DNA and dinosaurs

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,268
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,030.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
I'm not YEC. I believe in an old earth. I believe that the creation that now exists was God's second after destroying the first. However, I also find the ages quoted by evolutionists to be implausible. One of the concepts dear to evolutionists is that dinosaur fossils show great age. Since dinosaurs are old, the rocks adjacent must be old too. So, the evolutionist uses one unproveable age to "prove" another.

This theory has now proven to be fallacious. DNA, which decays rapidly, has been found in dinosaur fossils. This shakes the very foundation of Darwinian evolution. No longer can evolutionists point to hundreds of millions of years for creatures to evolve. Of course, they can. There is no limit to the mental gymnastics that evolutionists employ. The following link describes the dilemma facing evolutionists.

Incontrovertible Dinosaur DNA Reported – CEH
 

Jeshu

Bought by His Blood
Supporter
Mar 25, 2005
15,422
7,571
63
One of the Greatest Places on Earth.
✟600,188.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm not YEC. I believe in an old earth. I believe that the creation that now exists was God's second after destroying the first. However, I also find the ages quoted by evolutionists to be implausible. One of the concepts dear to evolutionists is that dinosaur fossils show great age. Since dinosaurs are old, the rocks adjacent must be old too. So, the evolutionist uses one unproveable age to "prove" another.

This theory has now proven to be fallacious. DNA, which decays rapidly, has been found in dinosaur fossils. This shakes the very foundation of Darwinian evolution. No longer can evolutionists point to hundreds of millions of years for creatures to evolve. Of course, they can. There is no limit to the mental gymnastics that evolutionists employ. The following link describes the dilemma facing evolutionists.

Incontrovertible Dinosaur DNA Reported – CEH

The Word knows dinosaurs, as you can see on the picture, they must have been huge, much bigger than a mammoth or elephant.
Job 40:15-18
“Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!

Its tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are close-knit.
Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like rods of iron.


cedar.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,268
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,030.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
The Word knows dinosaurs, as you can see on the picture, they must have been huge, much bigger than a mammoth or elephant.
Job 40:15-18
“Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!
Its tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are close-knit.
Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like rods of iron.

View attachment 306571
Yes, it may well be describing a dinosaur. Dragons are also known in every culture. It would be surprising if they were not real. The "fire breathing" bit could come from methane ignition. It's near impossible for fire to come out of the mouth. Methane burns way hotter than teeth or living tissue could stand. Perhaps there was ignition by static some distance from the creature. Again, we just don't know. Whichever way we look at it, dinosaurs are not 65 million years old. This casts doubt on a wide range of evolutionist dating assumptions.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Jeshu
Upvote 0

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,544.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Dating assumes that time has had a linear rate.

If you plot the ages of the patriarchs you get what is very close to a growth curve.

Maybe time itself has grown, and arrived at the rate we now know.

This would account for apparent age of early life.
 
Upvote 0

Jeshu

Bought by His Blood
Supporter
Mar 25, 2005
15,422
7,571
63
One of the Greatest Places on Earth.
✟600,188.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Dating assumes that time has had a linear rate.

If you plot the ages of the patriarchs you get what is very close to a growth curve.

Maybe time itself has grown, and arrived at the rate we now know.

This would account for apparent age of early life.

Interesting take you got on that.

i once heard someone tell me that God's truth can create the universe, with the world and everything in it, in seven days. Nevertheless this would make the rapidly expanding universe 15 billion years old were the earth end ended up from the original moment it came into being.

i'm not good at maths, so it was above my head, but i thought it was an interesting concept, taking the speed of the expansion into account. Never seen anything like that again, not sure if it is viable or a correct way to understand an old earth creation in seven days, but it was interesting nevertheless.
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,297
57
Michigan
✟166,106.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
I'm not YEC. I believe in an old earth. I believe that the creation that now exists was God's second after destroying the first. However, I also find the ages quoted by evolutionists to be implausible. One of the concepts dear to evolutionists is that dinosaur fossils show great age. Since dinosaurs are old, the rocks adjacent must be old too. So, the evolutionist uses one unproveable age to "prove" another.

