Oops! Another Problem for Darwinism

See the source image


As if soft tissue turning up in dinosaur fossils weren’t bad enough–well, they aren’t even talking about this.

The Mesozoic Era, or Age of Reptiles, begins with the Triassic Period 240 million years ago: the first dinosaurs appear. (“Presto!”) It ends 65 million years ago, in the Cretaceous Period, in which the dinosaurs disappear.

Imagine discovering a modern human skeleton, with a cell phone, right next to a Tyrannosaurus skeleton. Whoever discovered that, of course, would be in very big trouble. But imagine it anyway. If you take your Darwinism straight, that human skeleton would be 65 million years out of place.

But that’s nothing.

In 2013 we read of pollen–that is, fossils of flowering plants–being discovered in Triassic rocks in Switzerland ( https://www.enn.com/articles/46492). But Settled Science had always said flowering plants didn’t come along, didn’t “evolve,” until the Cretaceous. This pollen from Switzerland is therefore 100 million years out of place. Cores from the Barents Sea, north of Scandinavia, have also turned up pollen. In fact, some evidence pushes the fossil pollen back into the Permian Period–before the dinosaurs.

You don’t hear a lot about this old, old pollen. It’s so embarrassing. It’s as far out of place as a Jurassic Stegosaurus would be if it walked down Broadway in the traffic.

How many of these embarrassments–don’t forget the dinosaur soft tissue–can the Darwinist time scale take before it crumbles?


8 comments on “Oops! Another Problem for Darwinism

  1. Hey, a hundred million years here, a hundred million years there — we’re not even talking real years until we get into the billions, right? (Apologies to Everett Dirksen for this paraphrase.) And at this point, what difference does it make? (No apologies whatsoever to Hillary.)

  2. Charles Darwin was know as a congenital liar even as a young person. He plagiarized Wallace’s work on evolution and natural selection, and then lied about when he received this information from Wallace. It seems apropos that Darwinism was begun this way. Darwin was also mentored by a Unitarian who denied the Trinity and much of the Bible.

  3. The timescales used in the evolutionary explanation are, in essence, self referential. Items are dated by context, context is established by the items found within. There are Christians in the world of science, but they are frequently dismissed and their work is not truly considered on its merits.

    I gave the cosmologists explanation a fair chance and was even willing to believe their “deep time” explanations, but I never believed that it could have happened without a Creator. But the predictions of the cosmologists have fallen upon hard times.

    The rotation of galaxies does not match their predictions so they had to resort to “dark matter”, which they can’t explain, except that is has mass and in no other way interacts with the matter we know.

    Then the expansion of the Universe was greater than their predictions and they had to resort to “dark energy”, a mystical force they can’t explain, except that it makes the Universe expand more rapidly than their theories can otherwise account for.

    In characterizing the beginning of the material Universe as a Big Bang, they ran into some problems and had to invent Cosmic Inflation, a theory wherein the Universe expanded more rapidly for an extremely brief period of time, then mysteriously slowed down in its expansion. I think that goes contrary to Newton’s laws regarding motion, but when imagination is involved an entire Universe of matter can accelerate and decelerate much faster than the fastest missile.

    New discoveries are challenging “settled science” all the time. When I was a child, we had nine planets, but then Pluto was demoted because they realized that there were all sorts of objects the size of Pluto in our solar system. When I was a kid, I would read astronomy books and marvel at the pictures. Now I realize that these were artist’s conceptions and based on relatively few facts in proportion to imagination.

    The catastrophic explanation for geology and even paleontology makes a great deal of sense Dinosaurs were real, I’ve seen fossilized footprints with my own eyes. While the footprints of a stegosaurus are cast in stone at the foot of the Rockies, the time scale used by much of the scientific community is not cast in stone. The catastrophic model agrees with God’s word. There was a flood of unbelievable proportion and the sedimentary layers seen in our world are evidence thereof. It would appear that dinosaurs were present at the time and the evidence we see of this was preserved in the sedimentary layers of the earth’s surface.

    The catastrophic explanation supports tectonics, but on a much shorter timescale, probably during the flood. This explains the uplifted and tilted surfaces we see in mountainous areas. It explains the fact that some mountains show signs of significant erosion because they were formed earlier and weathered more of the receding waters, while other mountains seem much less weathered. The Flood explains a great deal, if we take the time to consider it.

    1. A friend of mine used to defend Science As Total And Ultimate Truth by turning on a household appliance and saying “See?”

      Toward the end of his life, Michael Crichton, lifelong atheist and anti-creationist, lost much of his faith in Science. Tragically, he never found faith in Jesus Christ, but wound up dabbling with New Age hokum. But the point is, no one was more steeped in Science than he was; and he finally learned enough Science to realize it was no different from ancient science or medieval science. Doomed to be superseded.

      Except for those Scientific doctrines in which Really Smart People have made heavy political investments.

    2. There’s science and then there’s science. Science took us to the moon and that was an amazing feat. But look at the character of the people involved; the engineers and administrators, not to mention the astronauts. These tended to be people of character and integrity. They weren’t about to be swayed by just any argument. They tended to be anchored in truth.

      Contrast that with today and the near obsession with publicity, sound bites, photo ops and the political meaning of even the simplest of acts. People with priorities such as these will cast a blind eye at untruth, so long as it furthers the agenda. Poor decisions are made and ‘science” is used as a tool to justify their agenda. Take away a Creator and the arbiter of truth is no longer absolute. Once that happens, anything goes and anything can be defended, so long as it advances the agenda. That’s what happened in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

Leave a Reply