Posts Tagged ‘Bible’

Late Survival Theorem, Regarding Chalicotherium
From A Comfy Chair, We I.D. Un-cuddly “Nandi Bear”?
Plus, a Terrace of Lions? Dude You’re not even Tryin’
Enigma’s & Mysteries Due to Skewed View of History

Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, Fin De Siecle, s8int.com, Science, Sophistication of Ancestors, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 04 2012



Gen 1:25 And God made the beasts of the earth after their kinds, and cattle after their kinds, and every thing that creeps upon the earth after its kind:
and God saw that it was good.”

   
Can a Leopard Change Its Paradigm?

As a Christian my interests are not strictly limited to debates about the meaning of scripture, issues concerning salvation or debates concerning the existence of God. Those are all important to be sure but throughout history science has been driven by human curiosity about and discoveries concerning the world and the universe that God has made.

One of the interests I have is in something I like to call crypto-zoo-archaeology. Clues to the true history of our planet can be discovered by examining the art and artifacts of past civilizations. The truth is; studying and writing about what I and many others have found in these artifacts is another way of addressing; the meaning of scripture, issues concerning salvation and debates concerning the existence of God.


In this pursuit I have found that those who accept the literal creation account of Genesis have an incredible advantage in this arena. One can look at the artifacts of ancient history through at least two filters; 1)that all living creatures are descended from a single living cell and have evolved through some process (essentially linear and sequential) into the higher order living species that we see today, or 2)the Genesis account of creation which would mean that all living creatures including man have all lived together simultaneously through all history in essentially their current forms.

No matter which filter one uses much of ancient history will still be a puzzle. But using the wrong filter certainly leads to a copious number of; inconsistencies, anomalies, contradictions, unknowns, mysteries and a need to fill in missing information with speculations and assertions which are not data or evidence.

Personally, I have tested the Genesis account and found that what I see and what I expect to find in the historical and archaeological record better fit that filter.

Once one of the two above named paradigms are accepted however it is very difficult to see or even to consider evidence that conflicts with the paradigm. This is true whether you believe in evolution or in Creation ex Nihilo by God. This relative inability to see or except or even to evaluate evidence that might appear to conflict with your adopted paradigm afflicts even those among who are quite certain that we are actually open-minded and objective.

This doesn’t negate the fact that one of the referenced paradigms-is actually true-and that the selection of one or the other filter for your own life doesn’t have consequences.

When news outlets announced that James Cameron and others had allegedly found “the Jesus Tomb” it did not cause any consternation among us Christians who paid zero attention to the story. We waited for secular archaeologists to refute it-which they have. When news conferences, books and television series were coordinated around the announcement of an alleged human ancestor—which was going to change everything- exploded on the scene-“Ida”, I personally did not do a spit-take.

By the end of that year “Ida” was not even on lists for the top ten science stories of that year. “She/it had been debunked. I have never seen “evidence for evolution”. I’ve never seen a transitional fossil.

I accept that evolutionists have not seen evidence for the theory of creation either. However, shouldn’t just a single ancient artifact indicating that humans and dinosaurs lived together falsify the notion that we missed each other by 65 million years? In the 1920’s the World’s foremost archaeologist discovered human and dinosaur bones together in Mongolia and he found that they had fashioned jewelry by boring the shells and making ornaments of dinosaur eggs. (See our article: Dinosaur and Human Interactions in Our Times; the New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Sun Times ect)

Do I need to tell you that you need to use “fresh” un-fossilized dinosaur eggs for this purpose? Archaeologist, Roy Chapman Andrews, went on to become the director of the American Museum of Natural History-so how come so many evolutionists ask where there has ever been such evidence (of co-existence) ever in the world?

Let’s test my paradigm theory. Note the middle, right photograph compilation; the one with the three views of an archaeological object above. Once you read the museum’s description of the object, or perhaps prior thereto your filter goes into action.

“Colima Horned Toad. Protoclassic, ca. 100 B.C. to A.D. 250. Height: 5.3 in. (13.5 cm.); Length: 10.5 in. (26.7 cm.). Price: $2,250

There are four rows of spiked protrusions in high relief along the length of the body, and one row across the head, thirty in all. Coffee bean eyes, recessed nostrils, open mouth, spout as tail, and short legs create a reptile that seems pleased with his surroundings. Provenance: From a Riverside County, California Collection.”

Our article can be found Here.

Now, if you are a creationist, willing to believe that dinosaurs and man co-existed, you may see that the photo comparison with an armored dinosaur is very apt. If however, you are using the evolution filter it will be a toad. There is no way that it could be a dinosaur because you believe that they missed each other by 65 million years.

This is then, for you a toad, a fake or etc.. Paradigm preserved. Forehead unfurrowed. In the same way, of course, I have trouble accepting this as a toad because I see the dinosaur explanation as a better fit-however, I do believe that the toad explanation is a possibility.


These filters exist and work to protect us from having to flip flop our beliefs and our view on the world every five or six minutes.

Just above, left is another very interesting ancient artifact. This artifact is described by the curator as a “lion”. I picked this one out because I want to get into the heart of this post and talk about another group of famous lions. Most people would be perfectly willing to see this depiction as a “lion”.

“Early Islamic glass lion (zoomorphic balsamarium). 7th-9th century AD”.