This theory has now proven to be fallacious. DNA, which decays rapidly, has been found in dinosaur fossils. This shakes the very foundation of Darwinian evolution. No longer can evolutionists point to hundreds of millions of years for creatures to evolve. Of course, they can. There is no limit to the mental gymnastics that evolutionists employ. The following link describes the dilemma facing evolutionists.

Incontrovertible Dinosaur DNA Reported – CEH
DNA like any molecule needs exposure to a caustic or bonding element to decay. Encapsulation in fossilized bone will prevent this sort of exposure.
Even with exposure DNA has a half life of 521 years - meaning half of the DNA bonds would be broken down 521 years after death, and half of the remaining bonds would be decayed another 521 years after that, and so on. So even without encapsulation all the DNA bonds would not be completely destroyed in bone until after about 6.8 million years.
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,268
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,030.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
DNA like any molecule needs exposure to a caustic or bonding element to decay. Encapsulation in fossilized bone will prevent this sort of exposure.
Even with exposure DNA has a half life of 521 years - meaning half of the DNA bonds would be broken down 521 years after death, and half of the remaining bonds would be decayed another 521 years after that, and so on. So even without encapsulation all the DNA bonds would not be completely destroyed in bone until after about 6.8 million years.
Says who? The people who are deceived about how old everything is? The usual evolutionist games. According to the research I've read, at most DNA can survive for a million years. Now because that no longer fits, the research that was once gospel is suddenly wrong. How convenient.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,216
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟292,947.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm not YEC. I believe in an old earth. I believe that the creation that now exists was God's second after destroying the first. However, I also find the ages quoted by evolutionists to be implausible. One of the concepts dear to evolutionists is that dinosaur fossils show great age. Since dinosaurs are old, the rocks adjacent must be old too. So, the evolutionist uses one unproveable age to "prove" another.

This theory has now proven to be fallacious. DNA, which decays rapidly, has been found in dinosaur fossils. This shakes the very foundation of Darwinian evolution. No longer can evolutionists point to hundreds of millions of years for creatures to evolve. Of course, they can. There is no limit to the mental gymnastics that evolutionists employ. The following link describes the dilemma facing evolutionists.

Incontrovertible Dinosaur DNA Reported – CEH

So where's the part that actually describes the presence of DNA? I see talk about biomolecules, but that's about it.

Also, we don't date rocks based on fossils within them. This is just an age old misconception. We use relative dating, superposition, inclusions, cross cutting relations etc.

YECs continue to overlook the most obvious consideration that if the world were only 6,000 years old, we would find fully in-tact DNA in every single dinosaur fossil, and would have fully sequenced many species by now, just as we routinely sequence DNA of anything else living today and in the recent past (we've sequenced mammoths and neanderthals for example). But instead we are left digging for the utmost best cases of preservation, treating and demineralizing fossils, and going to extensive lengths just to discover mere fragments of something we simply hope would be remnants of DNA.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HARK!

שמע
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Supporter
Oct 29, 2017
54,680
8,037
US
✟1,060,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Dating assumes that time has had a linear rate.

That's an interesting thought. Let's assume that the universe is expanding from a central point.

At beginning of that expansion, would not the rate that expansion be constrained more, by the gravitational pulls of the matter in closer proximity to any one atom?

As the universe expands, would not the gravitational pull on the initial acceleration be diminished at a rate of 2 times the inverse square law?

Now for the next thought, which is just as intriguing:

As photons emitted from the matter behind the path of any body of matter, strike that matter, which is moving toward darkness; would not that matter be accelerated toward the darkness?

To put this postulate more simply, the gravitational pull of the opposite sides of the universe, would pull against each other less and less as the universe expands. However, the light coming from the opposite sides of the universe, would continue to push the opposite sides outward, thereby causing the opposite sides to accelerate.

