1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured What do you do with missing evidence? Like the global dearth of soft tissue in all fossils?

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by tas8831, Jun 18, 2019.

  1. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,357
    Ratings:
    +1,066
    Seems that the discovery of "soft tissue" in some dinosaur fossils has creationists claiming victory - for how can "soft tissues" exist for millions of years? This proves, they write or imply, that the only logical explanation is that the earth is young, just like the literalists' interpretation of Genesis indicates (never mind that the begats and begots are not internally consistent) .

    If the earth is truly young, creationism young, and this is shown by the presence of "soft tissue" in some dinosaur bones, a question must be asked -

    Why do we not see this "soft tissue" in nearly all dinosaur (or other) fossils? Surely we could allow for some fossils being exposed to harsh environments during their formation that destroyed the soft tissues, but nearly ALL of them?

    Creationists, in effect, just 'cannot believe' that "soft tissue" (even though it is not actually tissue) could last for millions of years. Why can they just not 'believe' this? The only actual explanation I have ever seen from them is reference to a paper on DNA degradation (note that none of the "soft tissue" found in dinosaur fossils have been DNA) that gives DNA a half life of ~600 years and a maximum 'shelf life' of around 6 million (the oldest sequencable DNA I have read about was ~700,000 years old from a well-preserved, frozen horse).

    If those numbers hold, then we should be finding not only "soft tissue" in dinosaur fossils, but sizeable chunks of DNA!

    So, creationists - where are they?
     
    • Like Like x 3
  2. David1967

    David1967 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2015
    Messages:
    7,993
    Ratings:
    +6,044
    Religion:
    Christian
    I know a lot of people use the discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur bones as a basis to debate creation v evolution, but the first thing that came to my mind was; 'Can we use it to clone one?' :D
     
    • Like Like x 4
  3. Altfish

    Altfish Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    7,437
    Ratings:
    +5,921
    Religion:
    Humanist
    What we don't do is say "God did it"

    Because that way you stop research, science and knowledge.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Greased up & ready for action!
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    146,084
    Ratings:
    +40,379
    Religion:
    Bokononism
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
  5. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    4,808
    Ratings:
    +2,755
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yeah, I liked your post.
    Do you know why?

    Because I'm not a YEC.
    Remember that.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  6. dianaiad

    dianaiad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,552
    Ratings:
    +797
    Religion:
    LDS (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints)
    That was the first thing I thought, too....and then I thought...

    OK, mastodons/mammoths, yes, T-rex? Not so much. ;)
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. dianaiad

    dianaiad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,552
    Ratings:
    +797
    Religion:
    LDS (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints)
    NO NO NO!!!!

    It's just FINE to say 'God did it!"

    Because He DID.

    What we need to say, once we say 'God did it," is "I wonder how?" And then we go find out. There is no reason why "God did it" and "I wonder how He did that" or "What laws of nature can we figure out by finding out how God did it," or "HOW does this WORK?" Can't work together.

    "God did it" is about faith and religion. It is entirely apart from what WE need to learn about the processes of creation.

    "I wonder HOW?" is science. Those who can't tell the difference between the two, and allow the two to work in the same brain, only learn half of what God wants us to learn, I think.

    This goes for the biblical young earth creationists AND the atheists who think that if "God did it," then OF COURSE He must have done it in a way we can't understand, and since we CAN understand a lot, then God doesn't exist.

    Drives me nuts.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Creative Creative x 1
  8. David1967

    David1967 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2015
    Messages:
    7,993
    Ratings:
    +6,044
    Religion:
    Christian
    I was thinking a nice little protoceratops.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Altfish

    Altfish Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    7,437
    Ratings:
    +5,921
    Religion:
    Humanist
    I'm sorry, give me evidence for god and I'll change my mind,
    But there is none, none at all.
    Until I see evidence of god I'll only rely on science and reason to explain this fantastic planet and universe
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. dianaiad

    dianaiad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,552
    Ratings:
    +797
    Religion:
    LDS (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints)
    I didn't say anything else. Of course you should rely on science and reason to explain this fantastic planet and universe. That was my entire point.