Certainly no one would object to “mythological”, or “unknown animal” or even; “stylized lion figure”. One must make a decision and call it something. However, if you accept the evolutionary filter it is possible that a whole group of potential candidates can’t even be considered. What if the true depiction here is of some type of crested dinosaur? In the photo we’ve compared it to Olorotitan, a European, crested hadrosaur (top, right of photo) and to Amargasaurus, a crested sauropod. Fossils of the specific species have been found in Argentina.

My point is that creationists can consider the entire creation when examining an artifact but those using the other filter cannot—and maintain their paradigm-al purity. They must describe every artifact in terms of the ruling evolutionary paradigm or face the penalties that the scientific/academic/media culture will mete out. Can you imagine someone from Academia describing this as either a badly composed lion or possibly a sauropod like Amargasaurus?

So now let’s talk about some other depictions labeled “lions” by the archaeological establishment.

The Terrace of Lions at Delos


“The island of Delos, recognized as the birthplace of the god Apollo, has been a sacred area used for various reasons throughout history. Today it is one of the most important archaeological sites in Greece and is covered in excavations, one of which is the famous Terrace of the Lions. This terrace was erected and dedicated to Apollo by the people of Naxos just before 600 BCE.

The terrace consisted of a row of nine to twelve marble carved lions that faced eastward towards the Sacred Lake of Delos along the Sacred Way from Skardana Bay to the temples. The lions, with their mouths open as if roaring or snarling, were both meant to guard the sanctuaries and to inspire a feeling of divine fear among the worshippers. The way in which they were positioned is similar to the way sphinxes were set up along avenues in ancient Egypt.

Today, only five of the original lions remain with remnants of three others and the headless body of another has been transported and put over the main gate of a Venetian arsenal.” Biers, William R. The Archaeology of Greece. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996. Whitley, James. The Archaeology of Ancient Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

“The island of Delos near Mykonos, near the centre of the Cyclades archipelago, is one of the most important mythological, historical and archaeological sites in Greece. The excavations in the island are among the most extensive in the Mediterranean; ongoing work takes place under the direction of the French School at Athens and many of the artifacts found are on display at the Archaeological Museum of Delos and the National Archaeological Museum of Athens.”

Photo:Naxian Lions held at the Museum at Delos are less damaged.


Question? Are these in fact, lions? If they are lions, they are surely “stylized lions” because their proportions are incorrect. Their front legs are too long. They have three fingers paws. Their bodies are too long. This from a culture that provides us many examples of museum level, realistic depictions of lions and other animals. If these are lions built to “guard” the sanctuaries why aren’t they more self-evidently and accurately sculpted; lions?

Could they depict some other animal? Are they mythological?

Prior to trying to answer that, we switch to a more recent crypto-zoological mystery; the Nandi Bear of Kenya for reasons which I hope to make clear.

The Nandi Bear and Chalicotherium


“The Nandi Bear, also known as Ngoloko, is a cryptid, or unconfirmed animal, reported to live in Africa. It takes its name from the Nandi people who live in western Kenya, near where the Nandi Bear is reported as living.

Frank W. Lane wrote, “What the Abominable Snowman is to Asia, or the great Sea Serpent is to the oceans, the Nandi Bear is to Africa. It is one of the most notorious of those legendary beasts which have, so far, eluded capture and the collector’s rifle.

…Descriptions of the Nandi Bear are of a ferocious, powerfully built carnivore with high front shoulders (over four feet tall) and a sloping back; somewhat similar to a hyena. Some have speculated that Nandi Bears are in fact a misidentified hyena or a surviving Ice Age giant hyena: Karl Shuker states that a surviving short-faced hyena Pachycrocuta brevirostris,extinct ca. 500,000 years before present, would “explain these cases very satisfactorily.”

Other than the Atlas Bear (extinct by the 1800s), no bears are known to be native to Africa, besides those of the prehistoric genera Agriotherium and Indarctos, which died out 4.4 million years ago. Louis Leakey suggested that Nandi Bear descriptions matched that of the extinct Chalicotherium, though chalicotheres were herbivores.

The Nandi people call it Kerit. Local legend holds that it only eats the brain of its victims. Nandi Bears were regularly reported in Kenya throughout the 19th century and early 20th century. Bernard Heuvelmans’s On the Track of Unknown Animals and Karl Shuker’s In Search of Prehistoric Survivors provide the most extensive chronicles of Nandi bear sightings in print.”


A syndicated news article appearing Mansfield News of January 6, 1924 reported that a very large fresh, fragment of unfossilized claw of chalicotherium had been discovered at Bunyoro, Uganda ( Central Africa) and that the thought to be extinct chalicotherium might be very much still alive.

In fact, Zoologists were making a connection between the stories the Nandi peoples had been telling of a fearsome, man killing, brain eating deadly night creature they called “Gereit” might exist and was in fact, chalicotherium. The drawing above right, is from that 1924 article and is a depiction of chalicotherium.

“Chalicotherium, genus of extinct perissodactyls, the order including the horse and rhinoceros. Fossil remains of the genus are common in deposits of Asia, Europe, and Africa from the Miocene Epoch (23 to 5.3 million years ago). The genus persisted into the following Pliocene Epoch, and remains of a related genus, Moropus, are found in North America.


Chalicotherium and its relatives, collectively known as the chalicotheres, ( we’re not locking down on the genus) were very unusual in appearance and structure. In overall appearance the body and slim skull were horse like. The front limbs were longer than the hind limbs, and the back sloped downward. The teeth were distinctive in structure and unhorse like. The feet were quite distinctive.

