Archive for the ‘Amusing?’ Category

No Your Dinosaurs! Who Knows for Certain What Dinosaurs Actually Looked Like? Nobody!
Except Perhaps the Eyewitnesses Responsible for the Ancient Dinosaur Art at the Peabody.

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Science, Sophistication of Ancestors, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Oct 19 2013


Isaiah 35:7
“And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water; in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be grass with reeds and rushes.”

           
“No Your Dinosaurs! Who Knows for Certain What Dinosaurs Actually Looked Like? Nobody! Except Perhaps the Eyewitnesses Responsible for the Ancient Dinosaur Art at the Peabody”. by Chris Parker, s8int.com
           

Before you vote; See the follow up to this article Holding On to the Faith of Darwin Though the Hand of God’s Dinosaurs Be Upon Thee

Did Ancient Artists See and Memorialize Dinosaurs In Their Art?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Prologue

In the movie; “The Princess Bride” an important character, Inigo has a conversation with the man in black during a sword fight and that conversation has become a trope in television and movies (convention or device used in creative works). The conversation goes something like this:

Inigo: “I admit it: you are better than I am!”
Man in Black: “Then why are you smiling?”
Inigo: “Because I know something you don’t know.”
Man in Black: “And what is that?”
Inigo: “I AM NOT LEFT HANDED” [Switches the sword to his right hand and starts driving him back]

I sometimes have the feeling that I am in Inigo’s position when I find myself in a conversation with someone about man and dinosaurs living at the same time.

“You believe that man and dinosaurs lived together at the same time within the last 10,000 years they’ll say incredulously”? Or perhaps they’ll say it sneeringly, or contemptuously or in some rare cases even sadly or compassionately.

They are quite certain that they have the upper hand, the science, the good sense, the pure knowledge the unmitigated certainty. They slap their foreheads. They roll their eyes. All that. They believe that they are winning this “fight”-discussion-debate because-come on! They may even be fellow believers.

They’re thinking that I have set science aside for some kind of blind faith belief in what science has said is impossible-for the sake of the Bible. They’re thinking I’m living in some anti-science anti-evidence bubble. However, as a Christian I have choices. I could believe as some Christian’s do that God created through evolution and that man and dinosaur did miss each other by millions of years.

I could believe that the dinosaurs were wiped out in the flood and thus man and dinosaur barely met. I could believe as some Christians do that God sent unbelievers a strong delusion because of their unbelief (Romans 1) and simply put the bones of animals that never existed in the ground in order to further delude them.

I could simply choose not to speak when this topic is raised thinking that as a Christian it is outside of my pay grade, that the answers are unknowable. I could choose to be cowed by the sheer numbers of people who unblinkingly accept the current paradigm.

Caption: The Real Postosuchus? See Below

But I know something they don’t know. I took a fact based approach. I went where the evidence took me and in this internet age the truth can be found. Many non-Christians don’t know that faith is supposed to be built- not on nothing as they assume—but on evidence. “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Heb 1:1

I have spent a lot of time sifting through the evidence in ancient history, the work of ancient “biologists” the articles in old newspapers and recently the evidence in world famous archaeological museums. The evidence is clear. The evidence is persuasive.

The evidence proves that dinosaurs and man lived together all over the world in the last few thousand years. Now, the Bible is a “type” of sword and in this dinosaur and man conversation we’re having they are the ones who don’t have the facts or the truth. There is a reason why I am smiling:– I AM NOT LEFT HANDED!

Peabody Museum Zoomorphic Stone Heads

Historians say that dragons appear in the history and art of virtually every ancient culture (as do stories of a great flood). Here’s an interesting fact along those lines; no matter what culture a piece of ancient art comes from everyone can instantly recognize a dragon. Isn’t that interesting? Here we have a supposedly completely mythological creature, a product of the imagination of man and culture and yet they agree across geography and time in the salient characteristics of their portrayals with the added peculiarity that everyone knows that they are dragons?

No modern artist who works for a science journal or a museum or is otherwise engaged in depicting dinosaurs from a few bones is going to draw a dragon-like creature. So, although dragons are reptilian, frightening sometimes preternaturally large creatures—and so are dinosaurs they don’t often look much alike when you get down to the details. But here’s the rub when it comes to that; no one living actually knows what dinosaurs looked like.

In prior articles on this topic we’ve often quoted Discover Magazine on this point;

There’s a running joke among professional dinosaur artists that goes like this: Given just an elephant skeleton, they’d probably render a titanic hamster. Does anyone know what dinosaurs really looked like? Sure we do. We see them everywhere, not just in the museums, but in magazines, movies, even in value meals at McDonald’s. But all of these lifelike renderings are mostly artistic interpretations based on very sparse scientific evidence. Discover Magazine, What Did Dinosaurs Really Look Like? By William Speed Weed, Christopher Griffith|Friday, September 01, 2000

http://discovermagazine.com/2000/sep/featdino

Of course, Discover Magazine isn’t the only source that admits that science is just guessing when it puts forth a drawing or illustration of a dinosaur—particularly when many dinosaurs are only known from a few bones.

A new book entitled “All Yesterdays: Unique and Speculative Views of Dinosaurs and Other Prehistoric Animals” by paleo artists C.M Koseman and John Conway is a review of dinosaur depictions and misconceptions in science art and a speculation about potential alternate depictions. They are basically letting the reader in on their secret that the work they do is simply informed speculation.


In the photo on the right they freely speculate on how a dinosaur paleontologist might have interpreted the bones (absent muscle and soft parts) of the cow and the housecat (bottom).

This interpretation problem makes it tougher on “crypto-zoo-archaeologists” like me. My hypothesis that man and dinosaur lived during the same age and that the ancient peoples would have left evidence in the form of their art, history and artifacts is complicated by the fact that the work of paleo artists today might not match up with the work of the actual eyewitnesses living in the past.

Thus, for instance a dinosaur in an archaeological museum like Harvard’s Peabody Museum might be perfectly depicted by the ancient artist but not match up with current thinking on how that dinosaur looked and go unrecognized; categorized as zoomorphic, unknown, animal, mythological creature or simply reptile. (Actually my experience is that any depiction recognizable as a dinosaur or one which is deemed too close does not end up in the front room of the museum in any case).

For example, in eyewitness viewings of what I believe are living pterosaurs over the last few years some have described the creature the saw as “almost prehistoric looking”, which could mean that they saw a living creature that did not completely comport with modern illustrations of the creature.

Moche Culture Vase in the Form of…?

In the last few weeks I set out to prove my hypothesis at the Harvard Peabody, online archaeological museum site as well as at other online collection sites. The Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University “is steward to one of the oldest and largest collections of cultural objects in the Western Hemisphere”. Other online collections visited include, the Penn Museum, the Met and several Museums of Central and South America.

Could it be shown that creatures that are recognizable as dinosaurs and Not dragons-in the mythological sense are somehow going unnoticed in their online collections? Can we show how specific types of dinosaurs might have been erroneously depicted? In that case, the depiction would have to be close enough for an identification to be made.

In this article and shall we say “collection” I intend to show once again through the arts of ancient peoples that man and dinosaur lived together within the last 5,000 years—but only to the fair and open minded.

           
The Eyewitness to Recent, Ancient History Dinosaur Collection, Part 1

1)Chasmosaurus at the Museo Larco, Peru


Actually it is not a piece from the Peabody that I wish to start with. It is a piece from the Museo Larco that illustrates the points we have been making about identification and misidentification most clearly. (See complete vessel at top of this article).

The Larco Museum (Spanish: Museo Arqueológico Rafael Larco Herrera) is a privately owned museum of pre-Columbian art, located in the Pueblo Libre District of Lima, Peru. The museum is housed in an 18th-century vice-royal building built over a 7th-century pre-Columbian pyramid.

The Inca civilization spanned the period of 1438 to 1533 in pre-Columbian South America. That would make this piece between 500 to 600 years old.

Inca Pot Water Carrier Lima
Museo Larco, Peru

I believe that the animal atop this Inca water carrier (and atop this article) is a ceratopsian dinosaur of a type similar to Chasmosaurus particularly given the placement of its horn and the shape of its frill. Ceratopsians might have broken down neatly into the categories now suggested by science or they could have been as widely divergent as dogs are today. They may have been sexually dimorphic and animals identified as belonging to another species may have only been sexually dimorphic or juvenile versions of other science-identified species.

“Chasmosaurus (/?kæzm??s?r?s/ KAZ-mo-SAWR-?s) is a genus of ceratopsid dinosaur from the Upper Cretaceous Period of North America. Its name means ‘opening lizard’, referring to the large openings (fenestrae) in its frill (Greek chasma meaning ‘opening’ or ‘hollow’ or ‘gulf’ and sauros meaning ‘lizard’). With a length of 4–5 metres (13–16 ft) and a weight of 2 tonnes (2.2 short tons), Chasmosaurus was a ceratopsian of average size. Like all ceratopsians, it was purely herbivorous. It was initially to be called Protorosaurus, but this name had been previously published for another animal.

All specimens of Chasmosaurus were collected from the Dinosaur Park Formation of the Dinosaur Provincial Park of Alberta, Canada. C. russelli comes from the lower beds of the formation while C. belli comes from middle and upper beds. “…Wikipedia


Let me explain what I believe that you’re looking at. It is a ceratopsian dinosaur similar to the Chasmosaurus. It is 500 years old. The right horn has broken off and is probably what is seen on the animal’s right side from the reader’s perspective.

The heavy ceratopsian tail curls up at the back and the animal fits in terms of body shape and tail for a ceratopsian. The animal has a crest and you should be able to see that the complete head, ending behind the horns includes a solid neck frill ending in a ‘V” shape similar to that of the chasmosaurus. In the photo on the left I have thoughtfully replaced the animals missing horn. The artist took pains to make sure that the ceratopsian toes were outlined for the viewer as well.

I believe what we have here is a depiction of a ceratopsian dinosaur that differs slightly from what one expects given modern depictions. The beak is slightly less pronounced-but evident. The horns are actually in the exact place on its head as the horns on modern Chasmosaurus depictions. The creature has growths (possibly pre-horn?) growths on the front of its face that are not seen on ceratopsian depictions.

This is clearly a depiction of a ceratopsian dinosaur by an actual eyewitness some 500 years ago in pre Columbian South America. It should be noted that all the ceratopsia were supposed to have gone extinct 65 million years ago.

           

2)Peabody Museum ”6,000 to 7,000 Year Old” Ceramic Bottle with Bi-Pedal Dinosaur (Iguanodon?) from South America

“Peabody Number: 90-27-30/54866
Display Title: Black ware stirrup spouted vase
Descriptions:
Inventory Description: Ceramic bottle, stirrup spout, chipped rim, animal effigy, molded body, lying on its side.
Classification:
Stirrup spout
Department: Archaeological
Geography/Provenience:
South America/Peru
Materials: Ceramic


The earliest ceramics known from the Americas have been found in the lower Amazon Basin. Ceramics from the Caverna de Pedra Pintada, near Santarém, Brazil, have been dated to 7,500 to 5,000 years ago. Ceramics from Taperinha, also near Santarém, have been dated to 7,000 to 6,000 years ago.” Peabody Museum

This appears to me quite clearly to represent some type of bi-pedal theropod dinosaur. Here we show the artifact on its side so that the identification of this dinosaur is more easily made.
The trio below is shown with two versions of the dinosaur iguanodon, a bi-pedal dinosaur which has been found in North America.

Distinctive features of iguanodon include large thumb spikes, which were possibly used for defence against predators, combined with long prehensile fifth fingers able to forage for food…Wikipedia.

Unfortunately that part of the sculpture has been worn away-like noses in Egyptian artifacts. Part of the tail has apparently broken off as well. I believe that this piece represents a bi pedal theropod dinosaur like iguanodon or a relative.

           

3)Postosuchus Sculpted by Pre Columbians From the Period AD 500-1350 at The Walters Art Museum?
The creature displayed at the top of the pre Columbian incense burner could be called a dragon, a crocodilian (the museum I.D.) or a mythical creature–but no one who believes that dinosaurs and their alleged ancestors died out more than 65 million years ago would ever think of this as a recently extinct, living creature.

Taking that point of view it is easy to ignore the reptilian/dinosaur like armor, the teeth which no lizard ever sported and the distinct horns. In looking at the creature carefully with the assumption that a living creature was being depicted a tentative crypto-zoo-archaeological identification is that of an archosaur like postosuchus.


Postosuchus, meaning “crocodile from Post”, is an extinct genus of rauisuchian reptiles…Postosuchus is a member of the clade Pseudosuchia, the lineage of archosaurs that includes modern crocodilians (the other main group of archosaurs is Avemetatarsalia, the lineage that includes non-avian dinosaurs and their descendants, birds). Its name refers to Post Quarry, a place in Texas where many fossils of the type species, P. kirkpatricki, were found…

Although the heavy build of the skeleton suggests that Postosuchus walked on all four limbs, the extreme shortness of the forelimbs relative to the hind limbs is a strong indication that Postosuchus was able to walk on two legs…Postosuchus possessed heterodonty dentition, which means each tooth was different in size and shape from the others.

A feature of the skull of postosuchus is a “crest” over each eye. Modern artists have had to decide how to draw or illustrate that skull feature and most have not significantly featured them. This piece from the Walters Art Museum has “eye crests” like those of postosuchus which are more clearly featured as crests above each eye.

In other pieces we’ve noted the three toes of a depiction which were similar to dinosaur toes. Postosuchus actually had a different manus and pes than did the dinosaurs. In the minds of scientists postosuchus and its relatives actually preceded the dinosaurs. Of course, most creationists believe that they lived at the same time.


The Museum Description: This incense burner is topped with the portrayal of a caiman or other member of the Crocodylidae family, one of the frequent animal spirit forms of Central American shamans. Its particularly aggressive stance may refer to the practitioner’s battle against supernatural forces.

