science literature you will never find any scientist who believes that soft tissue or blood vessels could survive more than 10 to 100 thousand years. Think of all the years of heat and cold in the ground and all the exposure to cosmic rays. There is no way blood can survive that long. The most obvious conclusion then is that for this particular bone it is not 65 million years old.   

During the recent "60 minutes" T.V. program of November 15,2009, the scientists admitted they were shocked that soft tissue and blood vessels could survive 65 million years. Not once did they ever consider that the bones were NOT 65 million years old. If they were good logical scientists they would then raise the question: Perhaps this bone is not 65 million years old after all?  If that is possible what other test could be run to determine the age of the soft tissues? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to think: What about radiocarbon (RC) dating of the soft material or collagen? This would be an independent way of determining the age of the tissues and raise serious questions about the age of the strata.  What you could determine with radiocarbon dating is that when you find no radiocarbon present you have proven that the material is older than 80 thousand years old. However if you find any radiocarbon present then we must conclude that the soft tissue is only thousands of years old! Perhaps that particular bone is not 65 million years old. Perhaps the postulate "that the bone came from a 65 million year old strata and therefore it must be that old" is also wrong. Since we at the Paleo Group have no sacred dogma to defend, we will plan to carbon date some of that soft material. We challenge other scientists to do the same including collagen and bio-apatite and let the chips fall where they may!   We therefore say: Date the fossils, NoT the rocks!

In addition we of the Paleo Group have already taken dinosaur bones and sent them to a licensed lab where they were pretreated in the proper method as outlined by the Radiocarbon journal and the various carbon dating labs. Then the bones were dated by the Accelerated Mass Spectrometry method. These tests run on numerous samples have confirmed that those dinosaur bones are less than 50,000 years old - not 65 million years old.  Refer to the link Carbon 14 Dating for the results.  (refer to our page for the results.) Carbon 14 Dating. Presently we have tested bone collagen, bone apatite(CaCo3) and total organics but not any soft tissues.

Further information on this subject is from the July 2009 ScienceDaily publication intitled Reexamination Of T. Rex Verifies Disputed Biochemical Remains ScienceDaily (July 31, 2009)

    — A new analysis of the remains of a Tyrannosaurus rex (T. rex) that roamed Earth 68 million years ago has confirmed traces of protein from blood and bone, tendons, or cartilage. The findings, scheduled for publication in the Sept. 4 issue of the Journal of Proteome Research, is the latest addition to an ongoing controversy over which biochemical remnants can be detected in the dinosaur.

    In the study, Marshall Bern, Brett S. Phinney and David Goldberg point out that the first analysis in 2007 of a well-preserved, fossilized T. rex bone identified traces of seven distinct protein fragments, or peptides, from collagen. That material is one of the primary components of bone, tendons and other connective tissue. However, later studies disputed that finding, suggesting that it was a statistical fluke or the result of contamination from another laboratory sample. The scientists describe reanalysis of the T. rex data and also report finding evidence of substances found in collagen. "In summary, we find nothing obviously wrong with the Tyrannosaurus rex [analysis from 2007]," the report states. "The identified peptides seem consistent with a sample containing old, quite possibly very ancient, bird-like bone, contaminated with only fairly explicable proteins. Hemoglobin and collagen are plausible proteins to find in fossil bone, because they are two of the most abundant proteins in bone and bone marrow."

Further information on this subject comes from a new article in Scientific American of December 2010 page 62. apparently the controversy has been laid to rest. There is definitely soft tissue blood cells and organic matter in some dinosaur bones. Many bones from different locations have been found and tested and there is no longer any controversy. dinosaur blood and tissue from Scientific American article of 2010

http://www.dinosaurc14ages.com/dinoblood.htm

True Science Marches On! Revolution! Scientific evidence trumps old assumptions!
« Last Edit: August 11, 2014, 10:41:14 am by goodsamaritan »
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Massive Dinosaur Soft Tissue Discovery In China – Includes Skin And Feathers!
By Michael Snyder, on March 6th, 2014

A fossil bed in China that is being called “Jurassic Park” has yielded perhaps the greatest dinosaur soft tissue discovery of all time.  According to media reports, “nearly-complete skeletons” have been discovered that even include skin and feathers.  But of course if these dinosaurs are really “160 million years old”, that should be absolutely impossible.  Needless to say, this shocking discovery is once again going to have paleontologists scrambling to find a way to prop up the popular myths that they have been promoting.  What they have been telling us simply does not fit the facts.  The truth is that this latest find is even more evidence that dinosaurs are far, far younger than we have traditionally been taught.

