T-Rex bone discovery supports a young earth

  • Thread starter Thread starter jessejames
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Karl Keating:
This thread began with this claim:

“According to an article published in last month’s Science magazine, in 2003 scientists found a Tyrannosaurus Rex thigh bone during an archaeological dig. The research team had to break the bone in pieces in order to fit it into a helicopter, and when they did so, they discovered the fossil contained well-preserved soft tissues, including blood vessels.”

The article in “Science” said that the bone was 107 cm. long. That’s only 42 inches. If the bone had to be broken to fit into a helicopter, then the helicopter was not a Robinson 22 (most popular two-seater). It must have been one of those radio-controlled models you can buy through hobby stores.
wow
thats awesome!

Three sixteen, I wonder if you are being serious or if you created this name to start trouble?
 
Purgatory is kind of a combination of theistic evolutionists, creationists, and maybe a few atheists like Alec.
lol good one Groundhog Phil ill give you a brownie point for humor. but it looks like i’ll have to research all your sites before i can respond. so gimme some research time.

cheers,

three-sixteen
 
by the way, OMG!!! was that Karl Keating the author of one of my favorite books, Catholicism & Fundamentalism?

if that is the same guy this is unreal to be on the same thread with him. He is one of the best Catholic Defenders around, and one of my heroes.
 
40.png
PhilVaz:
There is no credible scientific evidence for a young earth, and no credible scientific evidence against macroevolution. The Catholic Church has confirmed the science from Pius XII, to John Paul II, to Benedict XVI. See Catechism 159, 283-284.
Phil P
Phil, I have no idea where you find the patience:

As you know I’ve given up science, 'cos the moon dust argument was just too good for me, and taken up flower arranging. You deserve these:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Alec
evolutionpages.com
 
Karl Keating:
This thread began with this claim:

“According to an article published in last month’s Science magazine, in 2003 scientists found a Tyrannosaurus Rex thigh bone during an archaeological dig. The research team had to break the bone in pieces in order to fit it into a helicopter, and when they did so, they discovered the fossil contained well-preserved soft tissues, including blood vessels.”

The article in “Science” said that the bone was 107 cm. long. That’s only 42 inches. If the bone had to be broken to fit into a helicopter, then the helicopter was not a Robinson 22 (most popular two-seater). It must have been one of those radio-controlled models you can buy through hobby stores.
I am now slapping myself on the forehead. I should have figured this out for myself. If the scientists couldn’t fit a 42" length piece of bone in the helicopter, then none of the scientist, themselves, could fit into the heliocopter either.

Even without working out the conversion from cm to inches, it doesn’t make sense that scientists would break an ancient fossil. These things are worth a lot of money. Besides why wouldn’t they have just transported it over land?
 
40.png
deb1:
KarlKeating:
This thread began with this claim:
“According to an article published in last month’s Science magazine, in 2003 scientists found a Tyrannosaurus Rex thigh bone during an archaeological dig. The research team had to break the bone in pieces in order to fit it into a helicopter, and when they did so, they discovered the fossil contained well-preserved soft tissues, including blood vessels.”

The article in “Science” said that the bone was 107 cm. long. That’s only 42 inches. If the bone had to be broken to fit into a helicopter, then the helicopter was not a Robinson 22 (most popular two-seater). It must have been one of those radio-controlled models you can buy through hobby stores.
I am now slapping myself on the forehead. I should have figured this out for myself. If the scientists couldn’t fit a 42" length piece of bone in the helicopter, then none of the scientist, themselves, could fit into the heliocopter either.

Even without working out the conversion from cm to inches, it doesn’t make sense that scientists would break an ancient fossil. These things are worth a lot of money. Besides why wouldn’t they have just transported it over land?
No, it’s not just the length. The bone is encased in plaster and a wooden frame for transportation and the (sensible) reports, for example from New Scientist, suggest that the whole thing was too heavy for the chopper. It couldn’t go overland because the Hell Creek formation is very remote. When the bone was divided for transportation a few small samples were taken from inside for Schweitzer.

Alec
evolutionpages.com
 
It appears to me wildflowers always bloom in every post I read. May God continue to bless mankind with cheerful thoughts as we contemplate what came before us and what lies ahead. 🙂
 


I’m starving to death! Bring me the creationists! 😃 A thigh will do. It’s been eons since I’ve had a good old belch! 😛
 
40.png
hecd2:
Phil, I have no idea where you find the patience:

…Alec
I don’t know where either of you find the patience

keep up the good fight against the darknees misunderstanding 👍
 
On this who Evolution theory…
What if perception of God’s time is way off? I mean what if God’s 7 days is much much different than what we consider 7 Days?

I hope I make sense.
 
40.png
hecd2:
No, it’s not just the length. The bone is encased in plaster and a wooden frame for transportation and the (sensible) reports, for example from New Scientist, suggest that the whole thing was too heavy for the chopper. It couldn’t go overland because the Hell Creek formation is very remote. When the bone was divided for transportation a few small samples were taken from inside for Schweitzer.

Alec
evolutionpages.com
Only complimenting what Alec has already validated. 🙂

msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683

Be sure to watch the free video • T. rex discovery
It’s incrediable! North Carolina State University’s Mary Schweitzer, who was part of the team that found the Tyrannosaurus rex cells, talks to MSNBC-TV’s Monica Crowley and Ron Reagan.
 