Many such incense burners were found ritually broken on the slopes of a principal volcano on the island of Ometepe in Lake Nicaragua, the incense burner lid with its smoke issuing from the top mimicking an active volcano.


Among peoples from southern Nicaragua to Mesoamerica the earth was likened to the back of a crocodile floating in the primordial sea, its dorsal scutes being the volcanic north-south backbone that defines the continents of the Western Hemisphere. This incense burner, then, constitutes a profound ritual vessel pertaining to the transition from the natural to the supernatural realms and a symbolic model of the ancient Costa Rican world.


Uh, huh. That’s pretty complicated. Maybe it’s just a depiction of some exceptional local fauna of the time; an or perhaps a small dinosaur of unknown type. Certainly if this same depiction appeared on a site featuring artists renditions of dinosaurs this piece would not be out of place.

The photos above show comparisons of the ancient art work with modern depictions of postosuchus (without the strong “crests” and body armor and in comparison to the skull and the full skeleton of postosuchus. The comparisons appear to me to show a similarity of this depiction with that of one of the archosaurs–such as postosuchus. The feet are not those of a dinosaurs (many are three toed) but the feet of the animal depicted do correspond to that of our identification.

           

4)Nayarit Chinesco “Embryonic Dog” May Be Baby Sauropod


Nayarit is a state in western Mexico. The Nayarit culture from which this artifact comes is from the period 300 B.C. to 400 A.D.—or even older. This piece is said to represent an embryonic dog. Another identification would seem to be in order for this piece.

           
For one thing, dogs do not have necks this long. Here I’ve shown it in comparison to an animal that really did have such a long neck; the sauropod dinosaur.

Nayarit Chinesco Pottery Painted Embryonic Dog
Online Collections Auction
Auction date November 2012
Pre-Columbian, West Mexico, Ca. 300 BC to 200 AD.
Buff pottery, unique representation, elastic form.
Surface has traces of original polychrome color.
Provenance: Ex-Dr. R. Boyd Stifler, Vanderwagen NM.
Rare specimen Authenticity Guaranteed
Condition:Some wear to surface and with nice dendrite
deposits.”..Online Collections

Recently a sauropod embryo was found and the sauropod embryo depicted comes from the “Tiniest Giants: Discovering Dinosaur Eggs”.

Sauropods are supposed to have gone extinct 65 million years ago.

           

5)Ancient Pueblo Culture (1200 B.C.-1500 A.D.) Native Americans of What is Now Arizona Craft Dinosaur Named Aetosaur; Most of Whose Fossils Have Been Found in Arizona

           
Aetosaur Skeleton Top and Ancient Pueblo Artifact below.


“The Pueblo people are Native American people in the Southwestern United States comprising several different language groups and two major cultural divisions, one organized by matrilineal kinship systems and the other having a patrilineal system.

These determine the clan membership of children, and lines of inheritance and descent. Their traditional economy is based on agriculture and trade. At the time of Spanish encounter in the 16th century, they were living in villages that the Spanish called pueblos, meaning “towns””…Wikipedia

This piece comes from a 1936 expedition to the Hopi reservation and was determined to be from one of the Pueblo Native American cultures. It is described by the Peabody Museum as “zoomorphic”. Looking at a list of dinosaur fossils found in Arizona one can quickly see that there is a similarity between the archaeological piece and –the aetosaur. (Angle of aetosaur skeleton head adjusted for comparison purposes.)

“Aetosaurs order name Aetosauria from Greek, ????? (aetos, “eagle”) and ?????? (sauros, “lizard”)) are an extinct order of heavily armoured, medium- to large-sized Late Triassic herbivorous archosaurs. They have small heads, upturned snouts, erect limbs, and a body covered by plate-like scutes. All aetosaurs belong to the family Stagonolepididae.

Most fossils have been found from Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas…Wikipedia

.

Here is a sobering fact for those of us who can accept the fact that the ancient Pueblo people of Arizona actually saw and depicted an aetosaur which supposedly lived from 200 million years ago becoming extinct 65 million years or more ago;


“Since their armoured plates are often preserved and are abundant in certain localities, aetosaurs serve as important Late Triassic tetrapod index fossils. Many aetosaurs had wide geographic ranges, but their stratigraphic ranges were relatively short. Therefore, the presence of particular aetosaurs can accurately date a site that they are found in.”

You see the problem? Aetosaurs were roaming around the North American continent during the span of the Pueblo peoples; 1200 B.C. to 1500 A.D. and one of their artists memorialized the aetosaur in ceramic.

Peabody Number: 36-131-10/8060
Display Title: Zooomorphic black on white potsherd–animal form
Inventory Description: Ceramic, zoomorphic figurine, with tail, opened mouth, two feet, black painted design on back and sides
Classification: Figurine
Department: Archaeological
Culture/Period: Pueblo
Geography/Provenience: North America/United States/Arizona/Navajo County/Hopi Reservation/Antelope Mesa/Awatovi
Intrasite: Test 14
Geo-Locale: Antelope Mesa
Materials: Ceramic Pigment
Provenance: Dr. John Otis Brew (1936)
Provenance: Peabody Museum Expedition (1936)

           
6) Crested Hadrosaur Depiction by the Ancient Peoples of Costa Rica at the Peabody Museum. (Modern Artists May Need to Put Some Weight on the Bones of these Depictions)

Crested Dinosaurs are fairly easy to recognize. Most of the crested dinosaurs are from the Lambeosaurinae of the hadrosaur group. The hadrosaurs were also known as the duck billed dinosaurs.


This depiction forms the legs of an ancient pottery piece. The pot is from Costa Rica, Central America. The crests on the various types of lambosaurines differed in size and shape even among the same species and they likely differed due to age and due to sexual dimorphism.

The hadrosaurs depicted have relatively small, round crests. Here we compare them to a number of known lambeosaurines including corythsaurus.


It is interesting that the depictions are clearly of the same animal but that the portraits differ. The ancient depictions are similar to modern ones except for the apparent weight of the creatures and the size of the eyes depicted.

“Archaeologists now know that civilization existed in Costa Rica for thousands of years before the arrival of Columbus, and evidence of human occupation in the region dates back 10,000 years. Among the cultural mysteries left behind by the area’s pre-Columbian inhabitants are thousands of perfectly spherical granite bolas that have been found near the west coast.


The sizes of these inimitable relics range from that of a baseball to that of a Volkswagen bus. Ruins of a large, ancient city complete with aqueducts were recently found east of San Jose, and some marvelously sophisticated gold and jade work was being wrought in the southwest as far back as 1,000 years ago. Some archeological sites in the central highlands and Nicoya peninsula have shown evidence of influence from the Mexican Olmec and Nahuatl civilizations.

By the time Columbus arrived, there were four major indigenous tribes living in Costa Rica. The east coast was the realm of the Caribs, while the Borucas, Chibchas, and Diquis resided in the southwest. “..geographia.com

Peabody Number: 26-44-20/C9956
Display Title: Small pottery vessel
Descriptions: Inventory Description: Ceramic complete tripod jar, zoomorphic rattle feet (1 missing)
Classification: Jar
Department: Archaeological
Geography/Provenience:
Central America/Costa Rica

           

7)A New Look at Dicynodont Therapsids Like Moschop from the Ancient Peoples Living I Peru, South America


The identity of this animal portrait was unknown apparently and thus it was given the general description “animal effigy” by the Harvard Peabody Museum. Was this animal purely a mythological one seen only in the imaginary eye of the artist—or was it seen with the artist’s actual eyes?

As you will see the depiction of the living therapsid is actually close enough to modern depictions of these types of creatures as to be readily identified. In appearance it is close to that of therapsids such as moschops which we know from fossils found in South Africa.

‘Moschops (Greek for “calf face”) is an extinct genus of therapsid that lived in the Guadalupian epoch, around 268-260 million years ago. Therapsids are synapsids which were at one time the dominant land animals. It was around 2.7 metres (8 ft 10 in) long..

….Moschops was heavily built, and had short, chisel-like teeth for cropping vegetation. Moschops mostly ate plants, but sometimes ate meat. The forelegs sprawled outwards, like those of a modern lizard, but the hind legs were under the body, like those of a mammal.” Wikipedia

Peabody Number: 46-77-30/5868
Display Title: Pottery animal figurine
Descriptions: Inventory Description: Ceramic whistle, animal effigy
Classification: Whistle
Department: Archaeological
Geography/Provenience:
South America/Peru/La Libertad Region///Sausal
Materials: Ceramic


Here we show the ancient, ceramic artifact in comparison to moschop and to another dicynodont therapsid. Moschops and therapsids similar to him supposedly went extinct before the dinosaurs even evolved. Clearly of this ancient Peruvian artifact represents one of these creatures something is extremely wrong with the evolutionary time scale.
           

8) Quapaw’s “Underwater Panther” from the 1500”s Could In Fact Be an Eyewitness Depiction of Dinosaur Such As Tenontosaurus


According to Wikipedia the Mississippian culture was a mound building group of indigenous people who lived in the Midwestern, Eastern, and Southeastern United States from approximately 800 A.D. to 1500 A.D. The collectors at Artsmia.org believe it to be a depiction of a mythological creature called an underwater panther. That makes these people seem “mystical” all right.

But what if it is an accurate depiction of an animal living at the time that we would call a dinosaur-rendered somewhat invisible as a depiction because modern versions of the creature differ greatly? Here is the museum description:

“The prominent colored swirls and eye motifs mark this animal as an Underwater Panther, one of the primary beings in the ancient Mississippian belief system and that of their descendants. The swirling pattern on its sides signifies water, while the eye markings allude to the animal’s unusually keen vision.

Red and white were symbolically significant colors that represented fundamental oppositions such as peace and war, light and dark and the on-going struggle between the celestial and subterranean realms. Underwater Panthers belonged to the subterranean and possessed great supernatural power. Their significance led Mississippian and subsequent artists to depict them frequently in many forms and media, including three-dimensional sculptures like this vessel. “

The toes of this creature appear to be triple toed-similar to a dinosaur. Its tail is very thick in the way dinosaur tails are often illustrated by modern paleo artists. I took a look to see what types of dinosaur fossils were prominent with respect to quadruped dinosaurs in those parts of the United States.


Here we show the “underwater panther” in comparison to tenontosaurus a genus of medium to large ornnithopod dinosaurs. It should be noted that there were a number of ornnithopod dinosaurs found to have lived in those parts of north America which would have had similar body shapes.

The genus tenontosaurus is known from the late Aptian to Albian ages of the middle Cretaceous period sediments of western North America, dating between 115 to 108 million years ago. It was formerly thought to be a ‘hypsilophodont’, but since Hypsilophodontia is no longer considered a clade, it is now considered to be a very primitive iguanodont.

The teeth of this portrait do give me pause. The point is however not that we know the specific type of dinosaur that was sculpted, but rather that it is more likely that it is a dinosaur being depicted here rather than an underwater panther (which itself sounds like a cryptid).

Vessel
Artist Unknown (Quapaw)
(United States, North America), c. 1500
Ceramic, pigment
9 1/8 x 10 3/8 x 5 1/4 in. (23.18 x 26.35 x 13.34 cm)
The William Hood Dunwoody Fund 2004.33

           

9)Metropolitan Museum of Asian Art’s Sauropod Dinosaur from Iran 250 B.C. to 225 A.D.


This artifact is from the Metropolitan Museum of Asian art and is labeled “zoomorphic”. I’m somewhat surprised that they didn’t call it a camel. Clearly however it is a sculpted ceramic in the form of a sauropod dinosaur.

Sauropod dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago according to science. This piece was estimated to have been made between 250 B.C. and 225 A.ZD. That period obviously covers the time of Christ.

Zoomorphic vessel
250 B.C.E.- 225 C.E.
Parthian period
Ceramic
H: 15.2 W: 28.4 D: 12.1 cm
Northern Iran, Northern Iran S1987.944

           

10) Ulisse Aldrovandi’s Detailed Drawing of A Long Tailed Pterosaur; Before They Were “Discovered” By Science

Ulisse Aldrovandi (also Aldrovandus) was born in 1522 and died in 1605. He is sometimes referred to as the father of natural history studies. By profession he was a professor of philosophy but eventually became one of the first professors of the natural sciences at Bologna (no offense intended).


Ulisse died 250 years before the first pterosaur was discovered by a scientist and he mistakenly thought it was a sea going creature. It was not until the beginning of the 19th century that science realized that pterosaurs were flying creatures.

“The first pterosaur fossil was described by the Italian naturalist Cosimo Collini in 1784. Collini misinterpreted his specimen as a seagoing creature that used its long front limbs as paddles.

A few scientists continued to support the aquatic interpretation even until 1830, when the German zoologist Johann Georg Wagler suggested that Pterodactylus used its wings as flippers. Georges Cuvier first suggested that pterosaurs were flying creatures in 1801, and coined the name “Ptero-dactyle” in 1809 for the specimen recovered in Germany.” …Wikipedia

After his death his book Serpentum, et draconum historiæ Serpentum, et Draconum was published. In it, was a drawing supposedly from life (well it was dead!) of a dragon which comports very well with a long tailed, crested pterosaur especially given that Aldrovandi was a philosopher and naturalist –and not an artist.

The interesting thing about Aldrovandi’s pterosaur is that it has the crest of the pteranodon and the tail of one of the long tailed rhamphorhynchoid pterosaurs. Although we don’t know this exact pterosaur from science it closely matches modern day eyewitness descriptions and drawings of a long tailed pterosaur. (There are long tail crested pterosaurs known to science but none with the classic bone sticking out the back of its head kind).

Note what might look like another set of small wings at the legs of Aldrovandi’s dragon. It is shown here in the more modern drawing between the pteranodon’s legs. That is called the uropatagium; and since it does not appear on birds it is one indication that Aldrovandi actually saw what he drew.