There were no hooves; instead, each of the three toes on each foot terminated in a strongly developed claw. It is probable that the development of claws was related to the feeding habits of the animal. Chalicotherium may have browsed on branches of trees, pulling them down with the front claws; the claws may also have been employed to dig up roots and tubers.”…Encyclopedia Britannica

The Crux: is the Nandi Bear a Chalicotherium? And What of the Lions of the Terrace at Delos?

Photo: Left, drawing of the Nandi bear from eyewitness accounts and Right, a frontal view of one of the Terrace of Lions, “lions”.

The Chalicotherium is supposed to have gone extinct from 5-7 million years ago. The chalicotherium has been forth as a possible ID for the Nandi bear primarily because the chalicotherium is also known for having much longer front legs than back legs and to have claws as some eyewitness accounts of the Nandi bear have described it.

The Nandi bear is also a cryptid whose description fits no known, living animal so the late survival of some animal thought to have been prehistoric are put forward as potential suspects. Hyenadon is another animal thought to have been prehistoric that has also been put forth as a potential suspect for the same reasons; high front shoulders, long front legs and a sloping back.

The chalicotherium ID is interesting in that this animal also has very unusual feet and claws which set him apart.

Photo:Comparison of admittedly carefully selected chalicotherium depiction inserted into old photo of Naxian (Terrace of Lions) Lion at Delos.


I came across the Terrace of Lions of Delos quite by accident while investigationg some other matter and was struck by how un-lion-like the lions were. They are magnificent animals to be sure but not like any lions I’ve ever seen. Could they be depictions of real creatures-who were not lions?

I did a quick Google search for prehistoric animals with long front legs and immediately was taken to articles about chalicotherium. Articles about chalicotherium also eventually led to articles concerning modern day speculation by cryptozoologists that chalicotherium was a potential match for the Nandi bear, a cryptid that I was unaware of.

The photo at the top of this section shows a very common drawing of the Nandi bear (of unknown source) along with a frontal photo of one of the lions of the Terrace of Lions. This is interesting because as far as I know no one has ever speculated that the “lions” of the Terrace of Lions has anything to do with either the Nandi bear or with chalicotherium. So is this visual similarity (if your filters aren’t preventing you from seeing it or mine forcing me to) just a coincidence?

Chalicotheres are usually depicted as thick, slow and sloth-like and not as fast, relatively slim and dangerous as the lions of Delos seem to appear.

Photo:Comparison of the skeleton of chalicotherium with a Naxian “lion” from the Delos Museum. Note that the face of the Naxian lion shown here has been worn down by weathering and age..


We know from articles about dinosaur depictions that scientists and artists are only guessing when they depict dinosaurs how a dinosaur looks just from their fossils alone.

We also remember that last year a scientific journal reported that scientists now believe that due to an error in a formula they have been using that they have overestimated the size of some dinosaurs by as much as 33% to 50%. The size of their bones are known it was the amount of meat the artists were throwing on the bone that is in question. This suggests that certain dinosaurs were depicted as much bulkier animals than they actually were. Could this be true of chalicotherium?

When artists or illustrators depict known animals the variety of the depictions, the form, the poses can be infinite because the real creature can appear in infinite poses and can be seen from infinite angles.

This not the case with unknown creatures. Inevitably, once a depiction of an animal is made (a guess) all other depictions take the shape of the reference depiction (or first few) and there becomes a limited view of the shape of the creature and even the poses that the animal is shown in. This group think about the look of an unknown creature appears to be inevitable. A radical departure from the consensus view of the creature won’t even be recognized as a depiction of said creature. Ironically an ancient depiction by an eyewitness to the living creature might be rejected because it does not look like the modern, consensus depiction.

Chalicotherium has three toes on each foot ending in claws. Still, the front and back feet are completely different from each other which may provide us some ID possibilities. Are there Nandi bear descriptions of three-toed feet? (By the way lions have five toes in front and four on their back feet).

Here is an antique, eyewitness account of an encounter with the Nandi bear:

“…the whole tent rocked; the pole to which Mbwambi was tied flew out and let down the ridge-pole, enveloping me in flapping canvas. At the same moment the most awful howl I have ever heard split the night. The sheer demoniac horror of it froze me still…I heard my pi-dog yelp just once. There was a crashing of branches in the bush, and then thud, thud, thud, of some huge beast making off. But that howl! I have heard half a dozen lions roaring in a stampede-chorus not twenty yards away; I have heard a maddened cow-elephant trumpeting; I have heard a trapped leopard make the silent night miles a rocking agony with screaming, snarling roars. But never have I heard, nor do I wish to hear again, such a howl as that of the chimiset. A trail of red spots on the sand showed where my pi-dog had gone. Beside that trail were huge footprints, four times as big as a man’s, showing the imprint of three huge clawed toes, with trefoil marks like a lion’s pad where the sole of the foot pressed down. But no lion ever boasted such a paw as that of the monster which had made that terrifying spoor.” Karl Shuker’s Blog

The Nandi bear has been described as having five or six toes in various accounts over the last century as well. I believe that Dale Drinnon who has written extensively on the Nandi bear postulates that the six toed account is assumed to have been where the back feet stepped into an existing three-toed front track.