I would seem that the universe, at some point in time, must begin accelerating to a speed approaching that of light, in reference to its' origin.

Here is another thought. As the moon pulls against the oceans; it creates tides. Theses tides create friction on the land. I don't understand how this could not possibly slow the earth's rotation. That would mean that our days would be getting longer; but as the earth would be rotating a slower speed, we would be covering distance a a lower rate, in relationship to the speed of light.

Has our path around the sun slowed too? What other factors might we consider?

The concept, of a day or a year being a constant, is looking highly implausible to me.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,268
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,030.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
So where's the part that actually describes the presence of DNA? I see talk about biomolecules, but that's about it.

Also, we don't date rocks based on fossils within them. This is just an age old misconception. We use relative dating, superposition, inclusions, cross cutting relations etc.

YECs continue to overlook the most obvious consideration that if the world were only 6,000 years old, we would find fully in-tact DNA in every single dinosaur fossil, and would have fully sequenced many species by now, just as we routinely sequence DNA of anything else living today and in the recent past (we've sequenced mammoths and neanderthals for example). But instead we are left digging for the utmost best cases of preservation, treating and demineralizing fossils, and going to extensive lengths just to discover mere fragments of something we simply hope would be remnants of DNA.
Like I said, I'm not YEC. But the ages claimed for the earth by evolutionists are absurd. The moon is moving away from the earth, very slowly but it's moving. If the earth was as old as claimed, we should not have a moon. Evolutionists need an old earth to explain how evolution is possible. Those who acknowledge God to be Creator have no need for an earth billions of years old.

The reality is that we do not know. We don't even know if time has been constant. So young/old may be meaningless. I do know what God's word has to say. I do know that evolutionists cannot point to evolution taking place. Because of that, they changed what I learned to be adaptation and applied the "E" word to it. Adaptation does happen. Evolution does not.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,216
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟292,947.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Like I said, I'm not YEC. But the ages claimed for the earth by evolutionists are absurd. The moon is moving away from the earth, very slowly but it's moving. If the earth was as old as claimed, we should not have a moon. Evolutionists need an old earth to explain how evolution is possible. Those who acknowledge God to be Creator have no need for an earth billions of years old.

The reality is that we do not know. We don't even know if time has been constant. So young/old may be meaningless. I do know what God's word has to say. I do know that evolutionists cannot point to evolution taking place. Because of that, they changed what I learned to be adaptation and applied the "E" word to it. Adaptation does happen. Evolution does not.

Why do you think that the moon is moving away too quickly? I would disagree here.

When I think about the question of if time has been constant, I think about things like prehistoric dinosaur foot tracks, or nests with eggs, or complex burrow networks. If time we're sped up in the past, yet animals still lived and walked and bred and nested etc., Then history would essentially have looked like a vhs movie being played in fast forward. I think that this belief of "fast-forwardism" just sounds kind of strange. It's much more easy to simply assume that animals walked and bred and nested at speeds that we see them doing so today. And of course there is no evidence to suggest otherwise anyway.

Here's a post just from a couple weeks ago where some other younger creationists brought up the moon:

Is Genesis history?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,268
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,030.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
Why do you think that the moon is moving away too quickly? I would disagree here.

When I think about the question of if time has been constant, I think about things like prehistoric dinosaur foot tracks, or nests with eggs, or complex burrow networks. If time we're sped up in the past, yet animals still lived and walked and bred and nested etc., Then history would essentially have looked like a vhs movie being played in fast forward. I think that this belief of "fast-forwardism" just sounds kind of strange. It's much more easy to simply assume that animals walked and bred and nested at speeds that we see them doing so today. And of course there is no evidence to suggest otherwise anyway.

