Hi komatite,
You wrote:
I have zero knowledge of the work of putting together the skeletons that we see in museums, however...
You do realize, I hope, that fossils are not the same as finding bones. We don't generally 'construct' fossils. We can certainly make what appear to be fossils by taking an object and encasing it in plaster or concrete of some kind and then removing the object after the material has set.
The very fact that we have any such evidence as bones would belie some hundred thousand or million year old age for such things. Bones are organic and, as the Lord proclaims, ashes to ashes and dust to dust they become. If the actual bones that we find are intact at all, it would generally mean that they are likely only a few thousand years old and not millions. Here's a copy of a statement from 'scienceabc.com':
In humid conditions, bones might be broken down in a matter of a decade or so, but in a dry climate, it could take thousands of years! Bones do decay, just at a slower rate than other types of organic material and tissue.
Now, there are a few explanations that are given as to why we find bones if the age of the dinosaurs is expected to be many hundreds of thousands or millions of years ago. But there isn't any proof that such explanations actually do explain why we have bones around today. We don't have any way of putting a bone in the conditions that are prescribed and then waiting thousands or millions of years to see if they do, in fact, not decay over such long periods of time. Again, such explanations are based on assumptions that haven't actually been proven to be true.
Fossils, of course, will last much, much longer, but the requirements for an organic matter to become fossilized match better with the biblical account of the flood than any other known event. The flood, as far as we know, is the only event that occurred so rapidly, within a few days, to have entombed animals in a manner that would create fossils from their forms. Here's a statement concerning that process:
The most common process of fossilization happens when an animal
is buried by sediment, such as sand or silt, shortly after it dies. Its
bones are protected from rotting by layers of sediment.
Generally, an animal dies in the wild and its skin, muscles and bones fairly quickly become dust. This is evidenced by the fact that our forests are not filled with skeletal remains. An animal must die and be very quickly covered for the fossilization process to work. So, just the fact that dinosaurs lived in South Dakota doesn't explain the ages that scientists are prone to date such evidences as their bones being found, generally in a dig of some kind. However, the area of land that we now know as South Dakota, being covered rapidly with the enormous amounts of silt awash in the waters of the flood does offer a much more plausible explanation.
Some say that glacial movement may explain the phenomenon, but there isn't any verified proof that South Dakota was ever covered by glaciers or that they grew or moved fast enough to have covered up a bunch of animals alive. Thereby entombing them. I believe, and yes I know this stands in direct contradiction to what 'science' tells us, that what we think we know about glaciers isn't as truthful as the reality of such masses.
If the earth is the age that God's word seems to pretty clearly indicate, then there haven't ever been glaciers that covered much more of the earth than they have since we've known about them. Science will tell us otherwise, but again, I'm not so confident of the wisdom of men as I am the wisdom and word of God.
Here's some further interesting reading on the subject:
https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching-content/unearthing-dinosaur-bones-and-fossils/
God bless,
In Christ, ted
Only a true believer in Jesus can give proper credit where it's do and glorify God for His creation. Secular man only glorifies evolution and the creation, and not the Creator, and only turns mankind away from the Bible and the Creator. (Romans 1:18-25)