“some pterosaur groups had a membrane that stretched between the legs, possibly connecting to or incorporating the tail, called the uropatagium; the extent of this membrane isn’t certain, as studies on Sordes seem to suggest that it simply connected the legs but did not involve the tail (rendering it a cruropatagium). It is generally agreed though that non-pterodactyloid pterosaurs had a broader uro/cruropatagium, with pterodactyloids only having membranes running along the legs; Pteranodon in particular might have developed/redeveloped an uropatagium, given the structure of the tail”..Wikipedia

The picture on the right (above) shows Aldrovandi’s dragon compared to Eskin Kuhn’s drawing (bottom, right) from his eyewitness sighting in the 1970’s. Kuhn was an artist and a soldier stationed at Guantanmo Bay, Cuba. His “pteranodon” had both the backwards facing “crest” and the long tail with tail vain of the rhamphorhynchoid pterosaurs. Top right is a modern drawing of a pteranodon without the long tail. Aldrovandi has the tail, crest and bat like wings of a pterosaur.
           

11) Peabody Museum Seeks to Make an Ancient Veraguas Culture Dinosaur Evolve Into a Bird Right Before Our Eyes

The “Bird” effigy ceramic whistle (middle) is from the ancient Veraguas Culture of Panama. That culture inhabited Panama from approximately 700 A.D. to 1530 A.D.

“This culture inhabited the central region of what is now province of Veraguás in Panama. The area extends from the Pacific to the Caribbean coast and includes a number of islands. The climate here is mainly humid and tropical, and the landscape includes wooded areas and valleys suitable for agriculture, as well as high mountains, hilly areas, and coastal lowlands.” Museo Chileno de Arte Precolombino


The ceramic sculpture with three legs does not have the correct number for either the bird (two) or the crested hadrosaur (four). My take is that given the teeth (which birds do not have) and the thick tail this is not a depiction of a bird but rather of a crested hadrosaur such as corythosaurus.

The single combined front legs represent the two front legs of the creature and this is not uncommon with pre Columbian art. One can certainly decide for his or her self.

Peabody Number: 39-90-20/6461
Display Title: Pottery bird effigy whistle. Light brown, probably faded from red.
Descriptions:
Inventory Description: Ceramic whistle, animal effigy with tripod legs
Classification: Ceramic
Department: Archaeological
Culture/Period: Veraguas
Geography/Provenience: Central America/Panama/Veraguas

           

12)Plesiosaur or Dinosaur? Mythological or Cryptozoological?


Here are a number of ancient artifacts that do beg the question; sea monster or dinosaur. It may not be clear what animal the artist has in mind but I believe that they so clearly mirror what modern day artists see as dinosaurs and marine reptiles that they simply cannot be imaginary creatures.

The ancient artist in each case intended to represent an actual living creature and they must have expected the beholder to recognize what the creature was as well. In each of these examples only a portion of the animal is sculpted making the crypto detective work more difficult.

In situations like these the museum or the auction house usually leaves this kind of speculation to the viewer but often uses the term “zoomorphic” as the description. Often as well they will name a creature for which if it were truly what the ancient artist intended he/she would have proven to be a terrible artist. That should drive down prices!

Christie’s auction house described this artifact as a horse which may seem reasonable at first but no horse would have that long a neck. Alternative identifications include the plesiosaur or a dinosaur. Plesiosaurs of course supposedly went extinct around 65 million years ago as did it is claimed, the dinosaur.

The artifact is thought to have come from the period of up to 1,000 Years before Christ.

Christie’s
• Overview
• Features
Lot Description
ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN TERRACOTTA ZOOMORPHIC RHYTON
CIRCA LATE 1ST MILLENNIUM B.C.

One in the form of a seated camel, black glazed, carrying two jars on either side of its back; another in the form of a horse, a strap handle joining the rim to the back of the vessel, a perforation at the top of the head forming the spout, 16 cm. high max.; an Amlash terracotta steatopygous idol, possibly 2nd Millenium B.C., 20.5 cm. high, mounted (repaired); and a bull rhyton, not ancient, 15 cm. high (4)

This item is described as a “serpent” effigy bowl; perhaps a “sea serpent”?


This pottery piece has been categorized as Neeley’s Ferry which are artifacts of one of the ancient group of State of Arkansas cultures. Ancient peoples are thought to have lived in Arkansas between 600 B.C. and 1600 A.D.

The Peabody specifically dated the artifact between 1350 and 1550.

This piece is further described as an earthen bowl, animal. The animal has a head with teeth giving the appearance of either a sea creature with long winding tail or perhaps a dinosaur.


Peabody Number: 80-20-10/21621
Display Title: Neeley’s Ferry serpent effigy bowl head and tail start on body & on short axis
Descriptions:
Inventory Description: Ceramic, complete vessel, bowl, mended, serpent head and tail
Object Description: Earthen bowl, animal. Neeley’s Ferry serpent effigy bowl, head and tail start on body, tail turned on itself, head and tail on short axis.
Classification: Bowl
Department: Archaeological
Date: A.D. 1350 – 1550
Culture/Period: Parkin Phase
Geography/Provenience: North America/United States/Arkansas/Cross County//Halcomb’s Mounds; Arkansas State Intrasite: Grave, 18 inches deep; 2 feet from river

Above shows our “sea monster” at another angle which provides additional detail concerning the shape of the head and tail. By the way, seals have fins and flippers not “tails”.

This final piece is also from the Neeley’s Ferry mounds and is described as a “ceramic effigy vessel of zoomorphic design”.


This artifact was found in a gravesite buried three feet below ground level and has been dated from the period between 1350-1550.

As you can see it is very reminiscent of modern paleoartist’s depiction of theropod or meat eating dinosaurs. Of course, we only have the head but is it possible that the artist saw and knew about a then living version of such a creature?

Or is it more believable that this is an effigy of a mythological animal which accidently reminds us of modern ideas about how dinosaurs looked?

Peabody Number: 80-20-10/21195
Display Title: Ceramic effigy vessel, zoomorphic design
Descriptions: Inventory Description: Ceramic effigy vessel, zoomophic design
Classification: Effigy
Department: Archaeological
Date: A.D. 1350 – 1550
Culture/Period: Parkin Phase
Geography/Provenience:North America/United States/Arkansas/Cross County//Neeley’s Ferry Mounds; Arkansas State # 3CS24
Intrasite: Grave, 3 feet deep Geo-Locale: Saint Francis River, West side of
Materials: Ceramic
Collector: Edwin Curtiss (01/01/1880)

           

Bonus: Nicoya, Pre Columbian Incense Burner Maker Tops Reptilian Artifact with Feet of a Theropod Dinosaur Which is Quite A Feat for Someone Who Missed Dinosaurs by 65M Years



Top left is a pre Columbian Censer (Incensario), from the 10th–12th century. There are many examples of this type of pre Columbian censer topped by a dragon/dinosaur. The excellent example at the top left is at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. If you take the time you can see the full body of a quadruped, dinosaur like creature with an extremely ornate crest or horns. This is typical of these artifacts.

No matter how un crocodile like the animal perched at the top is this type of vessel is known as either alligator or crocodile ware and elaborate stories have been concocted by archaeologists about the sacred nature of crocodiles and alligators in the pre Columbian cultures. Here’s a quote describing the object, top left by the Met.

The flare-footed, spherical bowl of this ceramic censer is enhanced, in silhouette, by the flamboyance of its chimney. Textured, appliqué bands encircle and emphasize the tall smoothness of the chimney. On the perforated cap rests an elaborate crested crocodilian. Smoke from the incense that was burned in the bowl escaped through the holes of the cap and from openings in the animal’s body. The rhythmical texture of the appliqué visually unites it with the surface of the creature’s body where the nubby portions are taken to represent the scutes of the reptile.

Both textured appliqués and scutes are surfaced in white. The spiky crest that surrounds the head is customarily found in incensarios of this period. Crocodilians frequently appear in Costa Rican art, strongly suggesting the supernatural import of these creatures in ancient times…The Met

On the Top right is a photo of one of those pre Columbian artifacts, Nicoya, an incense burner.
what is interesting about the artifact on the top, right is that a close up of the animals feet (bottom left) reveal and striking similarity of its feet as sculpted to that of the theropod dinsoaurs (bottom, right) and unlike those of lizards-or crocodiles.

           

Conclusion: There are hundreds if not thousands of artifacts in museums around the world containing representations of extinct creatures that we now called dinosaurs. The most obvious examples are labeled as fakes and are in provide collections.

Those that are not obvious dinosaurs are labeled dragons, unknown, zoomorphic, mythological, animal etc. Of course many artifacts are just those things. The issue is that when a group (archaeologists) are absolutely convinced that these animals lived millions of years ago all evidence will be viewed to reflect that belief and those that don’t will be reinterpreted, labeled or hidden away.

In any case if you should find that even one of the items in our collection is a dinosaur-or that a dinosaur is the most likely explanation that one should be enough to make you question the current scientific history control. But we understand that bucking the system is difficult to do.

Since I began with a quote from the Princess Bride it might be appropriate to finish with a modified version of another such quote:

Big Science: We face each other as God intended. Sportsmanlike. No tricks, no weapons, skill against skill alone. (not actually a believer)
Believer: You mean, you’ll put down your rock and I’ll put down my sword, and we’ll try to convince each other like civilized people-with facts and evidence?
Big Science; [brandishing rock (public opinion, science mythology, ridicule] I could just wipe you out now.
Believer: Frankly, I think the odds are slightly in your favor at hand fighting.
Big Science: It’s not my fault being the biggest and the strongest. I don’t even exercise.

Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaurs-How Evolutionary Science Hides Historical Man and Dinosaur Interaction in Plain Sight

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Science, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 13 2011


“Behold now, behemoth, which I made as well as thee; He eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, And his force is in the muscles of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are as tubes of brass; His limbs are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God….. Job 40

“So God created the Great Dragons” …Genesis 1:21 The Latin Vulgate; 5th Century

 

By Chris Parker, Copyright 2011
Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaurs Part 2

Obi-Wan Kenobi is a fictional character and one of the primary protagonists in the Star Wars movie series. Portrayed by Alec Guinness in the original trilogy, he was one of the most memorable. In the world of the Star Wars films, Kenobi had a particular skill that he used to great effect known now as “conversational hypnosis”. He was able to convince his antagonists by speaking in a specific tone of voice to alter their intended courses of action or for example, to see something that wasn’t in fact there.

Someone or something with even greater abilities is at work here in the real world. When it comes to modern science’s ability to utilize that same skill in convincing the world that dinosaurs and man never interacted, I’m afraid that Obi-Wan Kenobi comes off as a Wookiee;/rookie. Of course, in the movie Obi-Wan had the virtue of not being on the “dark” side. Not true of modern science.

Citizen: ”Science, Shouldn’t I look into the dinosaur/ancient dragon connection more closely?”
Evolutionary Science: [with a small wave of its hand]’ You don’t need to look into the dinosaur question more closely”.
Citizen: ” We don’t need to look more closely.”
Evolutionary Science: [calmly, smoothly, head moving side to side; indicating no..] These aren’t the dinosaurs you’re looking for.
Citizen: [trancelike] “These aren’t the dinosaurs I’m looking for.”
Evolutionary Science: You can go about your business.
Citizen: “ I can go about my business”.
Evolutionary Science:” Move along”.
Citizen: “ Moving along, moving along.”

It’s a bit ironic how easily even evolutionists accept portrayals of man and dinosaur together in cartoons, television programs and movies. However, we have all been trained regarding when it is acceptable to see these interactions and when it is not. Dinosaurs in cartoons; yes-dinosaurs in ancient art museums, no!

(I know that this particular one isn’t funny, but how about; “When this game evolves we’ll be using pigskin instead of dinosaur skin, but they won’t be here ‘til the Olicene”?)

Click on the cartoon above for the rest of this story. The point; dinosaurs and dragons; change the context change the dragon.

 

Photo Right:Top-Rhamphorynchus fossil at the British Nuseum, 1922. Bottom- Aurora Defeating the Dragon, Aurora Consurgens, Published 1420.

When the British Museum put the fossil remains of Rhamphorynchus on display in 1922, it was labeled “Pterodactyl or Extinct Flying Dragon”, drawing a direct line from the pterosaur of modern science to the historic tales of dragons, flying and otherwise that had pervaded the written and artistic history of virtually every ancient culture.

A photograph of that 1922 exhibit is shown here along with a drawing from the 1420 Book Aurora Consurgens (Aurora Defeating the Dragon). This 1420 book depicts a version of the British Museum pterosaur some 350 years prior to their scientific discovery by Cosimo Collini in 1784. Collini thought that they were seagoing creatures.

It’s true that pterosaurs are not considered to be dinosaurs but ancient cultures considered them all (dinosaurs, marine reptiles and pterosaurs) as either dragons or flying dragons. So what happened? How did the clear reference made by the British Museum of the obvious link between, giant, dangerous, reptilian, land, air and sea monsters with the modern discovery of giant, dangerous, reptilian, land air and sea monsters that we call dinosaurs get severed? These dragons are not the dinosaurs you seek!

Let’s start with why before we consider how. Even prior to Darwin many people had become skeptical about such things as the Biblical chronology of the earth and biblical history. For many dragons were considered mythological and a reason to doubt the Bible’s veracity. In this same period, the theories of the geologic column and formation of the earth over millions of years served as grist for the evolution mill. The term dinosaur was coined in 1842. Origin of the Species was published in 1859. All these tended to provide some evidence or support for Atheists and skeptics.

As more and more of these giant, mysterious creatures science called dinosaurs were discovered there was a chance that they could have been associated with the dragons of “recorded history” but instead were placed by science by use of the geologic column to an age millions of years ago.

This fit neatly with modern anti-biblical notions regarding the age of the earth and with evolutionary processes which needed millions and billions of years to complete. Of course any suggestions that dinosaurs were the dragons of the Bible and of ancient cultures would serve to undermine these theories and to support the Bible. The relatively new claim that birds evolved from dinosaurs would seem even more ridiculous if it was understood that dinosaurs were running around with birds –and man just a few years ago.