Once upon a time, scientists believed that it would be impossible to find anything other than the hardened fossilized remains of extinct dinosaurs.  And if those dinosaurs really were millions of years old, those scientists would have been 100% correct.  But instead, we are now starting to find dinosaur soft tissue all over the place.  The following is an excerpt from a recent Daily Mail article about this new discovery in China…

....

If the dinosaurs were really that old it would be impossible.

But now sample after sample and test after test have proven without a shadow of a doubt that we really are digging up dinosaur soft tissue.

Schweitzer and other paleontologists that are desperate to prop up their existing theories are now suggesting that “iron in the blood” could have preserved the soft tissue that we are finding for all of these millions of years.

If you believe that laughable theory, I have a bridge to sell you...

Source and full report here http://thetruthwins.com/archives/massive-dinosaur-soft-tissue-discovery-in-china-includes-skin-and-feathers
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Feathered everything: just how many dinosaurs had feathers?
« Reply #23 on: August 14, 2014, 10:54:00 am »
Feathered everything: just how many dinosaurs had feathers?

Recent discoveries point to the possibility that a great many, maybe even most, non-avian dinosaurs had feathers or something similar as part of their body covering. Dr Dave Hone

http://www.theguardian.com/science/lost-worlds/2013/jun/10/dinosaurs-fossils



Did T. rex have feathers?



WE DON’T know for sure if Tyrannosaurus rex had feathers, but it's a safe guess that it did. This may sound surprising: the mighty T. rex was covered in feathers? The idea is comical enough to some to be the subject of a viral image (above, via saurian.blogspot.co.uk). The evidence for this is based on a few spectacular fossils of other tyrannosaurs - close cousins of T. rex.

Two different tyrannosaurs, the human-sized Dilong and the nearly T.rex-sized Yutyrannus, have been found covered in feathers. The fossils of these tyrannosaurs come from China. They are among thousands of dinosaur fossils there that have been found sheathed in a coat of feathers.

The first feathered dinosaurs were found about 20 years ago and today these are some of the most famous dinosaur fossils in the world, as well as the clearest proof that birds evolved from dinosaurs.

http://www.walkingwithdinosaurs.com/news/post/did-t-rex-have-feathers/
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,830
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: Dino Fossils - A Velociraptor Without Feathers Isn’t a Velociraptor
« Reply #24 on: August 14, 2014, 11:00:01 am »




    Phenomena:
    March 20, 2013

A Velociraptor Without Feathers Isn’t a Velociraptor
by Brian Switek

Jurassic Park is the greatest dinosaur movie of all time. Aside from being an exceptionally entertaining adventure, the film introduced audiences to dinosaurs that had never been seen before – hybrids of new science and bleeding-edge special effects techniques. The active, alert, and clever dinosaurs that paleontologists had recently pieced together were revived by way of exquisite puppetry and computer imagery, instantly replacing the old images of dinosaurs as swamp-dwelling dullards. Despite the various scientific nitpicks and some artistic license overreach – let’s not talk about the “Spitter” -  Jurassic Park showed how science and cinema could collaborate to create something truly majestic. That’s why it’s so disappointing to hear the the next Jurassic Park sequel is going to turn its back on a critical aspect of dinosaur lives. In Jurassic Park 4, the film’s director has stated, there will be no feathery dinosaurs.

Three years after the first Jurassic Park debuted, paleontologists announced that the small theropod Sinosauropteryx was covered in a fine coat of fuzzy protofeathers. This was just the initial drop in a flood of feathery dinosaur discoveries which confirmed that a wide variety of dinosaurs bore archaic forms of plumage, from simple filaments to asymmetrical feathers that would have allowed them to fly. And not only did these discoveries confirm the fact that birds are one lineage of dinosaurs, but that many bird traits – such as feathers – evolved long before the first avians took to the air.

Velociraptor was definitely a feathery dinosaur, and Tyrannosaurus probably was, as well. In fact, other dinosaurs more distantly-related to birds – such as Triceratops – at least sometimes sported swaths of bristles, quills, or similar body coverings in addition to the pebbly tubercles of their skin. Dinosaurs were far stranger and flashier than anyone expected.

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/20/a-velociraptor-without-feathers-isnt-a-velociraptor/



Progress.  The old Jurassic Park 1 movie needs a serious update.  The latest Jurassic Park 4 will have dinos without feathers.  Disappointing up to date paleontologists.  The public HAS TO KNOW!
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk