Current Affairs

[Jack Staff]

"Misdirection is a form of deception in which the attention of an audience is focused on one thing in order to distract its attention from another. Managing the audience's attention is the aim of all theater, it is the foremost requirement of theatrical magic."

While you are all concerned with "Mrs Krankie", the United Kingdom is already breaking up.
Have a look, you'll notice that Northern Ireland is quietly shuffling towards the back door. You're only going to notice when you hear the door shut behind them.
Re-unification will remove all the problems of the border and the fact they voted remain. It also means they will not have to apply to be members of the E.U. They just have to change their currency and the flag on the town hall.
Once N.I. has gone, Scotlands departure from the U.K. is (in my opinion) inevitable.
Wales is not that keen on leaving the E.U. anymore either!

But of course...... They need us more than we need them. They cost us more than they pay in. If they want to go, let them. Have I missed any?

[wolfie]

What concerns me about McGuiness, and similar others, is that the leftist luvvies consider that his apparent Damascene conversion atones for all his past sins. However in the case of a Nazi prison guard simply obeying orders in fear for his own life, or an historic sex abuser even with no recent transgression, the full force of the law would descend upon them and they would be found guilty by the media even before their trial, no matter how old and frail they have become.

No matter their age they are still an abuser.

[wolfie]

For less money than producing forms in multiple languages we could offer all non English speaker a basic course in the language free of charge. If they refuse that offer fine but no further help

Reports say that the NHS spends upwards of £23million per year on translation services and that was in 2012 so I would expect it to be higher nowadays. When we talk about problems in the NHS this is one area where we could and should be saving money.

Perhaps a good school is the only place where such values are taught. I agree that they should be taught at home but some parents simply don't care

There are some homes with no values except themselves, and it's not always the 'vulnerable' who are the culprits. There are many high earning families who provide material needs but little by way of love and guidance since they are too busy following their own ambitions and lifestyles.

Not just the NHS, social services too.

[towny44]

What concerns me about McGuiness, and similar others, is that the leftist luvvies consider that his apparent Damascene conversion atones for all his past sins. However in the case of a Nazi prison guard simply obeying orders in fear for his own life, or an historic sex abuser even with no recent transgression, the full force of the law would descend upon them and they would be found guilty by the media even before their trial, no matter how old and frail they have become.

No matter their age they are still an abuser.

Exactly the point I was making, McGuiness should still be considered a terrorist and a murderer despite his recent history, but the leftie luvvies would prefer to deify him.

[oldbluefox]

For less money than producing forms in multiple languages we could offer all non English speaker a basic course in the language free of charge. If they refuse that offer fine but no further help

Reports say that the NHS spends upwards of £23million per year on translation services and that was in 2012 so I would expect it to be higher nowadays. When we talk about problems in the NHS this is one area where we could and should be saving money.

Not just the NHS, social services too.

And £40 million in three years spent by the police. The list is endless.

[qbman1]

At least the NHS seems to be seeing a bit of sense at last - not dishing out painkillers and cold/hay-fever remedies like sweeties, not issuing prescriptions for gluten-free foods and making viagra available to buy over the counter.

Sorry, must pop out to Boots.....!!

[towny44]

At least the NHS seems to be seeing a bit of sense at last - not dishing out painkillers and cold/hay-fever remedies like sweeties, not issuing prescriptions for gluten-free foods and making viagra available to buy over the counter.

Sorry, must pop out to Boots.....!!

Its only a proposal as yet Cubie don't go embarrassing yourself in Boots just yet.

[qbman1]

Wish you'd told me earlier - I now have 5 packets of razor blades !

[qbman1]

How times change....

C7_xd8bWkAAxI8q.jpg

[Onelife]

Hi Mr Shiney,

There is no denying some faith schools persue the qualities you discribe...but all come with conditions.

It is my belief that all faith schools lead children to be confused...for instance, subjects such as science/biology (scientific based evidence) taught alongside the teaching of religious studies (superstition) must be very confusing to a child's understanding of how the world came about. Whilst you and l have differing views on this, is it right that children are 'encouraged' to believe in one line of thought over the other because of the school they attend?

I hear an awful lot of talk about integration and how we need to draw different cultures/faiths together...well that sure aint gonna happen when we have schools which see women as inferior and people's of other religions/beliefs as pigs, monkeys and whores.

As far as l am concerned school children should be brought up completely secular - neither theist or atheist until such an age that they can make their own minds up about religion.

Banning all faith schools would be a step in the right direction in trying to achieve the 'unachievable' (integration of faiths/cultures and attatudes)....but hey! there's no harm in trying.

Regards

Keith

Hi Keith

Thank you for your comments.

You are quite right when you question if it is right for children to be "encouraged" to believe in one line of thought - I assume you mean "to the exclusion of other lines of thought". You also say "subjects such as science/biology (scientific based evidence) taught alongside the teaching of religious studies (superstition)". Hmmm.... What evidence do you have that Christianity is "superstition"? When you say "science/biology" in the same sentence, you appear to be referring to evolution. What evidence do you have that that is "scientific based evidence"? I went to a grammar school and it was taught as fact that we all evolved. We weren't given the other train of thought (not even told it existed), much less given the choice to decide which we felt was true. We were indoctrinated (=brainwashed) in the Theory of Evolution. It's only in more recent years that I have seen evidence that supports the unacceptable view and now no longer accept the commonly-held and taught views. Neither school of thought PROVES origins, but the evidence stacks up against evolution. Yet, because the world and his dog are so anxious to wipe God off the agenda, we're hardly ever given the opportunity to evaluate that evidence for ourselves -indeed it is actively suppressed and those who would wish to teach it are taken to court for "abuse".

What is widely taught as fact is actually a blind faith, based on supposition. Its claims are untestable. For example, it is accepted that rocks take millions of years to form. Not true, as Dark Knight confirmed a while ago. Rock has been OBSERVED to form quite quickly. People coming to the grotto where I work marvel at how this ancient stone was incorporated into the structure of the house - they are amazed when I tell them that it is actually manufactured, called Pulhamite, and is only about 100 years old (the grotto was built around 1910). Large stalactites can been seen within the piers of the Clifton Suspension Bridge, which is less than 200 years old. Landforms and geological features that are typically assumed to be gazillions of years old can be formed extremely quickly - the aftermath of the Mount St Helens eruption is a prime example. These, and other things, are known through observation, not guess work and assumption.

Do you think it right to make "factual" statements to anyone of any age, when there is no proof, or at least evidence, to back it up?

Hi Mr Shinny...

I'm sure by the time you reached your grammar school education you will have already formed any religious beliefs you may hold, so in that sence the brainwashing you refer to would have been well advanced.
Some may disagree, but l believe you attend school to get an education not to learn how to become a believer in superstitions...it sounds like your grammar school took this onboard...btw...Our daughter attended a grammar school and she received a balanced understanding of the six main faiths.

You ask how l know religion is all superstition?...well Mr Shinny the simple answer to that question is that the bible and other religious texts are full of superstitions.....crosses to ward off evil spirits, bible under your pillow, walking round in circles, head nodding, hell and damnation, turning wafers into the body of Christ ....yummy! yummy!  etc.etc. 
Superstitions are the crux of all religions and are used  to control...Mark 16:16 ."Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned".....  powerful words... no wonder so many opted for a good dunking. 

For a more intellectual explanation have a read of this.....


"Just think for one second, if ‘God’ or a ‘messenger of God’ had written that particular religious book/bible, how come the writings only occur within a very limited period in human history? Also, consider the fact, that a human writing on a piece of paper, or a few pieces of paper, is not the word of ‘God’. If they were really written by a universal God or entity, the books would not be limited to some pre-medievel costume drama but would encompass all universality, history, the future and science. Language is something created by man, not an all-seeing, all encompassing entity. God would presumably be universal and timeless as well as all-knowing, as is the universe, therefore these man-written books and scriptures, are just that, man-written linguistically created nonsense used to control men and women thousands of years ago. Why would ‘God’ write anything anyway? One must consider the fact that, even now, there are religious zealots and ordinary people still entrenched in a control belief system that is so far removed from reality that it borders on madness. There is no rational or scientific way that organised religions can have a modicum of truth or factual reality because of the very reason that these books are entombed in the time that they were written. These books should therefore simply be viewed as limited parables and historical fiction, as well as a lesson in how millions of people can be so easily controlled"


Ah! Darknight....you never know how much you miss someone until they're  gone.... Did he also tell you that you can turn rock into bread or was that someone else who said that?


With respect Mr Shinny l see the evolutionary rock theory as a sign of religious desperation - just another attempt to justify creationism timescales when all the fact based evidence suggests otherwise.


Regards


Keith












Sent from Samsung tablet

[Stephen]

I heard water can be turned into wine. Can someone tell me how, only my wine rack is getting low on stock

[Manoverboard]

Come on OL ...

It's Pulhamite ... NOT ' pull em, right '

[oldbluefox]

Thank you.jpg

I will be very happy to see this little lot with egg on their faces after some of the lies which have been trotted out. Smug, self serving, devious, arrogant, deluded........... No time for any of them.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Sitting on the fence again Foxy!

[qbman1]

Thank you.jpg
I will be very happy to see this little lot with egg on their faces after some of the lies which have been trotted out. Smug, self serving, devious, arrogant, deluded........... No time for any of them.

I do wish you wouldn't beat around the bush - say what you mean !

[oldbluefox]

And there was I thinking I was being tactful!!!!
I could think of other words to describe them but I would have to red pen myself!

[Mervyn and Trish]

Beware the Modplods.

Oh hang on........

[Silver_Shiney]

Hi Mr Shinny...

I'm sure by the time you reached your grammar school education you will have already formed any religious beliefs you may hold, so in that sence the brainwashing you refer to would have been well advanced.
Some may disagree, but l believe you attend school to get an education not to learn how to become a believer in superstitions...it sounds like your grammar school took this onboard...btw...Our daughter attended a grammar school and she received a balanced understanding of the six main faiths.

You're right - I had formed my "religious beliefs" there - I was an atheist. I became a Christian after I left school - the thorough brainwashing in evolution was acquired during my academic career, and not overturned until a few years ago when I came across evidence refuting it.

You ask how l know religion is all superstition?...well Mr Shinny the simple answer to that question is that the bible and other religious texts are full of superstitions.....crosses to ward off evil spirits, bible under your pillow, walking round in circles, head nodding, hell and damnation, turning wafers into the body of Christ ....yummy! yummy!  etc.etc. 

eh?? That's not "knowing", that's stating your prejudiced beliefs. Crosses to ward off evil spirits? Sorry, but I've never heard such nonsense. Bible under your pillow? I keep mine in the bookshelf. Walking round in circles? Where does that one come from? Head nodding? Only during a particularly boring sermon delivered in a "church" where they don't preach the gospel (and there are, sadly, many of those) . Hell and damnation. If someone chooses to refuse the gift of forgiveness, then that's their choice. God doesn't want it, but he won't overrule your decision. Turning wafers into the body of Christ? A gross misrepresentation - the bread/wafers are symbolic.

I now know that God exists because of what he has done in my life and the sheer overwhelming evidence of what he has done in other people's lives .

Superstitions are the crux of all religions and are used  to control...

I daresay. Thankfully, Christianity is not a religion, it is family, a relationship with God . No religion offers this.

Mark 16:16 ."Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned".....  powerful words... no wonder so many opted for a good dunking. 

See above. Here are some more powerful words: John_3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him.

For a more intellectual explanation have a read of this.....


"Just think for one second, if ‘God’ or a ‘messenger of God’ had written that particular religious book/bible, how come the writings only occur within a very limited period in human history? Also, consider the fact, that a human writing on a piece of paper, or a few pieces of paper, is not the word of ‘God’. If they were really written by a universal God or entity, the books would not be limited to some pre-medievel costume drama but would encompass all universality, history, the future and science. Language is something created by man, not an all-seeing, all encompassing entity. God would presumably be universal and timeless as well as all-knowing, as is the universe, therefore these man-written books and scriptures, are just that, man-written linguistically created nonsense used to control men and women thousands of years ago. Why would ‘God’ write anything anyway? One must consider the fact that, even now, there are religious zealots and ordinary people still entrenched in a control belief system that is so far removed from reality that it borders on madness. There is no rational or scientific way that organised religions can have a modicum of truth or factual reality because of the very reason that these books are entombed in the time that they were written. These books should therefore simply be viewed as limited parables and historical fiction, as well as a lesson in how millions of people can be so easily controlled"

Obviously written by a bigot who can't be bothered to examine the evidence. Consider the words of John Wesley, founder of the Methodist movement, who said

“The Bible must be the invention either of good men or angels, bad men or devils, or of God. It could not be the invention of good men or angels, for they neither would nor could make a book and tell lies all the time they were writing it, saying “Thus saith the Lord” when it was their own invention. It could not be the invention of bad men or devils, for they could not make a book that commands all duty, forbids all sin, and condemns their souls to hell for all eternity. Therefore the Bible must be given by Divine Inspiration.”

The collection of books that we know as the Bible were undoubtedly PENNED by man, but those men did so under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 2 Timothy 3:16 says “Every part of Scripture is God-breathed and useful one way or another--showing us truth, exposing our rebellion, correcting our mistakes, training us to live God's way.” – in other words, while it says that the Bible is produced by God, it doesn’t say what methods God used to produce it. One should always use Scripture to interpret Scripture. So, as well as claiming that it is “God-breathed” in 2 Tim 3:16, Romans 3:4 affirms that God is truth, so God has breathed truth into the Bible. “ Peter 1:21 states that the “…Holy Spirit prompted men and women to speak [and write] God's Word”. So we have a collection of books that were written under “dual authorship”, each having their individual human STYLES of writing yet retaining supernatural truth without human error.

Ah! Darknight....you never know how much you miss someone until they're  gone.... Did he also tell you that you can turn rock into bread or was that someone else who said that?

No, that was Satan (Mat 4:3 Then the Devil came to him and said, "If you are God's Son, order these stones to turn into bread.")

With respect Mr Shinny l see the evolutionary rock theory as a sign of religious desperation - just another attempt to justify creationism timescales when all the fact based evidence suggests otherwise.

Regards


Keith

You are so correct when you say the evolutionary rock theory is a sign of religious desparation - the religion of evolution (for that is really what it is) is so desparate to deny the existence of God that it aggressively denies the evidence that contradicts its proclamations. The actual facts suggest that the account in Genesis is correct. It is commonly taught, and believed that dinosaurs died out millions of years ago. It is known through observation that DNA degrades to nothing in a much shorter time. However.....

For the last 15 years, Dr Mary Schweitzer has been rocking the evolutionary/uniformitarian world with discoveries of soft tissue in dinosaur bones.(Schweitzer, M.H. et al., Heme compounds in dinosaur trabecular bone, PNAS 94:6291–6296, June 1997.) These discoveries have included blood cells, blood vessels, and proteins like collagen. But under measured rates of decomposition, they could not have lasted for the presumed 65 million years (Ma) since dino extinction, even if they had been kept at freezing point (never mind the much warmer climate proposed for the dinosaurs).(Nielsen-Marsh, C., Biomolecules in fossil remains: Multidisciplinary approach to endurance, The Biochemist, pp. 12–14, June 2002.) As she said in a popular TV show:

When you think about it, the laws of chemistry and biology and everything else that we know say that it should be gone, it should be degraded completely.(Schweitzer, M., Nova Science Now, May 2009, cross.tv/21726)
… as well as the following in a scientific paper:

The presence of original molecular components is not predicted for fossils older than a million years, and the discovery of collagen in this well-preserved dinosaur supports the use of actualistic conditions to formulate molecular degradation rates and models, rather than relying on theoretical or experimental extrapolations derived from conditions that do not occur in nature.(Schweitzer, M.H., et al., Analyses of soft tissue from Tyrannosaurus rex suggest the presence of protein, Science 316(5822):277–280, 2007)