How Did They do it?

For one thing; scientific illustrators try to make sure that dinosaur depictions look nothing at all like ancient depictions of dragons. It may surprise you to know that scientists actually have no idea what dinosaurs looked like. Witness this rather long exerpt from a Discover Magazine Article in 2000 entitled: What Did Dinosaurs Really Look Like?

“In recent months, artists in the workshop have been putting finishing touches on a special exhibit called Fighting Dinosaurs. In a diorama for the new exhibit a fierce velociraptor, looking like a thinned-down turkey with frighteningly large teeth, stalks a protoceratops. With a flanged crest and beaked mouth that make it look like a goat-sized version of its larger and more famous cousin, Triceratops, the protoceratops sees the predator coming and snarls.


The scene is so vivid that some visitors may glance around nervously to be certain they haven’t been whisked back 80 million years by a hidden time machine. “When you come upon a diorama,” says David Harvey, the museum’s vice president of exhibitions, “it transcends all of the data. It becomes a real experience.”

Yet it is precisely that experience with which a growing number of scientists have a big problem: There is precious little data about dinosaurs to transcend. What the museum scientists know about Indians, whales, and elephants is more than enough to mimic real life. But when it comes to dinosaurs, all they really have to work with is an incomplete jumble of bones. Indeed, if the exhibits department were limited to just skeletal data for its dioramas and reconstructions, these halls would take on a most unromantic flavor. For instance, the Indians in the canoe would lack noses, ears, and breasts, and the diorama artists (ignoring for the moment that they are humans themselves) would be at a loss for what to cover them in—slick skin like a dolphin? Monkey fur? Gorilla hair? As for the blue whale, no one would know to make it blue. And the elephants are a special case. There’s a running joke among professional dinosaur artists that goes like this: Given just an elephant skeleton, they’d probably render a titanic hamster.

Does anyone know what dinosaurs really looked like? Sure we do. We see them everywhere, not just in the museums, but in magazines, movies, even in value meals at McDonald’s. But all of these lifelike renderings are mostly artistic interpretations based on very sparse scientific evidence. To begin with, dinosaur skeletons are rarely found intact, and figuring out how scattered bones fit together is not always clear. Then, making the leap of placing tissue and skin on those bones is a process fraught with unknowns.

Some paleontologists trained in comparative anatomy are beginning to analyze microscopic marks that soft tissues make on bones in search of clues to what dinosaurs actually looked like. But taking a pile of bones and conjuring up what snarling dinosaurs about to battle each other really looked like involves at best equal parts educated guesswork and complete artistic fancy. As Mark Norell, curator of vertebrate paleontology at the museum, puts it, dinosaur artwork “is a fantastic leap from what we know.” And most scientists say we may never know a lot more than we do now”….Discover Magazine, September 2000

Dinosaurs look as little like dragons as possible considering that they are both giant, reptilian ‘monsters”. Could artists render them with bonier heads, external ears, beards and the ferocious dragon mien? Not if they want them published or taken seriously. If dinosaurs looked more like dragons it would be even more difficult to get us to “move along” on this issue.

Just a few more things about dinosaurs here; there are not nearly as many types of dinosaurs as you think. Because of evolution theory, dinosaurs are supposed to differ from continent to continent but they don’t. This doesn’t stop science from giving them different names though.

This last note will be important as we begin to look at some actual dinosaur depictions from ancient China—the actual intent of this article –if I can get to it. An article describing a recent study was published in Live Science on June 22, 2009:

Giant Dinosaurs Get Downsized “Some dinosaurs were the largest creatures ever to walk on land, including the classic long-necked, whip-tailed Diplodocus, but a new study suggests it and its many extinct brethren weighed as little as half as much as previously thought.” A new equation for calculating dinosaur mass based on skeletons found that scientists have been overestimating the girth of many dinosaurs.” Giant Dinosaurs get Downsized

    Photo:Might down sized sauropods have looked like this 3,500 year old Mesopotamian Cylinder Seal depiction rather than the standard depiction on the right?

    More here.


Please keep the foregoing in mind and your mind open as you view a few of the many, many examples of dinosaurs catalogued by the ancient Chinese and classed as mythological dragons by modern science; “Crouching dragon? Hidden Dinosaur?” I picked China here today because China and Asia are thought to be the ancient source of the “mythological dragon”. In truth, they appeared in the art and written history of virtually all ancient cultures in some form because “dinosaurs” lived all over the planet within recorded history. Of course it must be said that many alleged mythological creatures were in fact fanciful.

It’s time for a little show and tell!
[whisper] chris parker; these are not the dinosaurs you seek…

Tang Dynasty Running Dragons

I’ve often particularly noticed these little gold Tang Dynasty (618 A.D. to 907 A.D.) running dragons at the Shanghai Museum. Known as running dragons, this little herd of “dragons” are versions of the same type of dragon that crops up in the art of a number of ancient Chinese Dynasties. What a curious way to portray a mythological creature! In a herd.

I thought that perhaps they might be depictions of actual creatures but I was never successful in finding anything similar in modern depictions of dinosaurs.

I noted that there are other versions of this dragon in ancient Chinese art, but I also came across a very similar dragon in the art of ancient Babylon. What strikes me about these dragons is their slight build but also the seemingly “exaggerated” distance between their front and back legs. They certainly don’t make one think of most modern depictions of dinosaurs.

Remember however, that 1) no scientist today has a clue what dinosaurs actually looked like and 2)there is some indication that artists have been placing a little too much meat on the bone; oversizing them as much as double according to the Live Science article quoted above.

The Tang Dynasty dragons are in the center; on the right of the graphic is the famous dragon of Marduk from the Babylonian Ishtar gate. The Babylonian dragon precedes the Tang Dynasty versions by 1,000 years. Is it a coincidence that two ancient societies created nearly identical mythological dragons?


Perhaps. But perhaps not.. The creature on the left is Massospondylus (above photo; skeleton is alongside this para) (“a genus of prosauropod dinosaur from the early Jurassic Period (Hettangian to Pliensbachian ages, ca. 200–183 million years ago).” Wikipedia), as it appears on a Canadian stamp.

Massopondylus’ skeleton is very slight and most artists have depicted it as a heavier creature. However, drawn as a slighter animal it bears a resemblance to the Chinese dragons. Certainly if this group of dinosaurs, including other similar dinosaurs such as plateosaurus (small prosauropods) had been depicted like this some of us would have drawn a straighter line between dinosaurs and dragons even without the external “dragon” features.

“fossil concentrations have suggested that Massospondylus was a herd animal, perhaps wandering through the ancient landscape of what is today South Africa – as well as the rest of Africa – like modern wildebeest. It was certainly widespread. Remains of Massospondylus have also been found in North and South America, China and India.

When Massospondylus was alive, today’s land masses were all joined together in the super-continent Pangaea (‘Pan-jee-a’, which is Greek for “All Earth”). This distribution of fossils indicates that the animals were present in large numbers over very large areas.” ….www.primeorigins.co.za/young_minds/massospondylus.htm

Let’s look at other slighter depictions of prosauropods like Massopondylus and compare them to depictions of ancient Chinese “dragons”.

At left, on top, is a Song dynasty dragon, (1127 A.D.-1279 A.D.) in silver and gold with turquoise inlays from the Musee Guimet, in Paris. Below is a depiction of plateosaurus, a prosauropod, similar to massospondylus. (Note to the detail oriented: the modern depiction has the rear left leg extended backwards at the same time as the forward left leg is extended forward. The mythological dragon seems as though he has the better gait?)

Do these dragons in fact represent truer versions of prosauropod? It could be. The point remains that no one knows what dinosaurs actually looked like.

 

 

I want to show you an additional dinosaur depiction that makes it clear that the same allegedly mythological dinosaur was modeled by as we showed the Babylonians on the Ishtar Gate, (604- 562 BC), the Tang Dynasty (618A.D. -907A.D.) and ancient South America from the Pre-classical Chupicuaro Culture (800 BC to 200 AD).

On top is a piece from the Julsrud collection; a collection of over 30 thousand miniature figurines found buried at the foot of El Toro Mountain on the outskirts of Acambaro, Mexico.

Of course, because the collection features so many obvious dinosaurs interacting with man it is not considered to be genuine. It is remarkable that the same dinosaur/dragon depiction has appeared on at least three continents representing cultures spanning 1,500 years.

The dinosaur/dragon on the bottom is also from the Tang Dynasty; it is a rare painted ceramic that recently sold at auction for over $23,000. The fact that the 1945 discovered Julsrud collection depicts dinosaurs not as modern artists do but as the ancients did provides credibility for the collection and the idea that these are real and not mythological creatures.


Here on the right an apparently clueless ancient Chinese hunter chases a “mythological creature” with either a bow or a bolo weapon. These Sketches (rubbings) of Han Dynasty (206 B.C. to 220 A.D.)motifs are by Lampo Leong, a University of Missouri Professor. The dynamic movement is typical of Han art. This appears to be the same dragon depicted by the Tang Dynasty, the ancient Babylonians, the ancient South Americans and-the Canadians!?

Science does not know hat dinosaurs looked like but “it” is sure of this one thing; they did not look anything like dragons!

Moving on.

Liao Dynasty

This next beautiful piece comes down to use from Liao Dynasty, China. (Photo from Wikimedia). It is a drinking flask covered with a Sancai glaze.

“The Liao Dynasty, also known as the Khitan Empire was an empire in East Asia that ruled over the regions of Manchuria, Mongolia, and parts of northern China proper between 907 – 1125. It was founded by the Yelü clan of the Khitan people in the same year as Tang Dynasty collapsed (907), even though its first ruler, Yelü Abaoji (Yaruud Ambagai Khan), did not declare an era name until 916.” Wikipedia

This piece is interesting because it features two different dragons. I want to discuss the “dragon” on the top of the flask. First of all, as for it being a dragon; it instead reminds me very much of a ceratopsian dinosaur. After all “ceratopsian” is Greek for “horned face”. The ceratopsians, which includes triceratops; supposedly went extinct more than 65 million years prior to the Liao Dynasty.

I see the horned face, and I see what appears to be from the only angle we have, a rudimentary neck frill.

But do you know what else?

Yes! The feet!. The dinosaur feet! Well, feet that would make tracks similar to those three-toed tracks made by many types of dinosaurs (although there are wide variations in three-toed dinosaur tracks). Note here the leptoceratopsian dinosaur; his feet are very similar to that of our dragon aboard the flask.

Note: “Except in extraordinary circumstances, it’s pretty much impossible to identify the specific genus or species of dinosaur that made a given footprint. What paleontologists can figure out fairly easily is whether the dinosaur was bipedal or quadruped (that is, whether it walked on two or four feet); what geological period it lived in (based on the age of the sediment where the footprint is found); and its approximate size and weight (based on the size and depth of the footprint).”..About.com Dinosaurs

Early American naturalist Edward Hitchcock wrongly interpreted the thousands of dinosaur footprints that he encountered on the America plains as the footprints of giant, flightless birds who roamed the Americas in giant herds. His mistaken hypothesis was taken up by a number of other naturalists for a time.

Here however, the Ancient Chinese somehow rightly associated dinosaur footprints with large dragon and dinosaur-like reptiles….

On the right here we compare the two right footprints of our Liao Dynasty dragon with those of the dinosaur. My guess is that the Ancient Chinese did not have to look at ancient tracks on the plain to figure out what sorts of creatures made them. The creatures; dinosaurs were still living at that time.

 

 

Late Eastern Zhou Sauropod

“The Shang dynasty (1766 BC – 1027 BC) ruled parts of northern and central China. Its capital city was located at Anyang near the border of Henan from about 1384 BCE. This dynasty was based on agriculture; millet, wheat, and barley were the primary crops grown.

In addition to the crops, silkworms, pigs, dogs, sheep, and oxen were raised. Aside from their agricultural prowess, the Shang dynasty was also advanced in metallurgy. Bronze ships, weapons, and tools were found from that era.” Thinkquest

This Ancient Chinese ornamental box of bronze features an unmistakable depiction of a sauropod dinosaur. To be more precise, likely a prosauropod dinosaur. A version of the object appeared in the book (The Great Bronze Age of China, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980, p. 285.) Fong, Wen ed. This photo is from Zhengzhou, from the Henan Museum.

The sauropod dinosaurs are easily recognizable and difficult to miss, however, might science here again made its depictions of the creature to large? One alternative to consider is that the creature depicted is one of the group that modern science now calls prosauropods who among other things was generally smaller. The creature crawling up the side of the box is also making an appearance here out in the water in the introductory photo at the very top of the page.

Here also he is shown in comparison to several dinosaurs described as ancient Chinese prosauropods, extinct for over 65 million years.

Top, left Yunnanosaurus; “ a genus of prosauropod dinosaur from the Early to Middle Jurassic Period, a position in time that makes it one of the last prosauropods. It is closely related to Lufengosaurus. Known from two valid species, Yunnanosaurus ranged in size from 7 meters (23 feet) long and 2 m (6.5 ft) high to 13 m (42 ft) long in the largest species.” Yang Zhongjian (aka C. C. Young) discovered the first Yunnanosaurus skeletons in the Lufeng Formation of Yunnan, China…Wikipedia

Bottom, right: Yimenosaurus .”Along with its close contemporary, Jingshanosaurus, Yimenosaurus was one of the largest prosauropods, measuring about 30 feet from head to tail and weighing as much as two tons–not much compared to the plus-sized sauropods of the late Jurassic period, but beefier than most other prosauropods, which only weighed a few hundred pounds. Thanks to its numerous (and near-complete) fossil remains, Yimenosaurus is one of the better known herbivorous dinosaurs of early Jurassic Asia, rivaled only by another Chinese prosauropod, Lufengosaurus.”…Wikipedia

PHOTO;Lufengosaurus Skeleton

The point here is not so much to identify the actual species of prosauropod that the Eastern Zhou “dragon” represents but rather to show that the artist could have credibly meant to represent one of these animals which were thought to have gone extinct 65 million years prior to the Shang Dynasty. This crouching dragon was more likely a hidden dinosaur.

 

 

Han Dynasty Theropod Dinosaur

The Chinese dragon bronze sculpture (below right, faded) is on display at the Glendive dinosaur and fossil museum in Glendive, Montana.

It is dated to the Han Dynasty (206 B.C.-220 A.D.)and is approximately 2,000 years old. The piece looks remarkably like a Theropod dinosaur including the correct posture, dermal spines, and forearms that end in “hands”. It bears a remarkable resemblance to a Therizinosaur.

The larger and clearer photo of the figure to the left is a virtually identical artifact described as an “ancient Chinese artifact”. The item is for sale on EBAY. The seller claims that it is a bronze, ancient piece from the Bronze Age of China.

If the item is authentic, then it bears a close resemblance to a Therizinosaur with its exaggerated claws and bi pedal stance. One would have to be impressed that the ancient Chinese could have even mythologized a bi pedal dragon/dinosaur. (Note the “compare” drawing is actually of Harpymimus (Wikidino) which is basicallly the Chinese version of the same theropod dinosaur.)

 

 

Ancient Chinese Fu (Foo) Dogs/Lions and other Mysterious Buddhist Temple Creatures

Photo:Pair of Asian stoneware lions 18th century.(1700’s) Busacca Gallery.

Foo Dogs/Lions are neither dogs nor lions. No one is quite sure what they are/were other than mystical creatures. I’ve been interested in them for some time because they are so ubiquitous, because they appear elsewhere in the ancient world outside of China; in ancient India for instance.
From Wikipedia “Chinese guardian lions, known as Shishi lions (Chinese pinyin: shísh?; literally “stone lion”) or Imperial guardian lion, and often incorrectly called “Foo Dogs” in the West, are a common representation of the lion in pre-modern China.

They have traditionally stood in front of Chinese Imperial palaces, Imperial tombs, government offices, temples, and the homes of government officials and the wealthy, from the Han Dynasty (206 BC-AD 220), and were believed to have powerful mythic protective benefits. Pairs of guardian lions are still common decorative and symbolic elements at the entrances to restaurants, hotels, supermarkets and other structures, with one sitting on each side of the entrance”.

Photo: Wall at the Ellora Caves

Some time ago I was struck by the following description; from India of a dragon which seemed to picture a creature somewhat similar to the Chinese Foo Dog. Later I found a photo of this Temple scene which also seemed to match the written description of a living creature.

“This kind also have beards, and lift their necks on high, while their scales glitter like silver; and the pupils of their eyes consist of a fiery stone, and they say that this has an uncanny power for many secret purposes.

The plain specimen falls the prize of the hunters whenever it draws upon itself an elephant; for the destruction of both creatures is the result, and those who capture the dragons are rewarded by getting the eyes and skin and teeth.

In most respects they resemble the largest swine, but they are slighter in build and ‘flexible, and they have teeth as sharp and indestructible as those of the largest fishes.”

(See the creature on the far left of the photo above). The Life of Apollonius of Tyana Philostratus {220 AD}On the Existence of Dragons …. Upon his visit to India

Let’s cut to the chase; I may have discovered what these creatures were and they were not mythological as modern science can attest. However, they weren’t dinosaurs either-which is why it took so long for me to identify these particular Chinese/Indian dragons.

For the final section of this somewhat long article I modestly propose to unmask in fact two ancient “mythological creatures”-by name, both of whom it is claimed lived 255 -260 million years ago. One key in examining this upcoming visual evidence is to remember that modern science and modern scientific illustrators like to draw their retrospective animal recreations “unadorned”.

“Moschops (meaning calf face) is an extinct genus of therapsid that lived in the Late Permian, around 255 million years ago. Therapsids were proto-mammals (non-mammal synapsids), which were the dominant land animals. Five metres long, Moschops was the largest land animal of its time, a herbivore preyed on by other therapsids. Its remains were found in the Karoo region of South Africa.

Here is a photo of “dragons” on the temple roof in Ellora.

It was the largest land animal at the time, with a body length of around 5 metres (16 ft). It was a heavily-built herbivore with short, chisel-like teeth for cropping vegetation. The forelimbs sprawled outwards, like those of a modern lizard, but the hind limbs were more mammalian in form, being placed directly under the body. The diet of Moschops was mostly plants, sometimes eating meat.”

“Ellora (Marathi) is an archaeological site, 30 km (19 mi) from the city of Aurangabad in the Indian state of Maharashtra built by the Rashtrakuta dynasty. Well-known for its monumental caves, Ellora is a World Heritage SiteEllora represents the epitome of Indian rock-cut architecture.

The 34 “caves” – actually structures excavated out of the vertical face of the Charanandri hills. Buddhist, Hindu and Jain rock-cut temples and viharas and mathas were built between the 5th century and 10th century” Wikipedia….


Are you familiar with the flack that has been caused by the discovery of a stegosaurus depiction at Angkor Wat? “(or the ceratopsian at Muktinath Temple?

This “dinosaur”/dragon depiction is much older. Here is an up close picture of the Ellora Roof Dragon and moschops or a close relative. Moschops did not live over 250 million years ago. He lived within the history of mankind. He was created by God during the six days of creation.

One could literally crop a close picture of the Ellora dragon, label it Moschops and when it came up in image searches for moschops the internet searcher would be none the wiser.

Another group shot of the ellora roof dragon and moschops should make it even more clear that these creatures were living in India during the 5th century A.D.

How did I get in India talking about moschops when I started out writing about Chinese dinosaur/dragons? I have to confesds that initially I believed that the Foo Dogs of China and India were moschops or one of its close relatives.

This just proves that like paleontology, cryptozoological historical archaeology is not an exact science. It’s not even an exacpt pronunciation. I have come to believe that the Foo dogs/lions of China might have been another creature entirely.

Anteosaurus (meaning “previous or early reptile”) is the name given to an extinct genus of large carnivorous synapsid. It lived during the Capitanian epoch of the Middle Permian (266-260 million years ago) in what is now South Africa. They became extinct by the middle Late Permian.

Anteosaurus was a semi aquatic synapsid with a long tail and weak limbs, which indicate a lifestyle including water, much like that of a crocodile. Anteosaurus weighed approximately 500-600 kg and was around 5-6 m long…

Let’s compare a modern depiction of Antesaurus with an ancient one of the Foo Dog/lion.

There is a lot to like in this depiction of antesaurus as a possible model for the Food dog in China and India;.the musculature, the posture and the incisors to name a few.

This Marx toy version of Moschops by Marx toys is what first made me see a possible association with Moschops.

There are so many articles of ancient art that we didn’t get a chance to examine here that there will no doubt have to be, God willing a part two and three of this article.

These are the dinosaurs you seek.

I feel a disturbance in the farce.

 

Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaurs Part 2

Riddle Me This My Good Brother
Which Folly is More Dumber (sic) Than the Other?
To Bow Down to That of Which You are the creator
Or to Think a Dead Rodent Your Mother?

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, s8int.com, Science, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Aug 27 2011


“….For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles”. Romans 1

“This Descended From A Rodent Declaration Causes a Chuckle
And What of Your Prior Claims of Being A Monkey’s Uncle?”…….s8int.com

Dinosaur-Era Mammal Possibly “Mother” of All Humanity
August 25, 2011 ThirdAge.com

A tiny, dinosaur-era mammal may have been the mother of all humanity — at least in a sense, National Geographic News reports.

According to a new study, the newly discovered 160-million-year-old fossil species, named the “Jurassic mother from China” [Juramaia sinensis], is the earliest known ancestor of placental mammals — that is, animals, such as humans, that give birth to relatively mature, live young.

Although it’s unclear if the creature is a direct ancestor of modern placentals, it’s “either a great grand-aunt or a great grandmother,” the study’s authors told National Geographic.

According to the study, the newfound eutherian scurried about temperate Jurassic forests, dined on insects under the cover of darkness, and weighed about half an ounce (15 grams), making it lighter than a chipmunk.

“The great evolutionary lineage that includes us had a very humble beginning, in terms of body mass,” Zhe-Xi Luo, a paleontologist at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh, who led the team that discovered the fossil, told National Geographic

The discovery brings the fossil record in line with DNA evidence that indicates that the split between ancestral marsupials and placentals occurred around 160 million years ago, Luo added.

“What is clear is that, besides the fact that marsupials and placentals start to differentiate, we also have the other mammals that diversified as well,” he continued. “But we don’t know what would be the specific environmental trigger for that.”

Placentals, which includes creatures ranging from mice to whales, are all that remain of the eutherian mammals.

The findings of the study will be published Thursday in the journal Nature.


“They Refuse to Worship God the Genuine Article
But Bow the Knee to a Non-Existing Particle?”…s8int.com

All idols are not carved from a block of wood.

It wasn’t more than two weeks ago that headlines around the world rang out with the news that CERN had finally found/discovered the elusive “God Particle” which was responsible for giving the matter in the universe mass. Now here we are a short time (and billions of dollars since the start of the program) later with the less than banner, worldwide headlines that the “God particle” might not exist after all. When they thought it might exist they called it the “God particle”; when they realized that it probably doesn’t exist they call it Higgs-Boson. Hedging their bets, scientists claim that the world of physics will be almost as excited if they learn that the particle doesn’t exist as they would have been to have discovered it. ….s8int.com

God Particle May not Exist After All

August 24, 2011

Photo: Statue of the Hindu god, Shiva Outside Cern Headquarters in Geneva


A particle believed to have played a key role in the creation of the universe might not exist after all, a media report said Tuesday quoting experts.

Scientists said last month that they were close to cornering the elusive Higgs boson or ‘God particle’ – a tiny but vital element in the construction of life as we know it.

But hope is now fading after the disappearance of signals scientists had hoped would lead them to it, the Daily Mail reported.

The CERN research centre, whose giant Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has been carrying out the work under the mountains on the French-Swiss border, announced its scepticism at a conference in Mumbai.

Guido Tonelli, from one of the two LHC detectors chasing the Higgs, said: “Whatever the final verdict on Higgs, we are now living in very exciting times for all involved in the quest for new physics.”

CERN said new results, which updated findings that caused excitement at another scientific gathering in Grenoble last month, “show that the elusive Higgs particle, if it exists, is running out of places to hide”, the Mail reported.

The centre’s research director Sergio Bertolucci told the conference at Mumbai’s Tata Institute of Fundamental Research that if the Higgs did not exist “its absence will point the way to new physics”.

Under what is known as the Standard Model of physics, the boson – named after British physicist Peter Higgs – is posited as having been the agent that gave mass and energy to matter just after the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago.

As a result, flying debris from that primeval explosion could come together as stars, planets and galaxies.

In the subterranean LHC, which began operating in March 2010, CERN engineers and physicists have created billions of miniature versions of the Big Bang by smashing particles together at just a fraction under the speed of light.

The results of those collisions are monitored by hundreds of physicists, not just at CERN but in linked laboratories around the world which sift through the vast volumes of information generated by the LHC, the Mail said.

For some scientists, the Higgs remains the simplest explanation of how matter got mass. It remains unclear what could replace it as an explanation.

Life is a Killer Problem for Science –And Hope for Alien Life; Dies Again. Plus, Shhh, Don’t Tell The Creationists

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, s8int.com, Science, The Flood of Noah, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Mar 21 2011


Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Gen 2:7/

Photo: Shhh, don’t tell the creationists!

As we’ve noted previously in this space, one of the most frequently used phrases in articles about science is; “scientists had previously thought”, or some close variation. Some claim that this is the very thing that is so wonderful about science, that science and its practioners refuse to rest on its/their laurels and that they/it keep searching for the truth and freely admit their mistakes when they’re discovered.

I personally hadn’t noticed that about science, but do note with interest that the internet and the current 24 hour media cycle appear to be speeding up the rate of “previous believism”.

To wit; Back in 1996 NASA’s announcement that alien bacteria had been discovered in a meteorite from Antarctica evoked quite a bit of international fanfare from inside and outside the scientific community. Although there were always skeptics of the “discovery”, it wasn’t until 2007 that the claim was thoroughly disproven when Mary Sue Bell, a University of Houston grad student was able to precisely recreate the alleged “bacterial” imprints with a lab created collision similar to a meteorite impacting a planetary surface.

NASA had to back away from its alien bacteria claims, but it took them 11 years.

On the othert hand, Ida, the alleged human ancestor fossil that was going to change everything, was introduced with much fanfare in April, 2009 and debunked before the end of that year, failing to make most top ten science story lists of 2009. Ida was replaced on some top ten lists with Ardi, another proposed earliest human ancestor, whose discovery had been announced in October of 2009.

However, by May of 2010, the same journal; “Science”, which had mucho ballyhooed Ardi, had this to say:

“Ardi,” the fossil female whose discovery is thought to stretch our human ancestry back more than 4 million years, has been challenged by specialists who discount the evidence of how she lived and maintain she was never a forerunner of the human line.”

Ardi and Ida were both effectively debunked as human ancestors within six to eight months of their worldwide discovery announcements, setting new records “for scientists had previously thought” reversals.

The Whole Alien Life and the Origin of Terrestrial Life Thing

It had taken NASA 11 years to back away from their 1976 alleged alien life discovery. On Friday, March 4th of this year NASA scientist Richard Hoover published a peer reviewed article in the Journal “Cosmology” with the claim that that he had found tiny fossils of alien life in the remnants of a meteorite.

This story was published internationally under headlines like: “NASA Scientist Finds ‘Alien Life’ Fossils”. Naturally, the NASA connection seemingly provided some support to the claim which was met with excitement-and skepticism.

Hold that thought for a minute before; the rest of the story.

“Twenty years ago the palaeontological community gasped as geoscientists revealed evidence for the oldest bacterial fossils on the planet.”..naturenews

The evidence here was a piece of rock found in Australia known as the Apex Chert and it contained it was said evidence of the earliest life on earth. Scientists declared that the Apex Chert was 3.5 billion years old, whereas Genesis would set its maximum age at 10,000 years or less. Last week there was a development re the Apex Chert as described by this headline:

“Whoops! Scientists left red-faced as oldest ‘evidence of life’ turns out to be iron deposits”

Whoops indeed. And what about all those evolution adherents who had snootily quoted this “fact” to non-evolution believers for twenty years? This ‘scientists had previously thought” item took even longer than the 1976 NASA “discovery” to reverse.

Getting back to NASA scientist Richard Hoover’s “alien life fossils”.

They were announced on a Friday and disavowed by “top scientists in different disciplines”, including NASA by the following Monday, by noon, setting new standards for scientists had previously thought type reversals. No alien fossils and quite probably no bacterial fossils.

So what’s going on? Why the dubious claims of proofs of early life and of the discovery of extra-terrestrial life?

The title of a recent article published in Scientific American* and written by John Horgan might provide a clue; “Pssst! Don’t tell the creationists, but scientists don’t have a clue how life began”. S8int.com blogged about this earlier this year in our article; When It Comes to Explanations for the Origin of Life, Genesis Has the Quality; So, Science Comes At You With Quantity

We think that materialist science understands that if it cannot accept the Genesis account a good counter would be to be able to prove exactly how life “actually” began. They have been and will continue to be unsuccessful. Frustrated perhaps with this paralyzing failure, some scientists have felt the need to come up with some incredible theories to fill the void. Increasingly, the idea that life may have begun elsewhere in the universe and made its way to earth on a comet has become popular even though this only moves the origin of life problem to a new location.

Recently, famous Atheist Dawkins, allowed that while he couldn’t accept God as the Designer/Creator of life on earth, he didn’t have the same reticence in believing some alien was the designer/creator.

Another famous Atheist, or so he claims, named John W. Loftus, the author of several Atheistic books was very excited about NASA scientist, Richard Hoover’s claims about alien life fossils. He posted the following telling post on his Debunking Christianity Blog entitled: NASA Scientist Finds Evidence of Alien Life “

See, the Bible doesn’t mention alien life. Therefore proof that alien life exists or even that it existed in the past would serve as a way of debunking Christianity, God and the Bible.

In the wake of recent events, however that post is no longer available.

*Thanks to CreationEvolutionHeadlines for the heads up on this article.

The Top 12 Science Stories of 2010 For Christians/Creationists

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Religious, s8int.com, Science, Sophistication of Ancestors, The Flood of Noah, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Jan 07 2011

by Chris Parker, Copyright 2010

2010 came in like a lion with a major earthquake in Chile and went out with snow like lamb’s wool covering many parts of the United States. So much for global warming?

More on that later.

There really is no way to quantitatively select the top 10 or 12 science stories that were the most important to the cause of belief in God, special creation and Biblical truths in 2010. This is quite obviously a subjective exercise. No real attempt has been made to here to prioritize among these choices either. If last years list is any indication, we’ll get some argument and some suggestions-some of which will be printable.

At s8int.com, we believe and fully accept the Biblical account for creation. That faith and belief helps us form our world view and our view of science. We’ve always assumed that true, honest and objective science would support the Biblical account and God’s place in the universe—and it has.

The world’s preeminent Atheist, Richard Dawkins, made the following observation in his book; The Blind Watchmaker’

“An atheist before Darwin could have said, following Hume: “I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn’t a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one.” I can’t help feeling that such a position, though logically sound, would have left one feeling pretty unsatisfied, and that although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.”

It’s been a tough decade for Darwinism, though and 2010 was no different. It continues to be the case that the more science learns about the universe and our place in it the less tenable is the Darwinist faith. Despite the hard work and dedication of Darwinists, a new Gallup poll (reported in December of 2010) shows that only 16% of Americans subscribe to the view that “Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in the process.”

Photo:Stein interviews Dawkins in “Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed!”

Things have gotten so bad for Darwinists that Richard Dawkins now says that he could accept the notion that “super-intelligent aliens” are responsible for creating life on earth and that this would explain why life seems designed. (Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed , 2008

Dawkins doesn’t even seem to realize that this illogical and contradictory position puts him squarely back in the pre-Darwin; anything or anyone but God camp! The very position he described as being “logically sound” but “intellectually unsatisfying”!

The Joy of Ignorance? What group has tried to turn their own ignorance into a virtue as aggressively as the Darwinists? Remember “vestigial organs”? Basically science was ignorant about the function of certain “organs” and so they declared them functionless, leftovers from the evolutionary process.

They asserted that God wouldn’t have created useless organs and that ergo; there was no God!

Unfortunately for this theory, science could not maintain its ignorance for long; the list of supposedly vestigial organs in humans has gone from approximately 180 in 1890 to arguably, none in 1999. (Bergman, Jerry, “Do any vestigial organs exist in humans?”, Journal of Creation 14(2):95–98, August 2000)

Dawkins and other atheists also trumpeted “Junk DNA” as proof that there was no God. God they reasoned, would not have created useless, functionless, “junk” DNA (non-coding DNA ) that took up so much of the space in the genome. They fairly chortled about it. Dawkins said;

“Once again, creationists might spend some earnest time speculating on why the Creator should bother to litter genomes with untranslated pseudogenes and junk tandem repeat DNA.” (Dawkins: The Information Challenge)

Time and additional scientific knowledge and understanding vindicated God as the creator and showed that Dawkins and other evolution believing critics were simply speaking from a very deep well of ignorance. It turns out, once again that science’s (and Dawkin’s) own lack of knowledge was the problem here, not God’s creative abilities:

” “The findings, from a project involving hundreds of scientists in 11 countries and detailed in 29 papers being published today, confirm growing suspicions that the stretches of “junk DNA” flanking hardworking genes are not junk at all. But the study goes further, indicating for the first time that the vast majority of the 3 billion “letters” of the human genetic code are busily toiling at an array of previously invisible tasks.” (Washington Post, July 14, 2007 Intricate Toiling Found In Nooks of DNA Once Believed to Stand Idle
)

Finally, Darwin admitted that it was difficult to conceive of how an organ as complicated as they eye could have evolved (although he believed it did). Michael Behe, an architect of “intelligent design” deemed the eye irreducibly complex; in other words it had to be the result of a deliberate design rather than evolution because it would have been useless without all of its parts being fully functional.

Evolutionists have deemed the eye to be one of evolutions biggest mistakes because it appears to them to be wired backwards. In 2010 it became clear once again that ignorance on the part of atheists and Darwinists was the problem. A study showed that the design of the eye leads to better vision and that in fact its design should be copied in order to make better optical machines.

This is a principle Christians can depend on; if evolutionists think that something God created is imperfect;- simply wait until their ignorance dissipates. “Let God be true and every man a liar!” Romans 3:4

We combed through; Discovery News, CreationEvolutionHeadlines, NewScientist, s8int.com/WordPress and other sources to compile news stories of interest. Here’s our list of the top science stories of 2010 for Christians/creationists.


1)Universal Health Scare: Study Locates Conscious Minds Locked in Appearance of “Vegetative State And; Atheist Doctors More Likely to Kill You!

“Distressing” is not an adequate word to describe a study by Cambridge University neuroscientist Adrian M. Owen that proves that many people in supposedly vegetative states actually are quite aware of what is happening around them and have opinions and views about it all. There may be thousands of such people in the U.S. alone.

The implications are hard to bear and yet demand action. Can you imagine anything much worse than being completely unable to communicate with others and yet affected by them? Anyone who has suffered an injury that impairs even a small function knows how frustrating that can be. But this is almost like being buried alive. With this difference: the patient is aware of people’s conversations and can, at least in his mind, respond. But no one in the presence of such a person–until now–has found a way to “listen” and therefore to converse.

This study adds force to the anti-euthanasia arguments made in cases like that of Terri Schiavo. It also calls in the name of human compassion for greater efforts to engage such conscious minds encased in unresponsive bodies and to give their lives some scope for vigorous interaction. It also calls for greater scientific and technological efforts to break the physical chains binding such people.

A colleague of Dr. Owens sees a number of immediate practical uses of the new way of communicating with conscious, but immobilized persons. “This technique could be used to address important clinical questions. For example, patients who are aware, but cannot move or speak, could be asked if they are feeling any pain, allowing doctors to decide when painkillers should be administered.”

But another urgent need is to find ways to communicate more directly than is possible now. In their study, the Cambridge team used MRI technology, which is expensive and obviously hard to arrange on any regular basis. Posted by Bruce Chapman on February 3, 2010 4:03 PM Discovery News

Atheist Doctors More Likely to End Your Life–ScienceDaily (Aug. 26, 2010)

Atheist or agnostic doctors are almost twice as willing to take decisions that they think will hasten the end of a very sick patient’s life as doctors who are deeply religious, suggests research published online in the Journal of Medical Ethics.


And doctors with a strong faith are less likely to discuss this type of treatment with the patient concerned, the research shows. The findings are based on a postal survey of more than 8500 UK doctors, spanning a wide range of specialties, which was designed to see what influence religious belief — or lack of it — had on end of life care…. ScienceDaily


2)Darwinian Reversals

“There is a wide consensus among paleontologists that birds are the descendants of theropod dinosaurs”, according to Wikipedia and other Darwinist sources. This idea is a new tenet of the Darwinist faith and the truth is the acceptance of the idea has never really been as much of a consensus as advertized. As we’ve noted many times, “Storrs Olson, Curator of Birds at the Smithsonian and evolutionist himself proclaimed that “a cadre of “zealots” were trying to “actively promulgate the theropod dinosaur origin of birds theory in concert with Nature and National Geo”… Quote Story

An article published in 2009 in Medical Hypotheses noted: Some “Non-Avian Feathered Dinosaurs May Have Been Birds.” Spend a few minutes working out that headline’s meaning. In an article published in PhysOrg, a different group of evolutionists at OSU made a complete reversal of the Darwinist tenet by claiming that the evidence showed that dinosaurs evolved from birds!” Commentary by: CreationEvolutionHeadlines

“Feb 9, 2010 — Birds evolved from dinosaurs, we are often told. That’s backwards, reply some scientists at Oregon State University. According to PhysOrg, the recently-published bi-plane model study of Microraptor gui (01/29/2010) demonstrates that theropod dinosaurs did not sprout wings and fly; instead, they became flightless after their bird ancestors came down from the trees.

Their response demonstrates how the same evidence can be spun different ways. They are adamant about it: “The weight of the evidence is now suggesting that not only did birds not descend from dinosaurs,” John Ruben of OSU said, “but that some species now believed to be dinosaurs may have descended from birds.” He’s glad to see a breakthrough from the conventional wisdom. “This issue isn’t resolved at all. There are just too many inconsistencies with the idea that birds had dinosaur ancestors, and this newest study adds to that.” CreationEvolutionHeadlines

From Soup to Nuts! One of the oldest tenets of Darwinism is that life began in a “primordial soup”. However, “the ‘soup’ theory has been overturned in a pioneering paper in BioEssays which claims it was the Earth’s chemical energy, from hydrothermal vents on the ocean floor, which kick-started early life.” ScienceDaily

The truth is that absent an acceptance of the Genesis account science has no idea how dead chemicals became living. There are literally hundreds of competing ”scientific” theories regarding life’s origin, as we covered in our story:. “When It Comes to Explanations for the Origin of Life, Genesis Has the Quality; So, Science Comes At You With Quantity

Neanderthal Now One of Us. Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon have long been enlisted by the Darwinists as a caveman/primitive man proof of the truth of the evolution of man from lower forms. They were successful enough that even some Christians invented “pre-Adamic” man to try to help the Bible out.

As late as last year some scientists were still claiming that man and Neanderthal never interbred; that they couldn’t speak, that they had no language, argued over whether they buried their dead, claimed that they only ate meat because they weren’t smart enough to cook vegetables, etc. etc. (Cro-Magnon was rehabilitated some years ago).

Now, it’s all changed. It’s been reversed…

An analysis of “Neanderthal” DNA indicated that their DNA matched “modern” man’s DNA to 99.97%. Since the analysis was only of 60% of the genome the actual match might be closer. That awaits further study. It’s worth noting that each of our own DNA is a match to our neighbor’s to 99.999%.

Scientists Lied and Real Neanderthals Died! Neanderthal DNA 99.97% Identical to that of Evolutionary Scientist’s!

Neanderthals Admired Beauty 01/10/2010
Jan 10, 2010 — This may be the last evidence needed to debunk the image of Neanderthals as dim-witted brutes: they wore make-up. CreationEvolutionHeadlines

    Humans and Neanderthals Are One 05/08/2010

“May 08, 2010 — If Neanderthals bred with modern humans, they are one and the same species. That must be the case according to the most widely-accepted definition of a species: those who can breed and produce fertile offspring. The news media are abuzz with Science magazine’s cover story this week, “The Neanderthal Genome.” Most anthropologists are now accepting the genetic evidence for human-Neanderthal mixing of DNA, and that there are remnants of the Neanderthal genome walking the earth in living human beings. CreationEvolutionHeadlines

Science Daily announced, “Neandertals ‘Hardly Differed at All’ from Modern Humans.”

Fossil Ida:

The last bit of dirt was kicked over Ida, the fossil that evolutionists claimed was going to change everything. ‘Missing Link’ Fossil Was Not Human Ancestor as Claimed, Anthropologists Say ScienceDaily (Mar. 3, 2010)


3)Macro Evolution’s Evolving, Non-Evolving Problem The trade secret of paleontology might very well be the lack of transitional fossils..(Gould); but the Darwin family secret is the long list of supposedly millions of years old fossils which are indistigushable from their living counterparts. Two of those articles are linked here:

Pelican Fossil Poses Evolutionary Riddle; Why, They Haven’t Evolved, Not Even a Little

“Oh What A Tangled Web We Weave, When At First We Practice to Deceive”–Alleged 165 Million Year Old Spider Looks Just Like 165 Day Old Spider


4)
Evolutionists Blind, Ignorant, Criticism of the Design of the Eye Proves to be Short Sighted and Wrong. (Will Science Teachers Continue to Constrict Their Pupils with This Kind of Teaching?)