Various descriptions noted that the animal liked to sit back on its haunches, described it as bear-like (hence the name) having large feet and as being brown in color.

Photo: The interesting foot of the Naxian lion from the Delos Museum compared with the interesting rear foot of the chalicotherium.


Regarding the lions of Delos again; it can be clearly seen from the less damaged statues inside the museum that the lions have three toes on the front feet and very long rear feet, also with three long claws. This superficially at least matches the front feet and rear feet of chalicotherium.

We’ve shown here additional photographs comparing the feet of chalicotherium with those on the Delos lions-both front and rear as well as a number of photographs comparing the physiology, including the long front legs and sloping back.

Photo:A comparison of the three clawed front foot of chalicotherium with the front feet of the Delos, Naxian Lion.


I’ve gone back to look at the actual chalicotherium skeleton to see if a depiction of the living creature as long, slim bodied with a sloping back would also have been a realistic way to depict the creature notwithstanding all the thousands of versions of fat chalicos.

I’ve concluded that the skeleton does lend itself to the Delos, Terrace of Lions, chalicotherium which has closely matching front and back feet, the long front legs and the sloping back of the fossil chalicotherium. (See my admittedly unscientific juxtapostion photo above left.) Even the long hair (mane) of the statues fails to accurately depict the mane of a lion and does remind me of the long hair on certain sloths.

It appears that there is reason to connect the chalicotherium; a creature that supposedly became extinct 5-7 million years ago to the Naxian Lions at Delos. There appears to be some evidence that there is a connection between the Nandi bear of Kenya and Central Africa and the chalicotherium. The elongated bodies of the Naxian lions could be a match for the elongated bodies, and unusual feet of the chalicotherium which could aide in an affirmative identification and prove that chalicotherium was a “late survivor” and could even still be alive.

One More Mystery; Are They Telling the Truth About this Great Monument-or are They Still Lion? Filters On?


Sigiriya (Lion’s rock) Sri Lnkan Mega Site

“In 1831 Major Jonathan Forbes of the 78th Highlanders of the British army, while returning on horseback from a trip to Pollonnuruwa, came across the “bush covered summit of Sigiriya”. Sigiriya came to the attention of antiquarians and, later, archaeologists. Archaeological work at Sigiriya began on a small scale in the 1890s. H.C.P. Bell was the first archaeologist to conduct extensive research on Sigiriya. The Cultural Triangle Project, launched by the Government of Sri Lanka, focused its attention on Sigiriya in 1982. Archaeological work began on the entire city for the first time under this project. There was a sculpted lion’s head above the legs and paws flanking the entrance, but the head broke down many years ago”….Wikipedia
Sigiriya consists of an ancient castle built by King Kasiappan during the 5th century. The Sigiriya site has the remains of an upper palace sited on the flat top of the rock, a mid-level terrace that includes the Lion Gate and the mirror wall with its frescoes, the lower palace that clings to the slopes below the rock, and the moats, walls, and gardens that extend for some hundreds of metres out from the base of the rock.

The site is both a palace and a fortress. Despite its age, the splendor of the palace still furnishes a stunning insight into the ingenuity and creativity of its builders. The upper palace on the top of the rock includes cisterns cut into the rock that still retain water. The moats and walls that surround the lower palace are still exquisitely beautiful.

During Kassapa’s reign in the 5th century AD, a massive, 60-foot lion was chiseled out of the rock. The steps which continued up to the royal palace started at the lion’s feet, wrapped around his body and eventually entered his mouth. Today, all that remain are the paws, but they give a good idea of the statue’s scale. It’s hard to appreciate how impressive it must have been 1500 years ago. It would be impressive now.

The final flight of stairs, hugging tightly to the stone wall, is not for those who suffer from vertigo…Great Photos as the site of srilanka for 91days.com

Here is the mystery; the lion’s head has fallen down and that years ago. One of the most famous parts of the entire sight is the gigantic “lion’s Paws that begin the assent to the next level. But the paws rendered in great detail, are of a creature with three claws on each foot. Lions have five total claws on each front foot although one claw is a “thumb” that usually does not show in a foot print.


So, did someone take the time and input the engineering to construct a megalithic structure featuring a lion only to get the detail concerning the number of claws wrong? I’m even more amazed that no one seems to be questioning whether or not these are meant to be lion’s paws. People seem content just to accept the ID and to move on to the other incredible features of the site.

At least cryptozoologists ought to be asking about the three-clawed lion–if not biologists.

Seriously, is it even reasonable to suppose that the people who built this great monument intended it to represent a three toed lion? Even beyond the number of claws, go google lion claws, view the images and you will note that notwithstanding the actual number of claws–they are nothing like the claws of a lion. What creature, perhaps lion-like in demeanor could be confused with a depiction of a lion- and have three sharp claws on its front feet?

Well, certain dinosaurs might fit the bill–and of course there is the Naxian lion come chalicotherium….

–Comments to: s8intcom@comcast.net

Update: The Biggest Out of Place Artifacts Ever? Immense, Stupendous Petrified Trees of the Black Hills, South Dakota

Giants in Those Days, s8int.com, Science, The Flood of Noah, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Nov 23 2012



Photo: Portion of gigantic petrified tree laying horizontally on the ground. Here we could be looking at a stump or a branch with a circumference of 130 to 150 feet. Black Hills, South Dakota. Photo Copyright Joseph C. Bennett. All Rights reserved.

Gen 7:17 “The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits. Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.”

……..”this isn’t “rocket science”. Any self respecting boy scout can identify petrified wood.” www.beholdgiants.com

We first met Joseph C. Bennett almost three years ago, online when he forwarded some incredible photographs and made some incredible comments to go along with the photos. Joseph Bennett was the discoverer of a phenomenon that if true would require a radical re-examination and realization by science of the true history of this planet.

Photo: Right. Colossal trees neccessarily must have colossal seeds/pits, right? Mr. Bennett proposes that this is such a photo of a gigantic, petrified seed or pit at the Black Hills site. Photo by and Copyright Joseph C. Bennett. All rights reserved. Do not duplicate.

This post isn’t so much as an update as a restating of the original discovery and an opportunity to restore links to photographs.

Also, Joseph has made a video providing significant details of the discovery in terms of his explanation for the gigantic artifacts that he is diplaying pictorially. Joseph’s original site is no longer up, but if you are on facebook you can see approximately 140 pictures that he has located there.


Unfortunately, the detailed descriptions and explanations that were on the main site are no longer there.

Bennett is working on enhancing the material and promises to come back on line with a new site and with the new material that he has gathered over the years.

Our original short post on this topic is still one of the most popular posts on the site. In short, the discovery is this:



“An entire island, 50 x 100 miles, completely petrified. Covered with the petrified remains of a forest of super giants. Trees of incredible/impossible size, destroyed by a cataclysm that collapsed the island itself into the surrounding sea.

Having remained secret for all time. Now, this place has decided to make itself known. Here is just the beginning of an astounding photographic documentation of this petrified island. A little glimpse of an entirely unknown condition upon the Earth. Giants indeed.” Joseph C. Bennett www.beholdgiants.com

Photo:The bark on this stump or branch can be seen on the upper right of this photo. Black Hills, South Dakota. Photo Copyright Joseph C. Bennett. All Rights reserved



Bennett believes that he has discovered a gigantic, petrified forest of mind blowing dimensions in the Black Hills of South Dakota. If these artifacts are what they appear to be to the discerning an open minded eye; the remnants of forest of gigantic trees; where did they come from? In the history of the planet, at what time would an island of giant trees like this have existed?

Science has its own ideas about the many petrified forests (smaller trees) that have been discovered around the world;

“A petrified forest is a forest made out of fossil or petrified wood. In other words, a petrified forest is a forest made out of stone trees. Petrification is a natural process that occurs when all organic material in a tree dies and is replaced by a combination of quartz, copper, iron, and other minerals. Once the process has been finalized, petrified wood is no longer considered wood, and it becomes classified as a stone. In fact, petrified wood is Washington’s official stone. All petrified forests are national monuments and are carefully protected.

A petrified forest becomes such over the course of million of years. Some of the world’s largest petrified forests are an estimated 100 million years old” Wisegeek.

The Bible of course provides another version of history; that the whole earth was at one time covered in water above the mountains in a global flood less than 10,000 years ago. In 2011, what is being called the world’s largest tree was discovered in Redwood National Park in California. The tree named Hyperion reaches a height of 379 feet.

Scientists recently concluded that the maximum height of a tree is 425 feet under current gravimetric conditions. So how does one account for trees in the past of such huge size as to be impossible to imagine–up to 1/2 mile in circumference (distance walking around it)–and larger? For instance, a 900 foot petrified tree found in Texas in 1927 had “upright trunks are so large that they appear from a distance to be great symmetrical columns of natural rock.” A 900 foot tree should not have been possible under the current gravity of the earth–but Bennett claims evidence of trees much larger even than this. Perhaps the trees were as large as this in the Garden of Eden?


….”When you get to the top of one particular ridge, overlooking a long meadow to the south and a larger valley to the southeast, you see a vast landscape, littered everywhere with large petrified tree sections similar to the ones you have seen so far. Then when you look out a little further, you notice right away that things get a lot bigger and you realize that everything else you have seen is most certainly smaller giant trees and branches of much larger giant trees.

Wow. Time to burn some brain calories. First, is this for real?”..www.beholdgiants.com
Photo above: In the foreground; Mount Rushmore. In the background; gigantic broken off tree stumps?

Joseph Bennett made these discoveries while hiking in the Black Hills of South Dakota himself. As he says, these artifacts aren’t going to go away. Anyone with the time, a little knowledge and the inclination can verify these discoveries-and their implications themselves.


We don’t have the ability to understand the satellite maps in the same way that Mr.Bennett sees them. We are on board with the notion that he has a number of photographs proving that there are gigantic, petrified trees there at the site (the smaller trees). We think that he has more work to do to prove that the really super big trees which appear to be small mountains are really broken off tree stumps. He promises to come forward in the future with some additional, mind blowing artifacts.

The facebook site of a number of these photographs is:Black Hills Petrified Giants

Video Link to BeholdGiants.com

All photos Copyright Joseph C. Bennett
Hey Chris,
Spot the giant log?

Joseph C. Bennett


  

Following is an additional, large scale view of the location with several huge stumps described.

Click the photo to see a higher resolution version.


Encode Project Proves that Materialists Had Gotten Ignorance Down to a Science; Junk DNA is No More!

Church of Darwin, s8int.com, Science, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Oct 05 2012


By Chris Parker Copyright 2012

The National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) launched a public research consortium named ENCODE, the Encyclopedia Of DNA Elements, in September 2003, to carry out a project to identify all functional elements in the human genome sequence. Recently they announced some science shaking results.

Back Story

“Ignorance is bliss” the saying goes and many who promote or adhere to today’s scientific paradigms are in the position to best report whether or not this saying is true. I’m not using the word “ignorance” in a pejorative sense but rather in the sense of Webster’s “a state of being uninformed (lack of knowledge).

Finding oneself in the state of being uninformed is common to most of us in some aspects of our lives but deciding to build up an area of science or to make scientific assertions built upon the foundation of one’s own ignorance is a mistake that’s likely to be made manifest once that ignorance is dispelled with a bit of the light of actual knowledge.

As an example, for years scientists did not know what the function was for a number of organs or structures in the human body. They could have said “we do not know what the function of this particular organ or part in the body is”. What they did instead was to build on the evolution myth by tying their ignorance about the human body into “scientific knowledge” claiming that these “vestigial organs or structures” were leftovers from the evolutionary past-which had lost their functions. Eventually, other scientists were able to discover important functions for each of these “vestigial” organs and today, arguably, none exist.

Materialists and strict evolutionists believe that there is only matter and energy in the universe and that somehow that matter and energy was able to organize itself into planets, comets, stars and life. They don’t believe in spirit, such as the souls of man or in God who is Spirit because such can’t be scientifically quantified. There is however another sphere that exists apart from matter and energy that even the materialists have to admit is real. This sphere is called information.

Information exists and in fact is the basis of life itself. Information is non-material and exists apart from any method or material used to convey it. Information exists in copious amounts in the cells of everything living. This information, DNA, is a language which the living cell can read, understand and “obey”. This information provides the instructions for every facet of life.

“The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of those bases are the same in all people. The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism, similar to the way in which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and sentences.”..NIH

Information and language come from a mind; it comes from intelligence. DNA is such a language.

The “technology” conveyed through the language DNA is infinitely above any technology of mankind. The fact that this information could have only come from a superior intelligence should be obvious; whoever placed the language in the cells of everything living first had to have stupendous and incredible knowledge in order to implant it into all life.

If materialists and evolutionists gave themselves a moment to reflect they would realize that DNA is proof that God exists and so they refuse to reflect-and instead apparently spend their time trying to create counter arguments to the obvious.

Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft said :

“DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.”
Bill Gates, The Road Ahead .

All of Gates far less complicated software codes had creators.

Anyone who was honestly considering whether or not God exists had no alternative but to consider DNA absolute proof of a Creator. The smallest cell of bacteria living requires to much information to have been formed by chance and that information is on a level well above anything man has concieved or built.

As I.L. Cohen, Mathematician and researcher said:

“At that moment, when the DNA/RNA system became understood, the debate between Evolutionists and Creationists should have come to a screeching halt”……. I.L. Cohen, Researcher and Mathematician; Member NY Academy of Sciences; Officer of the Archaeological Inst. of America; “Darwin Was Wrong – A Study in Probabilities”; New Research Publications, 1984, p. 4

There is a small portion of the human genome that codes for proteins—around 2%. This area has been a central focus on gene studies. The function of the larger portion of the genome that does not code for protein has been a mystery. Materialists seized upon areas of the genome that were not as well understood and declared these areas “junk dna”. Being ignorant of the function of these areas, they argued that they were evolutionary junk, left over from eons of evolutionary activity.

Francis Collins, at one time the Director of the Human Genome Project said the following regarding materialist scientists using their own scientific ignorance as a basis for building on the current paradigm in science:

“There were long stretches of DNA in between genes that didn’t seem to be doing very much; some even referred to these as “junk DNA,” though a certain amount of hubris was required for anyone to call any part of the genome “junk,” given our level of ignorance.”
Francis S. Collins, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

Naturally, Materialists Ignored Collins’ Hubris Warnings and Those of Creationists

The term “Junk DNA” coined by Susumu Ohnoover 40 years ago is quite obviously a pejorative term intended to suggest lack of design and thus; lack of a Designer-God. A typical evolutionist challenge to creationists have typically gone something like this:

“Anti-evolutionists: can you explain why God would make “junk” DNA?

A good portion of our genetic code has no apparent purpose … that is until you account for millions if not billions of mutations that no longer have a phenotype in modern humans.”…Evolutionist, Anonymous

Richard Dawkins, the world’s preeminent Atheist said the following with unconcealed sarcasm:


“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)

…it is a remarkable fact that the greater part (95 percent in the case of humans) of the genome might as well not be there, for all the difference it makes.* The Greatest Show on Earth”

Although Encode wasn’t about “pseudogenes” there is increasing evidence that they have until now undiscovered function as well; Dawkins double downed and tripled down with this quote from “The Greatest Show on Earth”

“What pseudogenes are useful for is embarrassing creationists. It stretches even their creative ingenuity to make a convincing reason why an intelligent designer should have created a pseudogene — a gene that does absolutely nothing and gives every appearance of being a superannuated version of a gene that used to do something — unless he was deliberately setting out to fool us.”

Dawkins Was Wrong: The Encode Findings

ENCODE Project Writes Eulogy for Junk DNA, ScienceMag.org–September 2012 by Elizabeth Pennisi

“This week, 30 research papers, including six in Nature and additional papers published online by Science, sound the death knell for the idea that our DNA is mostly littered with useless bases. A decade-long project, the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE), has found that 80% of the human genome serves some purpose, biochemically speaking. Beyond defining proteins, the DNA bases highlighted by ENCODE specify landing spots for proteins that influence gene activity, strands of RNA with myriad roles, or simply places where chemical modifications serve to silence stretches of our chromosomes”

Breakthrough Study Overturns Theory of ‘Junk DNA’ in Genome-Guardian UK

“Long stretches of DNA previously dismissed as “junk” are in fact crucial to the way our genome works, an international team of researchers said on Wednesday……

For years, the vast stretches of DNA between our 20,000 or so protein-coding genes – more than 98% of the genetic sequence inside each of our cells – was written off as “junk” DNA. Already falling out of favour in recent years, this concept will now, with Encode’s work, be consigned to the history books”

Junk DNA, In the Beginning.org
Les Sherlock, Sept 2012

“Well, now it is the evolutionists who are embarrassed – or certainly should be. For 40 years, ever since Susumu Ohno introduced the term in 1972, they have been waving ‘junk DNA’ in the face of creationists, asking why their Creator-God would have produced DNA with only 5% that had any function. Now they know, or are beginning to find out, that it wasn’t that it was without function, but simply that they knew too little about it to be aware of what it did. In fact this mirrors exactly the blunder they made 100 years ago or so, when they claimed over 100 human organs were vestigial: remnants of our evolutionary past that were no longer functional. They were wrong with vestigial organs 100 years ago, and they have been wrong for the past 40 years with junk DNA. Will they never learn?”

Bits of Mystery DNA, Far From ‘Junk,’ Play Crucial Role-The New York Times 9/6/2012
By GINA KOLATA

“Now scientists have discovered a vital clue to unraveling these riddles. The human genome is packed with at least four million gene switches that reside in bits of DNA that once were dismissed as “junk” but that turn out to play critical roles in controlling how cells, organs and other tissues behave. The discovery, considered a major medical and scientific breakthrough, has enormous implications for human health because many complex diseases appear to be caused by tiny changes in hundreds of gene switches.

The findings, which are the fruit of an immense federal project involving 440 scientists from 32 laboratories around the world, will have immediate applications for understanding how alterations in the non-gene parts of DNA contribute to human diseases, which may in turn lead to new drugs. They can also help explain how the environment can affect disease risk. In the case of identical twins, small changes in environmental exposure can slightly alter gene switches, with the result that one twin gets a disease and the other does not.

As scientists delved into the “junk” — parts of the DNA that are not actual genes containing instructions for proteins — they discovered a complex system that controls genes. At least 80 percent of this DNA is active and needed.”

Monkey’s Uncle?

Evolutionists have trumpeted the similarity of the chimpanzee genome to that of humans, claiming that since the chimpanzee DNA profile matched ours up to 98% (debated number) that this was proof of evolution. However, the 98% number related to the 2% of the respective genomes that code for protein.

Given that, the Encode Project findings indicate that the vast majority of the two genomes are totally unrelated. In fact the extreme differences between the two species non coding DNA regions is too large to have occurred in the period alleged to have existed between the supposed evolution of chimps and man.

The Conclusion of it All

William Dembski sums up both the reasons materialists have for designating portions of the genome “junk” and why finding so much function in the genome tends to eliminate the possibility for evolutionary explanations to be correct.

“design is not a science stopper. Indeed, design can foster inquiry where traditional evolutionary approaches obstruct it. Consider the term “junk DNA.” Implicit in this term is the view that because the genome of an organism has been cobbled together through a long, undirected evolutionary process, the genome is a patchwork of which only limited portions are essential to the organism.

Thus on an evolutionary view we expect a lot of useless DNA.

If, on the other hand, organisms are designed, we expect DNA, as much as possible, to exhibit function. And indeed, the most recent findings suggest that designating DNA as “junk” merely cloaks our current lack of knowledge about function”….Dembski 1998

So far, the Encode Project and scientists working in this area have found function for only 80% of the genome.

It would now betray a certain, stubborn, anti scientific ignorance to believe function won’t be found for the entire DNA code-if the world stands.

See Also: Et tu, Pseudogenes? Another Type of “Junk” DNA Betrays Darwinian Predictions

Crypto-Zoo-Archaeological Mysteries Challenge Conventional Histories. The Ceratopsian Dinosaur and the Elephant in Ancient South America?

Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Science, Sophistication of Ancestors, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Aug 06 2012


by Chris Parker, Copyright 2012

Look at Behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox. What strength it has in its loins, what power in the muscles of its belly! Its tail sways like a cedar; the sinews of its thighs are close-knit. Its bones are tubes of bronze, its limbs like rods of iron. It ranks first among the works of God…Job 40

 

 

Ceratopsian Dinosaurs in Ancient South America?

Evidence indicating the historical presence of ceratopsian dinosaurs in South America within the last 1,000 years would be controversial for at least two reasons; one, ceratopsian dinosaurs are thought by modern science to have been extinct for 65 million years and two, science at most only recognizes the presence of one type of ceratopsian dinosaur on that entire continent.

Ceratopsian dinosaurs were, vegetarian, quadruped, frilled and horned dinosaurs whose fossils have been found primarily in North America, Asia and Europe. Incidentally, they also had tails like a cedar; Certainly much thicker than that of the hippo which some believe is described in the book of Job.

