Let's assume for the sake of this debate that the following premises are true:
A: The Christian God exists
B: The Christian God created the universe
Now, let's consider two possible creation scenarios.
Scenario 1: God created each species in a separate creation event.
Scenario 1 questions for debate:
1. Why would God create each species in separate creation events and yet make it appear that each species emerged from earlier lifeforms? Wouldn't that make God dishonest?
2. The Bible says that God is trustworthy; can he still be trusted if he made it look like large-scale evolution has taken place when in fact it hasn't?
3. Why would God make it look like large-scale evolution has taken place when in fact it hasn't, knowing full well that this will cause many to doubt God's existence?
Scenario 2: God created the conditions in which carbon-based lifeforms could emerge and evolve on Earth, and eventually lead to the emergence of Homo Sapiens, which God would give a soul to (and perhaps make some other minor changes to), which would result in the creation of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, or Modern Humans.
Scenario B Question for debate:
1. Why would God go to all that trouble when he could simply create each species in separate creation events?
Here's a broader set of questions that apply to both scenarios:
Why would God create lifeforms other than humans? Clearly humans are important because they "house" the human soul. But what about Wolves? Crocodiles? Crows? Gorillas?
What is the role of non-human lifeforms in God's "plan"?
Do they have souls too? Consciousness/awareness is a state that people claim is possible due to the soul.
Well, the more we observe and study the non-human natural world, the more it seems that consciousness/awareness exists on a spectrum, from human-level awareness (or perhaps higher...), down to complete non-consciousness/non-awareness (e.g. bacteria). There isn't some absolute line where life is divided between conscious and non-conscious, except for maybe at the "lower lifeform levels", but definitely not at the "higher lifeform levels". Dogs are conscious, they just aren't conscious to the same degree that humans are.
So, why create lifeforms besides humans and have consciousness exist on a spectrum?
Why would God do this knowing full well that it would cause people to question his existence?
It just seems to be such an interesting coincidence that God created lifeform consciousness on a spectrum.
As we go further down it is clear that we came from a form of bacteria. since types of bacteria have been found in the very hot underwater volcanic exhaust, it is clear to me that the process started near the center of the Earth.
What makes this clear? There are bacteria in most every environment.
jerrygg38 wrote:
....
As far as there being billions of Earths in the entire universe that is pretty clear to me and many other people.
How is this is made pretty clear?
jerrygg38 wrote:
It is also confirmed to me by my spiritual encounters who have specified that this Earth is only one of billions and that the Holocaust has occurred billions of times in the past.
You mean voices in your head? Visions? What?
jerrygg38 wrote:
Thus the events upon this Earth basically repeat forever. Which unfortunately means that we repeat forever as well. We can move upward or downward but we are trapped in space and time. I am not happy about that but I have to accept it.
jerrygg38 wrote:
Firstly the Christian God is a subset of the God of the Universe. God is the God of all religions upon billions of billions of Earths.
As far as the soul of man being different than the soul of a fish, the spiritual energy is the same. Even a rock has a soul. what is a soul? A soul is an interaction between physical matter and spiritual matter. this entire Earth has a collective soul which I call the God of this Earth. This is higher light speed levels of God's energy which reached up to light speed infinity.
We come from a bacterial soul at the center of this Earth. this evolved toward the surface. the Darwinian evolutionary process driven by the spiritual dimension produced man. Cats and dots have collective souls. All lifeforms are important to God. When you go to the highest levels of humanity, you will find humans and animals. Within the spiritual realm you will find animals as well.
And your evidence for this comes from where?
By that I mean, what distinguishes this scenario of yours from a sci-fi plot hatched strictly in the imagination?
Firstly it is my belief that all religions provide a little understanding of God. When you combine all the concepts together you get an understanding that all forms of life have the same spiritual dimension as man. We are not unique.
Let's start with that proposition. What is this belief based on? What evidence is there that ANY religion provides ANY understanding of a god, assuming there is one?
As we go further down it is clear that we came from a form of bacteria. since types of bacteria have been found in the very hot underwater volcanic exhaust, it is clear to me that the process started near the center of the Earth.
What makes this clear? There are bacteria in most every environment.
jerrygg38 wrote:
....
As far as there being billions of Earths in the entire universe that is pretty clear to me and many other people.
How is this is made pretty clear?
jerrygg38 wrote:
It is also confirmed to me by my spiritual encounters who have specified that this Earth is only one of billions and that the Holocaust has occurred billions of times in the past.
You mean voices in your head? Visions? What?
jerrygg38 wrote:
Thus the events upon this Earth basically repeat forever. Which unfortunately means that we repeat forever as well. We can move upward or downward but we are trapped in space and time. I am not happy about that but I have to accept it.
Ah ... perhaps the ultimate "zen lesson."
As far as my ideas on bacteria, the science programs on tv have proposed that forms of bacteria is common to all life. Even within our own bodies we find bacteria itself. In any event if the basic life form is not exactly bacteria then it is something which produces bacteria. In any event all life started at the microscopic level.
As far as billions of Earths are concerned, this is clear to most scientists that with billions of billions of galaxies, there are billions of Earths which have the same conditions as us. therefore to a great probability, we are not alone in the universe and man exists everywhere.
To confirm this for my own understanding, my dreams and visions showed me moving star frames leading to another Earth after I am dead. this was in response to my question of where I was going after death. thus my fate is predetermined. It is better than the pit of hell at the center of this Earth. Evolved man came from the pit of hell in bacterial form and many of us will end up right back there are the center of this Earth. Of course the self is gone and all you have left is a bacterial soul in chaos. Thus no one suffers in hell but you do suffer on the way to hell as I have been shown in dreams and visions.
My encounters since age 3 to now at age 76 came about by a gentile fatherly voice when I was a child to a young adult. I would pray to God and at various times God would answer my questions. There was always help. Sometimes I asked God to help with an engineering problem and God would give me the solution. However I no longer believe that the voice was the God of the Universe. It was my soul which occupies the lower mind of God. Thus everyone has a soul which exists in the lower mind of God. Many people hear such voices. In my case I always want information. Sometimes I must wait years for the answers. It took 10 years for God or God's lower mind to answer my questions on the Holocaust.
In 1981 the Gentle voice of my friend God, demanded that I do this work. I was forced into obedience by a force field. In the end of weeks of conflict I was radiated by God and glowed for 3 days. The only comfort I could get would be to declare myself insane. Yet it is very hard for me to do so because all the basic data I got appears true to me. However I must study the data and try to understand it. I am sorry that I ever demanded an answer from God about the Holocaust. To learn a little more about god and the universe involves suffering. I was stupid and foolish to confront god on this issue. What right does man have to judge God?
Re: God's voice and other testimonies of divine revelation:
There are many who make claims, from many religions and from the non-religious. The claims frequently contradict each other. The most plausible explanation is that those who claim such revelations and similar experiences are reporting thoughts from their own unconscious minds. This is not to rule out psychotic hallucinations, dreams, chemically enhanced experiences, nor should they automatically be considered the explanation. What we do know on balance, is that these reports are meaningless in terms of defining objective reality.
I have had my own experiences which contradict orthodox Christianity, if not all of it. Are my experiences less valid than Saul/Pauls? I certainly don't think so. I submit they are as valid as those of anyone else, and there is no refuting such a claim.
This is yet another example of why we look to science and empirical observation for validation of our descriptions of reality.
Volbrigade wrote:I'm glad you recognize m2m as a pejorative, for a feeble idea the is immanently worthy of such treatment.
If evolution could be described as microbes to men, then it would be worthy of such treatment. However, this discription is one that is made by those ignorant of what evolution is all about. Humanity is not the end point nor the goal of the evolutionary process. Evolution is a blind aimless process, like erosion. Erosion did not set about to create the Grand Canyon. Evolution did not set about to create humans. It is not microbes to men, but microbes to every living entity on the planet.
Volbrigade wrote:It boils down to this: "we think those rocks are very old. We think that, because they have been unchanged for a long time -- generations -- and therefore, they must have formed by very, very slow processes.
This is an ignorant characterization of modern geology.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good. First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians The truth will make you free. Gospel of John
Re: God's voice and other testimonies of divine revelation:
There are many who make claims, from many religions and from the non-religious. The claims frequently contradict each other. The most plausible explanation is that those who claim such revelations and similar experiences are reporting thoughts from their own unconscious minds. This is not to rule out psychotic hallucinations, dreams, chemically enhanced experiences, nor should they automatically be considered the explanation. What we do know on balance, is that these reports are meaningless in terms of defining objective reality.
I have had my own experiences which contradict orthodox Christianity, if not all of it. Are my experiences less valid than Saul/Pauls? I certainly don't think so. I submit they are as valid as those of anyone else, and there is no refuting such a claim.
This is yet another example of why we look to science and empirical observation for validation of our descriptions of reality.
The problem people experience is that the most they can reach in general is their own souls. Our souls as I conceive, exist within the lower portion of God's mind. this is photonic or light type energy. For the most part it is an interaction between the physical world and the spiritual energy of God. Your experiences concern your past. when was your soul christianized? If you came from the time of Jesus, you would be closer to Paul. If your souls history is only a few hundred years old then you might have come from a time of history where doubt was prevalent.
Some people here came from other Earths. These people have a longer period of similar beliefs. therefore we are all different. In any event the souls contain intelligence from our past lives. Often they only contain intelligence up to this age of science. The result is that the image of God is heterogeneous. everyone believes differently.
Science fails to determine God because science stops at only our dimension and light speed. All we can do is study the data from all the religions and try to make sense out of it.
Firstly it is my belief that all religions provide a little understanding of God. When you combine all the concepts together you get an understanding that all forms of life have the same spiritual dimension as man. We are not unique.
Let's start with that proposition. What is this belief based on? What evidence is there that ANY religion provides ANY understanding of a god, assuming there is one?
My belief is based upon an interaction between the spiritual dimension and the physical dimension. If interactions were impossible then no one would be having any spiritual encounters. It is true that all the encounters are different. therefore the interactions are dependent upon the level of information the visionary has and his or her history.
The evidence that any religion provides an understanding of God is basically zero. My theory of God and the Universe is based upon a physical God. The physics is somewhat different then ours at this dimension but it is similar.
The religions of man tend to make God something different than physical. Yet to me it is impossible for God to create or operate upon a physical universe unless God has physical characteristics.
The concept that God could say a word and that would happen is pure magic and not believable. thus I build physically realizable Gods in my mind and theory. My Gods are engineering level God and not the Gods of the philosophers. even them mathematicians do not satisfy me in their understanding of God and the Universe.
I try to match my Gods to the Bible and Gospels and all the religions of man. therefore reincarnation is important because the Hindu and the Buddhists make up a large part of humanity. It is my opinion that all of mankind has a little knowledge of interactions with God. Yet I will agree that none of them have specified any knowledge of Godself.
The information I got from my encounters have given me an insight into God. future man may improve upon my work and get a much better understanding.
jerrygg38 wrote:
Firstly it is my belief that all religions provide a little understanding of God. When you combine all the concepts together you get an understanding that all forms of life have the same spiritual dimension as man. We are not unique.
Let's start with that proposition. What is this belief based on? What evidence is there that ANY religion provides ANY understanding of a god, assuming there is one?
My belief is based upon an interaction between the spiritual dimension and the physical dimension. If interactions were impossible then no one would be having any spiritual encounters. It is true that all the encounters are different. therefore the interactions are dependent upon the level of information the visionary has and his or her history.
How do you know that it is an interaction with 'the spiritual dimension'?
Assuming it is seems to be begging the question.
How did you come to the conclusion that what you experience is 'the spiritual dimension'?
jerrygg38 wrote:
Firstly it is my belief that all religions provide a little understanding of God. When you combine all the concepts together you get an understanding that all forms of life have the same spiritual dimension as man. We are not unique.
Let's start with that proposition. What is this belief based on? What evidence is there that ANY religion provides ANY understanding of a god, assuming there is one?
My belief is based upon an interaction between the spiritual dimension and the physical dimension. If interactions were impossible then no one would be having any spiritual encounters. It is true that all the encounters are different. therefore the interactions are dependent upon the level of information the visionary has and his or her history.
How do you know that it is an interaction with 'the spiritual dimension'?
Assuming it is seems to be begging the question.
How did you come to the conclusion that what you experience is 'the spiritual dimension'?
I just call it the spiritual dimension. It is dimensions that do not include the three or four dimensions of this section of the total universe. It is different forms of energy. The entity that appeared before me, I could put my hand through it. It appeared like a hologram. It could have been a vision but it was certainly another dimension as best as I could understand in 1981. When I was young I would pray to God and at various times the voice of God would respond to me. the last year or so I have concluded that it was not God but my own soul within the spiritual dimension. If we go to string theory we get I believe 13 small dimensions.
From the Heisenberg theory it appears that energy jumps from point to point rather than traveling linearly. this means that there are many possible universes between these points. Thus there can be a huge number of coexisting universes. However if our universe is a spherical plane surface, then there could be layers of universes with the spiritual dimensions between them. I do not know the true answer but I recognize the possibilities.
The interesting thing is that my entity whatever it was could grab me but I could not grab it. I conclude that higher light speed photonic energy can operate upon this universe while this universe has no effect upon the spiritual domain. Other than my experiences and the Biblical experiences of Jewish visionaries who wrestled with angels and the healing powers of Jesus, I could only say that there is a form of energy which could be considered spiritual energy.
One may argue that my encounters were mere hallucinations. Yet one night as I took a physics test I was ill. I prayed to God for help. Whatever it was took over my mind. I just wrote down the answers. I got the usual hundred as I did on all my tests but the professor looked at me perplexed. He said that one question was a trick question. No one had ever found a way to solve it. It required months of trial and error word to solve. Yet in just a few seconds I had come up with an equation and solved the problem. How? I do not know because I did not do the test. whatever I am dealing with has a superior mind. Is it God? Is it my soul? Is it the collective soul of this Earth? I really do not know for sure but I do know that the mind of the entity is much more superior to my mind. And this happened throughout my career as a radar research engineer of Sperry Gyro. I always found the answers although I could never explain how. Some Christians thought I used witchcraft. All I know for sure is that there is some sort of spiritual dimension that I have communicated with all my life.Why me? It is just a Jewish gift or curse.
Danmark wrote:
This silliness of Batten's is the same nonsense peddled by Ken Ham and Kent Hovind, who is now in Federal prison for lying and fraud. All the 'reasons' listed have been refuted on this forum and other websites by real scientists. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/101_eviden ... e_universe for example. But it is not enough to simply paste in a URL and call it a day.
The scatter gun approach of people like Batten simply masks the fact that none of his poor logic and misstated facts are valid.
The better approach is to stick to one issue at a time and debate it:
For example, Dr. Schweitzer did not find viable soft tissue in dinosaur bones millions of years old. Essentially what she and her team discovered after taking samples of the fossilized tissue, grinding it up, applying acid and analyzing the powder they made was evidence in of heme structures from what millions of years ago was soft tissue. You can read the actual study here: http://www.pnas.org/content/94/12/6291.full
This story got 'dumbed down' for inclusion in popular articles for the layman and were completely misunderstood and misused by creationists like Carl Wieland.
'Carl Wieland is the major creationist "dino-blood" source and has presented his distorted interpretations of dinosaur biomolecule research through the Answers in Genesis Ministry: Creation Ex Nihilo (Wieland 1997) Creation (Wieland 1999) and the Answers in Genesis Ministry Webpages (Wieland 2002). His first article we will consider in detail, Sensational dinosaur blood report, opens with the following:
"ACTUAL red blood cells in fossil bones from a Tyrannosaurus rex? With traces of the blood protein hemoglobin (which makes blood red and carries oxygen)? It sounds preposterous to those who believe that these dinosaur remains are at least 65 million years old.
It is of course much less of a surprise to those who believe Genesis, in which case dinosaur remains are at most only a few thousands of years old."
And he ends with
"Evidence of hemoglobin, and the still-recognizable shapes of red blood cells, in unfossilized dinosaur bone is powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bible's account of a recent creation." [Wieland 1997]
These sentences are quite revealing. In barely two text pages, Wieland has shifted from "fossil bones" to "unfossilized dinosaur bone" and claims that a popularized account of one paleontological study is reason enough to abandon the sciences. What possible basis for these wild claims could Wieland have had? His entire claim of cellular preservation in dinosaur age fossils originated from a selective misrepresentation of a popular magazine account of research by Mary Schweitzer titled "The Real Jurassic Park" (Schweitzer and Staedter 1997). This article was published in 1997 by a magazine called Earth, a for-profit magazine focused on geology and paleontology for the general public. The magazine folded after three volumes. The former Editor, Josh Flishman, has personally acknowledged to me that Earth was a popularization, and not a scientific journal. But in 1997, the popularity of Steven Speilberg's film "Jurassic Park" prompted a tie-in theme at Earth magazine featuring Mary Schweitzer's preliminary analysis of an exceptionallywell preserved portion of a bone from a remarkably well preserved skeleton of a Tyrannosaurus rex. There were no red blood cells present, and this speaks volumes for the respect for truth shown at Answers in Genesis Ministry.'