As a careful scientist, after Dr Schweitzer found elastic blood vessels and other soft tissue, she rechecked her data thoroughly. A report quoted her as follows:

“It was totally shocking,” Schweitzer says. “I didn’t believe it until we’d done it 17 times.”(Schweitzer, cited in Science 307:1852, 25 March 2005)

Other evolutionists saw the baneful implications to their long-age dogma, and claimed that the blood vessels were really bacterial biofilms, and the blood cells were iron-rich spheres called framboids.(Kaye, T.G. et al., Dinosaurian soft tissues interpreted as bacterial biofilms, PLoS ONE 3(7):e2808, 2008 | doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002808) Yet this ignores the wide range of evidence Schweitzer adduced, and she has answered this claim in detail.(Researchers debate: Is it preserved dinosaur tissue, or bacterial slime? blogs.discovermagazine.com, 30 July 2008) However, Schweitzer herself maintains her faith in the long-age paradigm.(Yeoman, B., Schweitzer’s dangerous discovery, Discover 27(4):37–41, 77, April 2006)

Dino bone cells and proteins

Schweitzer’s more recent research makes long ages even harder to believe. Here, she analyzed bone from two dinosaurs, the famous Tyrannosaurus rex (MOR 112510) and a large duck-billed dinosaur called Brachylophosaurus canadensis (MOR 2598).(Schweitzer, M. H. et al. Molecular analyses of dinosaur osteocytes support the presence of endogenous molecules, Bone, 17 October 2012 | doi:10.1016/j.bone.2012.10.010. See also Thomas, B., Did scientists find T. Rex DNA? icr.org/article/7093/, 7 November 2012) Bone is an amazing structure with the ability to re-work in response to stress, and uses the finely designed protein osteocalcin, which has been found in the best known duck-billed dinosaur, Iguanadon, ‘dated’ to 120 Ma.Embery G., Milner A.C., Waddington R.J., Hall R.C., Langley M.S., Milan A.M., Identification of proteinaceous material in the bone of the dinosaur Iguanodon, Connect Tissue Res. 44 Suppl 1:41–6, 2003. The abstract says: “an early eluting fraction was immunoreactive with an antibody against osteocalcin.” The most plentiful cells in bones are osteocytes. These have a distinctive branching structure that connects to other osteocytes, and have a “vital role” in “immediate responses to changing stresses.”(Classification code—Museum of the Rockies)

James D. San Antonio, Mary H. Schweitzer, Shane T. Jensen, Raghu Kalluri, Michael Buckley, Joseph P. R. O. Orgel. (2011). Dinosaur Peptides Suggest Mechanisms of Protein Survival. PLoS ONE 6(6): e20381. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020381

Schweitzer’s team again removed the hard bony mineral with the chelating agent EDTA. They found “transparent cell-like microstructures with dentritic [branching, just the shape expected for osteocytes] processes, some containing internal contents,” from both dinos.

They also used antibodies to detect the globular proteins actin and tubulin, used to make filaments and tubes in vertebrates. The proteins from both dinos had similar binding patterns to the same proteins from ostrich and alligator. They are not found in bacteria, so this rules out contamination. In particular, these antibodies did not bind to the type of bacteria that forms biofilms, “thus a biofilm origin for these structures is not supported.”((Classification code—Museum of the Rockies)) Furthermore, they tested for collagen, a fibrous animal protein, and it was found in these bones—but not in surrounding sediments.

Furthermore, because actin, tubulin, and collagen are not unique to bone, they tested for a very distinctive osteocyte protein called PHEX. This stands for Phosphate-regulating endopeptidase, X-linked, which is vital in depositing the hard bone mineral. And indeed, antibodies specific to PHEX detected this unique bone protein. Detecting a distinctive bone protein is very strong support for osteocyte identification.

The problem for long ages is as they ask:

Cells are usually completely degraded soon after the death of the organism, so how could ‘bone cells’ and the molecules that comprise them persist in Mesozoic [evolutionary dino-age] bone?(Classification code—Museum of the Rockies)

They try to solve this problem by proposing that bone protects the cells from bacteria that cause degradation. Bone would hinder the cells from swelling that comes before cells self-destruct (autolysis) as well. They also propose that the surfaces of the mineral crystals attract and destroy enzymes that would otherwise speed up degradation. They propose that iron may play a vital role too, both by helping to cross-link and stabilize the proteins, as well as by acting as an anti-oxidant.

Actually, this is all reasonable from a biblical creationist perspective, up to a point. Measured decay rates of some proteins are compatible with an age of about 4,500 years (since the Flood), but not with many millions of years. However, seeing not only proteins but even cell microstructures after 4,500 years is still surprising, considering how easily bacteria can normally attack them. These ideas could help explain survival over thousands of years. But they seem totally implausible for millions of years, since the above preservation proposals could not stop ordinary breakdown by water (hydrolysis) over vast eons.

Dino DNA

However, even under the best preservation conditions at –5°C, our model predicts that no intact bonds (average length = 1 bp [base pair]) will remain in the DNA ‘strand’ after 6.8 Myr.—M.E. Allentoft et al.

The problem for long-agers is even more acute with their discovery of DNA. Estimates of DNA stability put its upper limit of survival at 125,000 years at 0°C, 17,500 years at 10°C and 2,500 years at 20°C.2 One recent report said:

“There is a general belief that DNA is ‘rock solid’—extremely stable,” says Brandt Eichman, associate professor of biological sciences at Vanderbilt, who directed the project. “Actually DNA is highly reactive.”

On a good day about one million bases in the DNA in a human cell are damaged. These lesions are caused by a combination of normal chemical activity within the cell and exposure to radiation and toxins coming from environmental sources including cigarette smoke, grilled foods and industrial wastes.(Newly discovered DNA repair mechanism, Science News, sciencedaily.com, 5 October 2010)

A recent paper on DNA shows that it might be able to last as much as 400 times longer in bone.(Allentoft, M.E. et al., The half-life of DNA in bone: measuring decay kinetics in 158 dated fossils, Proc. Royal Society B 279(1748):4724-4733,7 December 2012 | doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1745) But even there, there is no way that DNA could last the evolutionary time since dino extinction. Their figures of the time till complete disintegration of DNA (“no intact bonds”) is 22,000 years at 25°C, 131,000 years at 15°C, 882,000 years at 5°C; and even if it could somehow be kept continually below freezing point at –5°C, it could survive only 6.83 Ma—only about a tenth of the assumed evolutionary age. The researchers state:

However, even under the best preservation conditions at –5°C, our model predicts that no intact bonds (average length = 1 bp [base pair]) will remain in the DNA ‘strand’ after 6.8 Myr. This displays the extreme improbability of being able to amplify a 174 bp DNA fragment from an 80–85 Myr old Cretaceous bone.(Allentoft, M.E. et al., The half-life of DNA in bone: measuring decay kinetics in 158 dated fossils, Proc. Royal Society B 279(1748):4724-4733,7 December 2012 | doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1745)

Yet Schweitzer’s team detected DNA in three independent ways. Indeed, one of these chemical tests and specific antibodies specifically detect DNA in its double–stranded form. This shows that it was quite well preserved, since short strands of DNA less than about 10 bp don’t form stable duplexes. The stain DAPI(4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole, a fluorescent stain) lodges in the minor groove of a stable double helix, which requires even more bp (see diagram below), and the stain PI(Propidium iodide (C27H34I2N4), a fluorescent stain) is also an intercalation test.

Again, the first possible response by long-agers is “contamination”. But the DNA was not found everywhere, but only in certain internal regions of the ‘cells’. This pattern was just like in ostrich cells, but nothing like biofilm taken from other sources and exposed to the same DNA-detecting pattern. This is enough to rule out bacteria, because in more complex cells (such as ours and dinos), the DNA is stored in a small part of the cell—the nucleus.