    It is the idea that if one figures out how something works, that God obviously did NOT 'do it,' that bothers me. I can't prove that there is a God...the evidence for deity is subjective and personal. I believe that there is one, because I have done the reading, the studying and the praying, and have received what I firmly believe is an answer from Him. Since that evidence is subjective (and that is NOT a dirty word, btw) then you have to go figure out whether He is by your own self. Or not, as it pleases you.

    But part of the answer I believe I got from Him is "go find out how I did this." A great many theistic scientists feel the same way about it; one CAN believe that 'God did it," AND look for the 'how,' at the same time.

    In some ways, it actually helps; if one has a subjective faith that all of this makes sense, then looking through scientific lenses at the processes is a wonderful thing.

    You know, "so THAT'S how You did this!" Great on two fronts.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. dianaiad

    dianaiad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,552
    Ratings:
    +797
    Religion:
    LDS (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints)
    [​IMG] Adorable.
    Maybe a leeetle nervous making, because that bite looks, er, serious, but still.....looks like he'd handle my son's Great Dane just fine. ;)
     
  12. David1967

    David1967 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2015
    Messages:
    7,993
    Ratings:
    +6,044
    Religion:
    Christian
    They can fight. There is the famous fossil of the velociraptor and Protoceratops locked in a battle to the death. From the Gobi desert if I recall correctly.
     
  13. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,360
    Ratings:
    +2,736
    Roll back for a second.
    First creationists have zero clue about the text that they pretend they understand.

    SO, if someone is clearly clueless at their fundemental claim the text, and the fantasy creationism manifests in their cranium, and they then project that onto nature. Is the problem in the text or their heads? Most people will point to the text. Wrong anwser.

    100% of all emperical evidence points to their craniums. 0% points to the text.

    The way way more difficult question whats going on exactly. Good luck answering that. if you do try and answer it you dont understand it. And if you do understand it you wont try and expain it. Although koans are a nice way of going about it!!!!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,357
    Ratings:
    +1,066
    Then apparently OECs distort and plagiarize and move goal posts and bait and switch, too.
     
  15. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,357
    Ratings:
    +1,066
    Begging the question?
     
  16. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,357
    Ratings:
    +1,066
    Agreed.

    Add to that that some that do have at least have clues, most often ignore those clues and tend toward sensationalist hyperbole (at best).
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,360
    Ratings:
    +2,736
    Thats the tricky part!!!! I wrote a post on jungs red book. I basically said its an experience of the territory not a map of the territory. I am most certain mappers( i believe, i dont believe, i am agnostic) will totally disagree!!!!

    I like to say christianity is a coal pile filled with diamnonds. Mappers only see coal and are attracted to coal. In fact when mapper non believers, quote mapper believers they only reveal who they are same attracts same.

    I hace yet to read one atheist mapper quote thomas merton and say he is an idiot, science says xyz thus there is no god. Hahahaba bwaaah!!!!! Little does anyone know in my posts Thomas Merton is always close by. Like an angel sitting on my shoulder reminding me the truth is in the lesser than as the lesser than manifests in me.
     
  18. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    4,808
    Ratings:
    +2,755
    Religion:
    Christian
    Lol!
     
  19. dianaiad

    dianaiad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,552
    Ratings:
    +797
    Religion:
    LDS (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints)
    Not in this case. ;)

    I don't claim to be able to prove that He did....just say that it's OK to SAY that He did if one believes it, AND to learn how the universe works through the scientific method, because learning HOW He did it is the same process as learning how things work if one doesn't believe God exists.

    Though you'd have a point if I were attempting to prove that God exists. Very circular. Sorry for the confusion.
     
  20. night912

    night912 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages:
    74
    Ratings:
    +32
    Religion:
    Not religious
    That's the wrong way of reasoning. You're asserting that god did it when there is no reason to suggest that. Let's suppose that a god(s) do exist, there's still no reason to suggest that god created the universe. Because that god(s) may not have created the universe.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
Loading...