“The reason it hasn’t been discovered before is no right-thinking paleontologist would do what Mary did with her specimens. We don’t go to all this effort to dig this stuff out of the ground to then destroy it in acid,� says dinosaur paleontologist Thomas Holtz Jr., of the University of Maryland. “It’s great science.� The observations could shed new light on how dinosaurs evolved and how their muscles and blood vessels worked. And the new findings might help settle a long-running debate about whether dinosaurs were warmblooded, coldblooded—or both. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dinosau ... retal1997a
To summarize, what Wieland and other creationists have done is spread a lie.
'The basic lie that red blood cells had been observed in the bone of a T. rex now spread through the creationist literature, with the major vector coming within the Answers in Genesis publications. Jonathan Sarfati, a former chemist employed by Answers in Genesis, wrote in his 1999 book Refuting Evolution -
"Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years -- certainly not the 65 million years from when evolutionists think that the last dinosaur lived." [pg. 112, citing Wieland 1997]
This bizarre claim was presented as one of six evidences that the Earth was young. Three significant scientific publications in 1997 and one in 1999 by real scientists are ignored by Sarfati, who not only misrepresented this primary research, but incompetently paraphrased Wieland 1997 to boot. More interesting, the position is hardened that somehow the Schweitzer and Staedter 1997 publication now demonstrated that this fossil was less than a few thousand years old, and this was support for the YEC position. The illogic of this assertion is entirely contained in Sarfati's statement implying that he and his associates know how long organic molecules can survive. This is of course absurd.' ibid
As the Smithsonian article put it:
'Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth� creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as “a complete and total Christian.� On a shelf in her office is a plaque bearing an Old Testament verse: “For I know the plans I have for you,� declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.�' http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-n ... EZ53i42.99
This silliness of Batten's is the same nonsense peddled by Ken Ham and Kent Hovind, who is now in Federal prison for lying and fraud. All the 'reasons' listed have been refuted on this forum and other websites by real scientists. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/101_eviden ... e_universe for example. But it is not enough to simply paste in a URL and call it a day.
The scatter gun approach of people like Batten simply masks the fact that none of his poor logic and misstated facts are valid.
So Three Ad Hominems (Batten, Ham, Hovnid), A Baseless Assertion (nonsense), a Generalized Sweeping Baseless Assertion (All reasons have been refuted) a Red Herring (Federal Prison), Elephant Hurling (refuted on this forum and websites), and a No True Scotsman (Real Scientists). So 8 Logical Fallacies in two short sentences (you going for a Record?) Then Top it all off with sourcing "Rational Wiki"? Oh My Sir.
For example, Dr. Schweitzer did not find viable soft tissue in dinosaur bones millions of years old. Essentially what she and her team discovered after taking samples of the fossilized tissue, grinding it up, applying acid and analyzing the powder they made was evidence in of heme structures from what millions of years ago was soft tissue.
What on Earth are you talking about? It was on 60 minutes for cryin out loud with her stretching the tissue, here....
Are these "Heme Structures"??...
This story got 'dumbed down' for inclusion in popular articles for the layman and were completely misunderstood and misused by creationists like Carl Wieland.
Baseless Unsupported Charge (Fallacy) "Misused". Baseless Unsupported Assertion (Fallacy) x 2 "dumbed down" and "Misunderstood". Genetic Fallacy "Creationists". Please Support these Baseless Claims....?
'Carl Wieland is the major creationist "dino-blood" source and has presented his distorted interpretations of dinosaur biomolecule research through the Answers in Genesis Ministry: Creation Ex Nihilo (Wieland 1997) Creation (Wieland 1999) and the Answers in Genesis Ministry Webpages (Wieland 2002). His first article we will consider in detail, Sensational dinosaur blood report, opens with the following:
Baseless Charge (Fallacy) "distorted interpretations". Genetic Fallacy "Answers in Genesis".
"ACTUAL red blood cells in fossil bones from a Tyrannosaurus rex? With traces of the blood protein hemoglobin (which makes blood red and carries oxygen)? It sounds preposterous to those who believe that these dinosaur remains are at least 65 million years old.
It is of course much less of a surprise to those who believe Genesis, in which case dinosaur remains are at most only a few thousands of years old."
Well Yea.
There were no red blood cells present, and this speaks volumes for the respect for truth shown at Answers in Genesis Ministry.'
"--but test after test indicated that the spherical structures were indeed red blood cells from a 67-million-year-old Tyrannosaurus rex." {Emphasis Mine}
Scientific American, October 2012 http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/obs ... aur-cells/[/b]
And the PICS above, of course.
“The reason it hasn’t been discovered before is no right-thinking paleontologist would do what Mary did with her specimens.... says dinosaur paleontologist Thomas Holtz Jr., of the University of Maryland.