Furthermore, Schweitzer’s team detected a special protein called histone H4. Not only is yet another protein a big problem for millions of years, but this is a specific protein for DNA. (DNA is Deoxy-riboNucleic Acid, so is negatively charged, while histones are alkaline so positively charged, so they attract DNA). In more complex organisms, the histones are tiny spools around which the DNA is wrapped.(Schweitzer, M.H., Montana State University Museum of the Rockies; cited on p. 160 of Morell, V., Dino DNA: The hunt and the hype, Science 261(5118):160–162, 9 July 1993) But histones are not found in bacteria. So, as Schweitzer et al. say, “These data support the presence of non-microbial DNA in these dinosaur cells.”(Schweitzer, M. H. et al. Molecular analyses of dinosaur osteocytes support the presence of endogenous molecules, Bone, 17 October 2012 | doi:10.1016/j.bone.2012.10.010)

Conclusion

It’s hard to improve on one of Mary Schweitzer’s early quotes:

It was exactly like looking at a slice of modern bone. But of course, I couldn’t believe it. I said to the lab technician: “The bones are, after all, 65 million years old. How could blood cells survive that long?”(Segal, E. et al., A genomic code for nucleosome positioning, Nature 442(7104):772–778, 17 August 2006; DOI: 10.1038/nature04979)

But this just shows the grip of the long-age paradigm. A more reasonable and indeed scientific question would be:

This looks like modern bone; I have seen blood cells [and blood vessels] and detected hemoglobin [and now actin, tubulin, collagen, histones, and DNA], and real chemistry shows they can’t survive for 65 million years. What I don’t see is the claimed millions of years. So we should abandon this doctrine.


Dr Jonathan D Sarfati

The claims made by evolutionists regarding origins are based on unobserved, untestable and unrepeatable claims yet are presented as fact. The account given in Genesis is untestable and unrepeatable, but the evidence supports it (note - I did not say "proves" it).

I am very happy to carry on this conversation here, Keith, but others may prefer us to do so via PM rather than here.

Kind regards

[Onelife]

Hi Mr Shinny


http://www.livescience.com/41537-t-rex-soft-tissue.html

Regards

Keith

[wolfie]

Dr Jonathan D Sarfati

The claims made by evolutionists regarding origins are based on unobserved, untestable and unrepeatable claims yet are presented as fact. The account given in Genesis is untestable and unrepeatable, but the evidence supports it (note - I did not say "proves" it).

I am very happy to carry on this conversation here, Keith, but others may prefer us to do so via PM rather than here.

Kind regards

Yes please; then you can quote Google to your hearts content in PM's. So many Google references have been quoted en bloc, ( just copy and paste parts of the discussion) and you will also find them).

[Silver_Shiney]

Hi Mr Shinny


http://www.livescience.com/41537-t-rex-soft-tissue.html

Regards

Keith

A very interesting article, Keith. Thank you for sharing it. It still doesn't prove the millenia they trust in

[Mervyn and Trish]

Agreed Wolfie. Debate is running slightly off topic! Can we get back to arguing with Jack about Brexit!

[Silver_Shiney]

I heard water can be turned into wine. Can someone tell me how, only my wine rack is getting low on stock

It's dead easy, mate, I've done it many times. All you need is some grape concentrate, sugar and yeast, a demijohn and airlock, and you'll have six bottles of slurpy juice in about a year's time

[Silver_Shiney]

Happy to oblige, Wolfie, but on a point of order, I don't get my information from Google but from a website written by PhD holders who prefer facts to supposition.

I see we may be keeping to the European Court of Justice. Dumping that was one of the reasons I voted to leave.

[wolfie]

Happy to oblige, Wolfie, but on a point of order, I don't get my information from Google but from a website written by PhD holders who prefer facts to supposition.

I see we may be keeping to the European Court of Justice. Dumping that was one of the reasons I voted to leave.

Still a website and not your personal opinion which would carry much more weight. than a copy and paste.

wolfie