40.png
jessejames:
On Bob Sungenis’ web site he has this news story posted. Does soft tissue really support a young earth? (AgapePress) - The president of Answers in Genesis says the recent discovery of a dinosaur bone in Montana supports the biblical creationist theory of a young Earth.

According to an article published in last month’s Science magazine, in 2003 scientists found a Tyrannosaurus Rex thigh bone during an archaeological dig. Top
The discovery date of the Tyrannosaurus Rex was March 2005. 🙂 You may wish to convey that to Bob if he has it on his website.
 
40.png
wildleafblower:
The discovery date of the Tyrannosaurus Rex was March 2005. 🙂 You may wish to convey that to Bob if he has it on his website.
No, not quite. The publication date of the Schweitzer et al paper in Science was March 2005. The specimen was excavated from the Hell Creek Formation in 2003.

Alec
evolutionpages.com
 
40.png
hecd2:
No, not quite. The publication date of the Schweitzer et al paper in Science was March 2005. The specimen was excavated from the Hell Creek Formation in 2003.

Alec
evolutionpages.com
Help! I can’t confirm the excavation date 2003 in my research on the net. You must be getting the date from a peer-reviewed journal I don’t have access to. The Internet isn’t providing me with accurate information. Conflicting years. I hate it when this happens. What’s your source? Why did it take two years for the publication of Schweitzer’s paper? Thanks.
 
40.png
wildleafblower:
… Why did it take two years for the publication of Schweitzer’s paper? Thanks.
Magazines would generally need many months lead time to get the papers peer reviewed and editied.

I would think that field activites are planned far in advance so that you just don’t pack up the minute that something is found. You wait until the digging season is over and then you go back to the lab and do the actual work.

so if digging season ended Fall 2003 and the submital deadline for papers was late 2004 (?) that seems like a faily short time frame.
 
40.png
three-sixteen:
by the way, OMG!!! was that Karl Keating the author of one of my favorite books, Catholicism & Fundamentalism?

if that is the same guy this is unreal to be on the same thread with him. He is one of the best Catholic Defenders around, and one of my heroes.
I see that three-sixteen shows the overexuberance of youth. He will get over it. 😉
 
Thanks Steve for the info. 🙂

This is what is confusing me. Look at the year of this article:

**Dig pulls up five T. rex specimens
C-rex could be even bigger than Sue
Oct. 10, 2000 - BBC **

*The discovery of five Tyrannosaurus rex skeletons during a single summer dig in the United States could mean these creatures were more common than previously believed, according to the leader of the project.

One of the huge, carnivorous dinosaurs could also be the largest specimen ever found.

Jack Horner, head of palaeontology at the Museum of the Rockies in Montana, US, described his team’s finds as very unusual.

“On average, a T. rex is discovered once every 10 years,” he told BBC News Online. “To find five in one summer in one area is very surprising.”

Only 20 confirmed T. rex skeletons have been uncovered to date.

Horner, who acted as adviser to Steven Spielberg on the Jurassic Park films, is not willing to be drawn into immediate conclusions about the scientific significance of the discoveries.

Dinosaur evolution

But he concedes that it might mean the huge beasts were more common than previously believed.

The remains were found between June and September this year in the Fort Peck Reservoir area of Hell Creek, Montana. The area is a famous dinosaur hunting ground.

It has rocks that cross what is known as the K-T boundary, the layer where dinosaurs vanish from the geological record about 65 million years ago.

Horner and his team are involved in a five-year survey of the dinosaurs, mammals, invertebrates and fossil plants found in the region.

But they deliberately set out to look for creatures that lived long before the mass extinction - well below the K-T boundary.

Largest ever

“Most people have been interested in the extinction of dinosaurs, but I’m more interested in how they lived and evolved,” he said.

Most of the Tyrannosaurus remains have not yet been fully uncovered. Parts of three skeletons and most of a fourth have been removed so far. The rest will be extracted next summer.

There is great excitement about one of the specimens in particular. This was discovered by Horner’s wife, Celeste, in July.

The skeleton is only partially intact, but the jaw and a few cervical ribs removed late in the digging season seem to indicate that C-rex (as it has been dubbed) could be the largest T. rex ever found - bigger even than Sue, which drew huge crowds to the Field Museum in Chicago when it was put on full public display for the first time in May. *

crystalinks.com/dinosaurs2.html
Is the T-Rex bone in our current topic of discussion one of the bones mentioned in the article? If so, then the date of excavation appears to be between June and September 2000 or in the summer of 2001.

I’m not trying to be a pest or contrary, I’m curious. thx
 
40.png
hecd2:
Well I think Homo erectus would be more accurately described as an agnostic. It’s true that humanity has been going through a temporary theistic hiccup for the last 50,000 years but we’re beginning to get over it. 😃

Alec
evolutionpages.com
😃 Hey, you’re messing up my revelation, Alec! 😃

Karl, I understand you’re the head honcho of Catholic.com. How about giving your in-house scientists like Alec their very own Science Forum before they fade away. Pretty please. I’m sure he’ll bring in his pals from around the world. Membership will double within six months! 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top