Here's a post just from a couple weeks ago where some other younger creationists brought up the moon:

Is Genesis history?
The moon is moving away from the earth. That is able to be measured by lasers pointed at reflectors on the surface on the moon. It's 50mm a year if my memory serves me right. It's hard to know if the rate has been constant, but if the the earth was 4.5 billion years old, we would not have a moon.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,216
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟292,947.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The moon is moving away from the earth. That is able to be measured by lasers pointed at reflectors on the surface on the moon. It's 50mm a year if my memory serves me right. It's hard to know if the rate has been constant, but if the the earth was 4.5 billion years old, we would not have a moon.

If you're able to read your own linked paper, you would see that such a rate has not been constant.

And as I mentioned before, if it were constant, then the moon would have had some 10 billion years before touching earth if we re-wound time.

Is Genesis history?

"The article more specifically declares the problem seeking to be resolved:
"if present day observed dissipation rates are representative of the past, the moon must be younger than 1500 Ma (Hansen, 1982, Sonett, 1996)."

So really this article comes down to a discussion of dissipation rates, and is not actually focused on recession.

The article further describes a solution for the problem, and ultimately concludes:
"Results from an established numerical tidal model suggest that the tidal dissipation during the Cenozoic and Late Cretaceous were weaker than at present, with the exception of the glacial states over the last 2 Ma. It is very likely that the Earth–Moon system is unusually dissipative at present. Consequently, the Moon's recession rate was slower in the deep past than predicted using PD dissipation rates, supporting the old-age Earth–Moon model."

In other words, dissipation was weaker in the past and therefore recession was slower, and thus the old-age earth-moon model accurately reflects reality.

Aka the moon is 4.5 billion years old old, as per this article."

If you're able to read your own sourced paper, this should be an easy one for you to tackle.

Another link on the changing of the moons rate of recession over time:

Error - Cookies Turned Off -Geological constraints on the Precambrian history of Earth's rotation and the Moon's orbit
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm not YEC. I believe in an old earth. I believe that the creation that now exists was God's second after destroying the first. However, I also find the ages quoted by evolutionists to be implausible.

God has no concern for time.
He is past all that.
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,268
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,030.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
God has no concern for time.
He is past all that.
Agreed. But He has chosen to make His creation subject to time, so it matters to us. I'm 70, and I'm well aware of time. We are supposed to make the most of it. It's the only commodity that is the same for everyone and it's the least renewable resource there is.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Agreed. But He has chosen to make His creation subject to time, so it matters to us. I'm 70, and I'm well aware of time. We are supposed to make the most of it. It's the only commodity that is the same for everyone and it's the least renewable resource there is.

Christians are born again and have a second life of eternity that will be even more pleasant than this one.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yes, it may well be describing a dinosaur. Dragons are also known in every culture. It would be surprising if they were not real. The "fire breathing" bit could come from methane ignition. It's near impossible for fire to come out of the mouth. Methane burns way hotter than teeth or living tissue could stand. Perhaps there was ignition by static some distance from the creature. Again, we just don't know. Whichever way we look at it, dinosaurs are not 65 million years old. This casts doubt on a wide range of evolutionist dating assumptions.

Fire coming out of their butts? I think some cartoons cover that idea.

yNRZoXs-lGUAI5ySPUzqmRMXbUxybFxOANzo_WsCd9s.png
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,005
2,817
Australia
✟157,641.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, it may well be describing a dinosaur. Dragons are also known in every culture. It would be surprising if they were not real. The "fire breathing" bit could come from methane ignition. It's near impossible for fire to come out of the mouth. Methane burns way hotter than teeth or living tissue could stand. Perhaps there was ignition by static some distance from the creature. Again, we just don't know. Whichever way we look at it, dinosaurs are not 65 million years old. This casts doubt on a wide range of evolutionist dating assumptions.


Bombardier beetles combine hydroquinone and hydrogen peroxide, expelling a boiling puff of acrid gas and vapour up to 100C. Imagine that coming from a much larger creature. So 'fire breathing' could have meant something like that, rather than literal flames. The people recounting seeing such dragons would not have known that, plus they probably were recounting things while sitting around a fire so using the word fire would come naturally.
 
Upvote 0