Dawkins is not great. First, as head atheist he jumped on the; vestigial organs prove there is no God train, only to see it derailed; then onto “junk DNA” and finally to the “backwards designed” eye.

A 2007 Article entitled” Evolution’s Greatest Mistakes” claimed that the eye was an example of “flawed evolution”.

“The most famous flaw is found in vertebrate eyes. Their light-sensing structure, the retina, is wired up back-to-front.) NewScientist

In May, commenting in an editorial about a 2007 German study that found that the eye is wired backwards, purposely –or at least to the benefit of the eye said:

“IT LOOKS wrong, but the strange, “backwards” structure of the vertebrate retina actually improves vision.”
NewScientist went on to note that creationists have defended the eye design by claiming that the backwards design actually enhances vision:

“…creationists have argued that the backwards retina clearly has no problems providing vertebrates with excellent vision – and even that its structure enhances vision.

“This week, a study by (non-creationist) neurophysicists in Israel has found just that (see “Optical fibre cells transform our weird, ‘backward’ retinas”). Their simulations showed that Müller cells, which support and nourish the neurons overlying the retina’s light-sensitive layer, also collect, filter and refocus light, before delivering it to the light sensors to make images clearer.”

You have to love this defensive quote from NewScientist;

“The findings do not mean the creationists have a point – although they may well quote the study”.

According to the authors of the research paper, the findings of the study could lead to better designed optical equipment and cameras. So much for bad design.


5)Not A Grain of Truth to Science’s Claim That “Primitive Man” Domesticated Food Crops: Animals Refuse to eat Genetically Modified Foods..

It’s the belief of evolutionary scientists that all the domesticated grains that we eat; grains like rice, corn, oats, wheat and barley, were created by deliberate cultivation over hundreds or even thousands of years by our primitive ancestors. They would have needed the ability to work tirelessly and purposefully for a period of generations on crops that would have no food value for them until the projects were created; all eons before Gregor Mendel developed prinicples of genetic transmision of inherited traits.

This story is hard enough to believe but here’s another problem. If man genetically modified all the food crops we mentioned; why were cows and pigs eating them? And why do they have a problem with the New genetically modified foods? Isn’t the same agent, man responsible for the old GM crops as well as the new?

Clearly not, the crops we’ve known for thousands of years were created by God—not man. When Adam was punished he was told that he would have to earn a living by the sweat of his brow, he was meant to plant and harvest crops–the same crops that Cain brought as a failed offering to God.

Animals didn’t have a problem with the former, but the do have a problem with the latter. Article


6) Why Paleontology is Not “Science”; When It Comes to Giant Pterosaur Flight, Science Believes Very Strongly Both Ways!

In the course of a year’s time paleontologists made the bold statement that pterosaurs couldn’t fly; only to have another study claim that they were the greatest flyers ever!

Any discipline that claims two mutually exclusive things are both true in that short a period of time can’t be called a science. This is the stuff they want to teach your kids. Article


7)
Research Indicates Ancient Civilization Thrived Until Ocean Submerged It Beneath the Persian Gulf “About” 8 Thousand Years Ago: Do You Noah What That Reminds Us Of?

An ancient civilization the size of Great Britain was located under the Persian Gulf. The civilization was “drowned” thousands of years ago.


8) Science Daily Article: Liberals and Atheists Smarter? Intelligent People Have Values Novel in Human Evolutionary History, Study Finds.”

Unfortunately, we’re not smart enough to comment on this article. We didn’t understand it. It didn’t make any sense to us…. Article


9) Human Genome “Infinitely More Complex” Than Expected 04/05/2010 “April 05,

2010 — Ten years after the Human Genome Project was completed, now we know: biology is “orders of magnitude” more complicated than scientists expected. So wrote Erika Check Hayden in Nature News March 31 and in the April 1 issue of Nature.

An air of daunting complexity haunts the article. The Human Genome Project was one of the great scientific investigations of the end of the 20th century. Some compared it to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo program. It used to be tedious, painstaking work to read the sequence of DNA letters.

Now, deciphering genomes is a matter of course. But with the rush of data coming from genomes of everything from yeast to Neanderthals, one thing has become clear: “as sequencing and other new technologies spew forth data, the complexity of biology has seemed to grow by orders of magnitude,” Hayden wrote.

…..Hayden acknowledged that the “junk DNA” paradigm has been blown to smithereens. “Just one decade of post-genome biology has exploded that view,” she said, speaking of the notion that gene regulation was a straightforward, linear process – genes coding for regulator proteins that control transcription. “Biology’s new glimpse at a universe of non-coding DNA – what used to be called ‘junk’ DNA – has been fascinating and befuddling.”

If it’s junk, why would the human body decode 74% to 93% of it? The plethora of small RNAs produced by these non-coding regions, and how they interact with each other and with DNA, was completely unexpected when the project began.

These realizations are dissipating some of the early naïveté of the Human Genome Project. Planners predicted we would “unravel the mysteries behind everything from evolution to disease origins.” Cures for cancer were envisioned. We would trace the path of evolution through the genetic code. That was so 1990s.

Joshua Plotkin, a mathematical biologist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, said, “Just the sheer existence of these exotic regulators suggests that our understanding about the most basic things – such as how a cell turns on and off – is incredibly naïve.” “ CreationEvolutionHeadlines


10) Evolution as “Scientific Literacy” Dropped by NSB; Sets Off Firestorm 04/11/2010
April 11, 2010 — Can you be called scientifically literate if you deny that humans evolved from lower animals? What if you deny the universe began with an explosion? American students have typically scored low on those questions, leading to charges that they are scientifically illiterate compared to other countries in Europe and Asia.

But now, the National Science Board (NSB) decided to drop those hot-button questions in the 2010 edition of Science and Engineering Indicators, a biennial compilation of the state of global science, on the grounds that they don’t accurately reflect students’ knowledge of science, but rather their beliefs. The decision set off angry protests in certain quarters.

Yudhijit Bhattacharjee reported on this issue in the April 9 issue of Science. He quoted Joshua Rosenau of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) calling it “intellectual malpractice” to discuss scientific literacy without mentioning evolution. “It downplays the controversy,” he said. Jon Miller, a science literacy researcher at Michigan State, conducted the survey until 2001. As the one who added the survey question in the first place, he thinks the current board is making a big mistake.

“If a person says that the earth really is at the center of the universe, … how in the world would you call that person scientifically literate?” he asked. Bhattacharjee said, “those struggling to keep evolution in the classroom say the omission could hurt their efforts.”

But the NSB defended its decision to drop the “value-charged” question on evolution as a misleading indicator:…… CreationEvolutionHeadlines


11) The Great Global Warming Collapse

“In 2007, the most comprehensive report to date on global warming, issued by the respected United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made a shocking claim: The Himalayan glaciers could melt away as soon as 2035.

These glaciers provide the headwaters for Asia’s nine largest rivers and lifelines for the more than one billion people who live downstream. Melting ice and snow would create mass flooding, followed by mass drought. The glacier story was reported around the world. Last December, a spokesman for the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group, warned, “The deal reached at Copenhagen will have huge ramifications for the lives of hundreds of millions of people who are already highly vulnerable due to widespread poverty.” To dramatize their country’s plight, Nepal’s top politicians strapped on oxygen tanks and held a cabinet meeting on Mount Everest.

But the claim was rubbish, and the world’s top glaciologists knew it. It was based not on rigorously peer-reviewed science but on an anecdotal report by the WWF itself. When its background came to light on the eve of Copenhagen, Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, shrugged it off. But now, even leading scientists and environmental groups admit the IPCC is facing a crisis of credibility that makes the Climategate affair look like small change.” Globe and Mail


12)Bible Possibly Written Centuries Earlier, Text Suggests
Clara Moskowitz
LiveScience Staff Writer
Jan 15 2010
“Scientists have discovered the earliest known Hebrew writing – an inscription dating from the 10th century B.C., during the period of King David’s reign.
The breakthrough could mean that portions of the Bible were written centuries earlier than previously thought. (The Bible’s Old Testament is thought to have been first written down in an ancient form of Hebrew.)
Until now, many scholars have held that the Hebrew Bible originated in the 6th century B.C., because Hebrew writing was thought to stretch back no further. But the newly deciphered Hebrew text is about four centuries older, scientists announced this month.

“It indicates that the Kingdom of Israel already existed in the 10th century BCE and that at least some of the biblical texts were written hundreds of years before the dates presented in current research,” said Gershon Galil, a professor of Biblical Studies at the University of Haifa in Israel, who deciphered the ancient text.” Article

Top 12 Science Stories for Creationists/Believers of 2009

Evolutionists Say Eating Meat Made Our Brains Larger and Made Us Smarter. If That Sounds Dumb To You; Eat More Meat Einstein!. “Just-so stories” Driving Me Crazy

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Science, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 12 2010

A just-so story, also called the ad hoc fallacy, is a term used in academic anthropology, biological sciences, social sciences, and philosophy. It describes an unverifiable and unfalsifiable narrative explanation for a cultural practice, a biological trait, or behavior of humans or other animals. The use of the term is an implicit criticism that reminds the hearer of the essentially fictional and unprovable nature of such an explanation. Such tales are common in folklore and mythology (where they are known as etiological myths — see etiology).Wikipedia

“Just-so stories” driving me crazy john hawks weblog; paleoanthropology, genetics, and evolution.

“NPR has been doing a special series of reports during their “Morning Edition” program called “The Human Edge”, all about various aspects of human evolution. I think it’s just wonderful that they’re doing this, and the stories are available on the NPR website, which is also great.

I’ve been out of town and so haven’t been following closely. So I’m just noticing that some of these stories actually drive me up the wall. Every one of them is presented as what Stephen Jay Gould called a “just-so story”.

I’ll take one of the latest articles as an example: “Food For Thought: Meat-Based Diet Made Us Smarter”. The story begins with a short resume of the “expensive tissue hypothesis”, with quotes from one of expensive tissue’s main exponents, Leslie Aiello. This hypothesis is a serious one, which paleoanthropologists take seriously, and which has some empirical support in the comparative biology of primates. But here’s how the story poses the hypothesis:

“You can’t have a large brain and big guts at the same time,” explains Leslie Aiello, an anthropologist and director of the Wenner-Gren Foundation in New York City, which funds research on evolution. Digestion, she says, was the energy-hog of our primate ancestor’s body. The brain was the poor stepsister who got the leftovers.

Meat is packed with lots of calories and fat. Our brain — which uses about 20 times as much energy as the equivalent amount of muscle — piped up and said, “Please, sir, I want some more.”

As we got more, our guts shrank because we didn’t need a giant vegetable processor any more. Our bodies could spend more energy on other things like building a bigger brain. Sorry, vegetarians, but eating meat apparently made our ancestors smarter — smart enough to make better tools, which in turn led to other changes, says Aiello.

That’s a “just-so story.” How did meat make us smarter? Is it a magical meat property? If I fed enough meat to the local deer, would they get smarter? The expensive tissue hypothesis proposes an energetic trade-off, but doesn’t provide any mechanism by which the evolution of smarter brains (or diet shift) would occur. A trade-off is simply “you can’t have your cake and eat it too.” It needn’t say anything at all about how you bake a cake, or what happens if you can’t eat it.”

Click Here to Read the Remainder of the Article

NASA’s Hyped-Up Alien Life Press Conference Actually About Arsenic; NASA’s Arsenic Microbe Science Slammed

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Science | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 07 2010

Last Updated: Monday, December 6, 2010 CBC News

Photo: Costume Source

NASA’s Arsenic Microbe Science Slammed

Wolfe-Simon and her colleagues reported that a microbe found in California, shown in this electron microscope image, can use arsenic — an element that is usually toxic to living things — instead of phosphorus to make chemical building blocks of life such as DNA, proteins and fats. (Courtesy of Science/AAAS)

A recent high-profile astrobiology discovery led by a NASA scientist is being called into question by a B.C. microbiologist, who says the science was sloppy.

“I don’t know whether the authors are just bad scientists or whether they’re unscrupulously pushing NASA’s ‘There’s life in outer space!’ agenda,” wrote University of British Columbia Prof. Rosie Redfield on her blog about the study, which was published Dec. 2 in Science.

Critical chemist

Rosie Redfield is one of a number of scientists in different fields who have publicly criticized the arsenic microbe study since it was published online on Dec. 2.

Alex Bradley, a biogeochemist, posted his own review of the work on the science blog We, Beasties, writing that a “subtle but critical piece of evidence has been overlooked.” Bradley cited Steve Benner, a distinguished fellow at the Foundation for Applied Molecular Evolution in Gainesville, Fla., who said during a NASA news conference that DNA-like arsenic compounds are very unstable and tend to break down within minutes when exposed to water.

Consequently, arsenic-based DNA should break down into small pieces during its chemical analysis, Bradley said.

The fact that the DNA fragments isolated in the recent study were very large demonstrates that they were normal DNA made with phosphorus, not arsenic, he added.

In a blog post over the weekend, Redfield described the study led by astrobiologist Felisa Wolfe-Simon as “lots of flim-flam, but very little reliable information.”

Wolfe-Simon and her colleagues reported that a microbe found in California can use arsenic — an element that is usually toxic to living things — instead of phosphorus to make chemical building blocks of life such as DNA, proteins and fats. The bacteria were grown in an environment with very high arsenic and almost no phosphorus.

The discovery was hailed as “something different than life as we knew it.” NASA scientists said it opened the possibility of finding life in parts of the universe that might otherwise be considered uninhabitable.

Redfield dissected Wolfe-Simon’s molecular biology and microbiology methods and results in detail on her blog, RRResearch, garnering tens of thousands of hits and dozens of comments from other scientists.

One of the key findings of the NASA study was that the microbe’s DNA was partly made of arsenic instead of phosphorus, based on chemical analyses.

Cleanliness, calculations criticized
But Redfield disagreed, writing that the paper “doesn’t present ANY convincing evidence that arsenic has been incorporated into DNA (or any other biological molecule).

In an interview Monday, Redfield said the methods used by the researchers were so crude that any arsenic they detected was likely from contamination. There is no indication that the researchers purified the DNA to remove arsenic that might have been sticking to the outside of the DNA or the gel the DNA was embedded in, she added. Normally, purifying the DNA is a standard step, Redfield said: “It’s a kit, it costs $2, it takes 10 minutes.”

She also questioned why the researchers analyzed the DNA while it was still in the gel, making the results more difficult to interpret: “No molecular biologist would ever do that.”

Redfield also disagreed with the paper’s conclusion that the bacteria had to rely on arsenic to build molecules such as DNA because there wasn’t enough phosphate (a form of phosphorus) available in the samples with the lowest levels. Her arithmetic showed that in fact, there was enough phosphate to account for the amount of bacteria that grew.

“That shocked me,” she said.

Redfield added that there was actually very little arsenic in the DNA of bacteria grown in an environment high in arsenic and low in phosphorus. In fact, the amount was only twice that of the cells grown without arsenic: “That’s a level of difference that could be easily explained by very minor contamination.”

Debate shouldn’t be in media: NASA Read more Here:

When It Comes to Explanations for the Origin of Life, Genesis Has the Quality; So, Science Comes At You With Quantity

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, s8int.com, Science, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 06 2010

Genesis 1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

“The origins of life on Earth bristle with puzzle and paradox. Which came first, the proteins of living cells or the genetic information that makes them? How could the metabolism of living things get started without an enclosing membrane to keep all the necessary chemicals together? But if life started inside a cell membrane, how did the necessary nutrients get in?

The questions may seem moot, since life did start somehow.” New Glimpses of Life’s Puzzling Origins…NYT June 15 2009 Article

How close are scientists to knowing the origin of life on earth … Oct 21, 1999 … www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-close-are… Article

In 1924, Oparin began publishing his ideas on how life may have evolved from a prebiotic soup ….… www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/…/slm/originday.htm -

From Soup to; “Nuts?!” New Research Rejects 80-Year Theory of ‘Primordial Soup’ as the Origin of Life
S8int.com Article

Life could have evolved on Earth not once but twice.” BC Focus Magazine Video

Revolutionary New Theory For Origins Of Life On Earth

ScienceDaily (Dec. 4, 2002) — “A totally new and highly controversial theory on the origin of life on earth, is set to cause a storm in the science world and has implications for the existence of life on other planets. Research* by Professor William Martin of the University of Dusseldorf and Dr Michael Russell of the Scottish Environmental Research Centre in Glasgow, claims that living systems originated from inorganic incubators – small compartments in iron sulphide rocks. The new theory radically departs from existing perceptions of how life developed and it will be published in Philosophical Transactions B, a learned journal produced by the Royal Society”…Article Source

“Life May Have Evolved from Inanimate Matter, with associations among molecules becoming more and more complex. In this view, the force …” www.darwinspredictions.com/

“According to a new study, scientists found that life on earth went from single cells to blue whales and giant sequoias in 3.5 billion years in two distinct bursts. The study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. This theory is against the preconceived notion of life slowly evolved from simple to complex multicelled organism. The analysis of the fossils showed that the study of the two sized jumps were from bacteria to eukaryotic cells and from unicellular to multicellular organism.” Article

“Mineral cells might have incubated first living things.John Whitfield

Life on Earth may have begun in rocks on the ocean floor. More than 4 billion years ago, tiny cavities in minerals may have served as the first cells, two biologists are proposing. Other researchers argue that the idea leaves many questions unanswered.

The key to the new theory is iron sulphide. Hot springs deposit a honeycomb of this mineral on the ocean floor, with pockets a few hundredths of a millimetre across. This would have been the ideal place for life to get going, say William Martin, of Heinrich-Heine University in Dusseldorf, Germany, and Michael Russell of the Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre in Glasgow, UK.

“There are lots of theories [of the origin of life] but ours is the first to start with the cell,” says Martin. Most scientists assume that self-replicating molecules or proteins came first. NatureNews Article

Methane-Belching Bugs Inspire a New Theory of the Origin of Life on Earth

Two laboratories at Penn State set out to show how an obscure undersea microbe metabolizes carbon monoxide into methane and vinegar. What they found was not merely a previously unknown biochemical process–their discovery also became the inspiration for a fundamental new theory of the origin of life on Earth, reconciling a long-contentious pair of prevailing theories. This new, “thermodynamic” theory of evolution improves upon both previous theories by proposing a central role for energy conservation during early evolution, based on a simple three-step biochemical mechanism. Article

Life Could Have Evolved in Armoured Clay Bubbles ….. arXiv:1011.4711 Article

Life Could have started as self-assembling organic molecules. … Wikipedia Article

Did Life Evolve in Ice? Funky properties of frozen water may have made life possible….. Discover February 2008 issue; published online February 1, 2008 Article

Evidence Mounts That Life May Have Begun In a Scalding Toxic Bath

Born in the fire Evidence mounts that life may have begun in a scalding toxic bath By David Chandler, Globe Staff, 9/12/2000 For humans, it’s about as … Newsgroup Article

Life May Have Begun In The Hot Or The Cold

Over 3000 million years ago, life may have begun in the sea as simple bacteria. As ancient time progressed, there slowly evolved a diversity of …Astrobiology Magazine, Moffet Field CA (SPX) Feb 26, 2008

Life May Have Begun in Upper Atmosphere An experiment that simulated chemical reactions in the atmosphere of Saturn’s moon Titan suggests that life could have begun in the sky. American Scientist, November 2010
Article

Life May Have Begun Deep Down Under the Ground and Then Only Later Evolved and Adapted To Cooler Surface Conditions On Earth. … Nov 16, 2009
earthsky.org/space/paul-davies-do-we-live-in-a-bio-friendly-universe Article

Could life have evolved in cometary nuclei? A. Bar-Nun, A. Lazcano-Araujo and J. Oró

On Earth it is believed that life originated or could have originated in caves or round Hydrothermal vents…. Wikiversity.org

Life on Earth could have grown from the broken remains of alien viruses–Alien “Zombies?” …. Article;Wired Science

Comets may have brought life to Earth: New study www.physorg.com/news203584634 Article

But life could have taken 7 billion years to develop, and still have left time to evolve to beings like us, who could ask about the origin of life. … hawking.org.uk

Researcher Says Life Evolved Between the Mica Sheets: …www.nsf.gov/news/news Article

A new model shows how primitive life could have evolved from simple amino acids in a “primordial soup” – news.softpedia.com

The deep sea vent theory for the origin of life on Earth might apply to ……
www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/…/enceladus-f20080326.html Article

So the common ancestor of life could harness the natural proton … If life did evolve in alkaline hydrothermal vents, it might have …….www.allbusiness.com/science-technology/…/13228098-1.html Article

First Animals Evolved in Lakes, Not Oceans, Study Hints

Jul 28, 2009 … Earth’s first animals may have evolved in salty lakes, not oceans, … and its longevity may have helped animal life gain a foothold, Kennedy said. … Still, there could be other explanations for why older animal …news.nationalgeographic.com/…/090728-first-animals-evolution-lakes.html

Life May Have Evolved From Fresh Water? Carrine Blank, Ph.D., Washington University

Life may have evolved chemically, not biologically www.thaindian.com/…/life-may-have-evolved-chemically-not-biologically_ 1003221.html

Mars; Not Mars

–Or, more extraordinarily, it has been suggested that life may have evolved first on Mars and then come to Earth by the process of ballistic panspermia.7 …www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/M/Marslife.html

–Frozen Mars Likely Never Evolved Life
Jul 21, 2005 … This in turn suggests that Mars likely has not had conditions suitable for life to evolve, at least in the last 3.5 billion years. …www.sciscoop.com/2005-7-21-151739-652.html

–Life may have been seeded on Mars < ---from Earth. www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/M/Marslife.html

--Who knows, that an intelligent life may have evolved on Venus in distant past, even more ‘intelligent’ than us, who might have ruined the …www.chowk.com/articles/11545

What Dr. Seth Shostak is suggesting could come out of the pages of a science fiction novel. His idea is that intelligent life may have evolved into or created artificial intelligence.

These ‘robot’ forms of life may have different forms of communication and could be living in parts of the universe inhospitable to organic life forms like us. Dr. Seth Shostak, who is the Senior Astronomer at the SETI Institute. Article

Diamonds may have been life’s best friend.

Billions of years ago, the surface of these gems may have provided just the right conditions to foster the chemical reactions believed to have given rise to life on Earth, researchers in Germany report. ScienceDaily (July 30, 2008)

Unique three-dimensional native structures of first biopolymers could have evolved as a side effect of nonspecific physicochemical factors acting at the prebiotic stage of evolution. Harvard university Jan 23 1996

New theory fills in the gap before Darwin
By Tim Friend, USA TODAY

“Forget what you learned in biology about the origin of life: that it began with a single mother of all cells and became increasingly complex. It was a simplistic notion anyway.

A new theory by leading evolutionary microbiologist Carl Woese, which may revolutionize notions on the origin of life, suggests that life really began with at least three primitive cell-like structures engaged in a promiscuous gene-swapping free-for-all more than 3 billion years ago.” USA Today Article

If It Looks Like An Extinct Marine Reptile and It Quacks Like An Extinct Marine Reptile, It Must Be A Goat…?

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Sophistication of Ancestors, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Nov 06 2010

We admit that it is often difficult to determine exactly what creature is being depicted in objects of ancient art (cryptozooarcheaology being one of our hobbies) but we note that its quite common for “experts” to “orthodoxize” any potentially anomalous pieces. This tendency to provide potentially anomalous pieces mundane descriptions is precisely why people are often unaware that out of place artifacts actually exist in museums and museum basements around the world.

Following is a Pacific Northcoast Indigenous People’s artifact that the British Museum describes as having the head of a goat. We’ll let you be the judge of that but to us, there is a close resemblance in form to certain marine reptiles which were supposedly extinct millions of years before these artists came on the scene. We won’t name that creature less we sway your judgement but … a goat?!

Oh, ple-sio! :0) …….s8int.com

BRITISH MUSEUM: “Shaman’s rattle in the form of an oystercatcher Tlingit, 1800′s AD

From Alaska, North America

The rattle is carved of wood, in the form of an oystercatcher (?) surmounted by the head of a mountain goat, with a frog on the back whose tongue is joined with that of the goat.

A shaman is tying up a witch, from whose mouth a second frog emerges, with long pointed incisors. This frog represents the evil spirit possessing the sorcerer, which the shaman is responsible for removing.

Shamans, like mountain goats, were able to visit the most difficult terrain. Such rattles might be applied over an afflicted part of the body, or left with the patient as guardian.

J.C.H. King, First peoples, first contacts: (London, The British Museum Press, 1999)”

Pelican Fossil Poses Evolutionary Riddle; ,
Why, They Haven’t Evolved, Not Even a Little

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, s8int.com, Science, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Jun 25 2010


Pelican fossil poses another evolutionary riddle;
Why, they haven’t evolved, not even a little!
Just like spiders and octopi, lamprey’s and bees
Why did this “evolutionary process” seemingly freeze?

The fossil record shows fig wasps and crocodiles unchanged
How could such an “inexorable process” become so deranged?
Neither ants, bats or cockroaches have changed an iota
Of “beneficial mutations” did Darwin fail to gets its quota?

Scientist’s were “surprised” to find mammal hair “unevolved”?
How will macroevolution’s evolving, non-evolving problem be solved?
Will these constant discoveries give the “tree of life” a jostle?
Or will Darwinist’s have to call everything alive “living fossils”?

The “extinct” coelacanth; the ancestor of land animals was crowned
But it’s another evolution riddle ‘cause its still swimming around!
The “trade secret” of evolution revealed by a Darwinist apostle
But they still go on “snipe hunts” for transitional fossils!

Pelican fossil poses evolutionary puzzle, by Jeff Hecht, June 2010
NewScientist

Pelicans that closely resembled those living today were scooping fish from the water while our ancestors were still swinging from the trees, a fossil discovery suggests.

The identification of an extremely well preserved 30-million-year old fossilised beak raises interesting questions over why evolution has left the birds so little changed over such a long period.

The nearly complete beak of the 30-million-year old fossil, found in the Luberon area of south-eastern France, resembles those of the seven modern pelican species so closely that it falls within the genus Pelecanus, says Antoine Louchart of the University of Lyon, France.

Pelican beaks are the longest of any living birds. Beneath the beak is a flexible pouch that allows the birds to capture their prey in the water, then spit out the water before swallowing their meal. Like other bird beaks, they are rarely preserved as fossils, so little had been known about their early evolution.

Family resemblance
Louchart recognised the fossil, discovered in the 1980s, while examining specimens in the collection of his co-author Nicolas Tourment. Protected by being buried in fine-grained limestone, it includes most beak bones, plus parts of the skull and neck, and strongly resembles the modern great white pelican, Pelecanus onocrotalus.

The lack of evolutionary change could suggest the beak has reached an evolutionary optimum for flight or for eating. Louchart is not convinced that either of these hypotheses offers a complete explanation; he thinks something else may be involved but does not know what that might be.

The find not only pushes back the origins of pelicans, but of related birds too. “The groups now thought to be closest to pelicans, the shoebill and hamerkop, must also have differentiated very early, says Louchart.

“The pelican bill has been a successful adaptation or trait, in that it has remained very similar over time,” says Rebecca Kimball of the University of Florida. Two years ago Kimball reported in Science (DOI: 10.1126/science.1157704) that pelicans were genetically close to near relatives, which she said would reflect their slow evolution.