How about "a priori" adherences to Fairytale Long Ages?
To summarize, what Wieland and other creationists have done is spread a lie.
Generalized and Specific Baseless "Erroneous" Charge (Fallacy) "lie". And Who's LYING??
'The basic lie that red blood cells had been observed in the bone of a T. rex now spread through the creationist literature, with the major vector coming within the Answers in Genesis publications. Jonathan Sarfati, a former chemist employed by Answers in Genesis, wrote in his 1999 book Refuting Evolution -
"Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years -- certainly not the 65 million years from when evolutionists think that the last dinosaur lived." [pg. 112, citing Wieland 1997]
This bizarre claim was presented as one of six evidences that the Earth was young. Three significant scientific publications in 1997 and one in 1999 by real scientists are ignored by Sarfati, who not only misrepresented this primary research, but incompetently paraphrased Wieland 1997 to boot. More interesting, the position is hardened that somehow the Schweitzer and Staedter 1997 publication now demonstrated that this fossil was less than a few thousand years old, and this was support for the YEC position. The illogic of this assertion is entirely contained in Sarfati's statement implying that he and his associates know how long organic molecules can survive. This is of course absurd.'
ibid
Genetic Fallacy "employed by answers in Genesis". Baseless "Erroneous" Charge (Fallacy) x 3 "lie", "ignored", "misrepresented". Yes, we pretty much know that "Soft Tissue" doesn't last for 65 million years!!!! Mainly by Common Sense. You find this Illogical, eh?
How do you know Sarfati is a "Former" Chemist? Please Support....? And Yes, he would be utterly clueless as to how long Organic Molecules would last being a PhD Chemist.
As the Smithsonian article put it:
'Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth� creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as “a complete and total Christian.� On a shelf in her office is a plaque bearing an Old Testament verse: “For I know the plans I have for you,� declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.�' http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-n ... 9/#ioVVma0...
How did they misrepresent her work? .... Another Baseless Assertion (Fallacy). "Hijacked" ---Hyperbole. And who CARES what she "Thinks" or her Religious Beliefs? If they would have added what her favorite color was it would be just as relevant.
How about these...
“Taken together, all the analyses performed in this study strongly suggest that the fossilized reptile skin in BHI-102B [the lizard fossil] is not a simple impression, mineralized replacement or an amorphous organic carbon �lm, but contains a partial remnant of the living organism’s original chemistry, in this case derived from proteinaceous skin.�
Edwards, N.P. et al., Infrared mapping resolves soft tissue preservation in 50 million year-old reptile skin, Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 278(1722):3209–18, 2011.
Of Particular Note was the 150 Million Year Old squid ink (Dr. Phil Wilby Paleontologist.....
"It's fossilized so beautifully well that you can actually still write with it. It still looks as if it is modern squid ink."
"We felt that drawing the animal with it would be the ultimate self-portrait."
"Many of the fossils at the new site are better preserved than their quarry counterparts, the researchers report. The new fossils reveal the internal organs of several different arthropods, the most common type of animal in both the new and old Burgess Shale locations. Retinas, corneas, neural tissue, guts and even a possible heart and liver were found." Live Science, New Burgess Shale http://www.livescience.com/43270-new-bu ... anada.html
The Current "Soft Tissue" World Record Holder....
550 Million Year old Russian "Beard Worm" Soft Tissue
“The tube of S. cambriensis was flexible, as shown by its soft deformation and preservation, and composed of fibers perfect in habit and parallel arranged in sheets, and then sheets in layers.�.....“consistent with the ß chitin tubes of siboglinid animals�
“The Sabellidites organic body is preserved without permineralization. Minerals have not replicated any part of the soft tissue and the carbonaceous material of the wall is primary, preserving the original layering of the wall, its texture, and fabrics.�
Moczydłowska, M., Westall, F. and Foucher, F., Microstructure and biogeochemistry of the organically preserved Ediacaran Metazoan Sabellidites, Journal of Paleontology 88(2):224–239, 2014
This wouldn't be complete with the ole "Expelled" phenomena of a seasoned scientist discovering soft tissue on a triceratops fossil ...
According to court documents, shortly after the original soft tissue discovery, a CSUN official told Armitage, “We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department!�
Armitage, a published scientist of over 30 years, was subsequently let go after CSUN abruptly claimed his appointment at the university of 38 months had been temporary, and claimed a lack of funding for his position, according to attorneys." http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/07/ ... ur-fossil/