Unusual identifying features for this dinosaur include the rostral bone which gives its face a beak like appearance and the jugal bones which scientists most often depict as bones protruding from the side of the animals face. Ceratopsia is derived from the Greek for “horned face”.

Only one species has been identified from fossils in South America, Notoceratops and the scant fossils upon which that tentative identification was based have since been lost.

There is however a narrow strip of land between North and South America called the Isthmus of Panama, known in the past as the Isthmus of Darien, containing the country of Panama and the Panama Canal. According to current scientific belief, that land bridge was formed three million years ago, after the extinction of the dinosaurs.

Artifacts indicating that ceratopsian dinosaurs were living as the same time as man on the continent of South America would: call into question the entire evolutionary/materialistic time frame for evolution and the extinction of dinosaurs; prove that ceratopsians also lived on the Southern continent and calling into question the supposed timing of the formation of the Isthumus of Panama; provide an answer to the question that paleontologists have been debating as to whether or not ceratopsians had “cheeks” which covered their jugal bone formations or whether they were “cheekless” having the bones protrude as horns and/or some type of defense mechanism.

If ceratopsians indeed had cheeks which covered the jutting jugal bone they certainly would have a wide, almost smiling mien which would differ signifcantly from the way modern science now depicts them. If there are multiple South American artifacts indicating the presence of ceratopsians in South America, then why haven’t more fossils of the dinosaurs been found?

A Startling Artifact Depicting a South American, Short Frilled, Vegetable Eating Ceratopsian?


“The ceratopsians are largely subdivided into two groups: the long-frilled and the short-frilled dinosaurs. Largely identical to each other – short but powerful legs, robust bodies, tortoise beak-like jaws and a varied number of horns – they had either a shorter, more plain frill with smaller openings that didn’t extend beyond the dinosaur’s neck and shoulders (the short-frilled dinosaurs) or a longer frill with larger internal openings that extended further beyond the shoulders, occasionally possessing spikes of various length on its end.”…Walking with Dinosaurs Wikia.com

Ecuador is engaged in the process of “repatriating” 5,000 pre Columbian artifacts from Ecuador’s historic past which have been obtained either legally or illegally and which have been scattered around the world to museums and private collections. Recently elements of the Ecuadorian government sued to stop an international auction featuring a number of pre Columbian artifacts that they allege are from Ecuador. In turn, several auction have sued Ecuador claiming that the artifacts were obtained legally.

The artifact shown above right was among the objects for which Ecuador seeks a return. This pre Columbian artifact from ancient Ecuador appears to depict one of the short frilled, ceratopsian dinosaurs. It has a short frill and is depicted eating vegetation.


From the angle of the photo, the rostral bone depiction is not strong but still evident as the middle of the mouth is closer to the observer. In terms of cheeks vs no cheeks the artist came down firmly on the cheek school, depicting the cheeks totally subsuming the jugal bones on the side of the face giving the animal a wide, “grinning” mouth.

There is another visible feature in this depiction which although not dispositive of all other theories would tend to support the identification of the creature as a ceretopsian—or else cast some doubt.

That’s right! I’m talking about the creatures toes. See the photo above, right. The artist clearly depicts this animal as having five toes on the front feet (manus). But, what have paleontologists found with respect to the manus and pes (forefeet and hindfeet) of the short frilled, ceratopsian dinosaurs?

Among the short frilled ceratopsians were; protoceratops, monoceratops, leptoceratops and centrosaurus. The diagram represents one of centrosaurus’s forefeet.


“McCrea also conceded that some ceratopsians had five toes on the forefoot and four toes on the hindfoot and therefore would also be capable of leaving similar footprints.] The best known ceratopsians were known from strata more recent than that which preserved Tetrapodosaurus, however more recent discoveries have pushed the age range of ceratopsians back into ages comparable to that of Tetrapodosaurus. Nevertheless, McCrea supported the ankylosaur interpretation”…… Wikipedia on the question of who left the Abyssal/Gates tracks


“Protoceratops held its head low for grazing, using its parrotlike beak to snip off low leaves, which were swallowed whole, since the teeth were of no use for chewing. Its front feet had five toes” Quote Source

In short, we have a pre Columbian depiction of a possible short frilled, ceratopsian dinosaur some 65 million years after their extinction according to the current scientific paradigm, eating vegetation (what mythical dragons eat vegetation), with the requisite number of toes/fingers potentially answering a question regarding cheeks that has been argued for some time.

But is this a one off?

Corroborating South American Ceratopsia Depictions?

According to wikipedia, the name Ceratopsia was coined by Othniel Charles Marsh in 1890 to include dinosaurs possessing certain characteristic features, including horns, a rostral bone, teeth with two roots, fused neck vertebrae, and a forward-oriented pubis.

Two years prior to that, in 1888, Popular Science Monthly had an interesting article on whistles entitled, “Whistles, Ancient and Modern” by M. L. Gutode.

In the passage describing the artifact we want to examine he writes: “Seeing that so much can be done with such rude means, it is not strange that the whistle was a well-known instrument in antiquity. The old Peruvians were past masters in the fabrication of whistles.

They made them in great numbers, of earth, and ornamented with various designs and figures of animals. The porcelain-factory at Sèvres (Fig. 1) possesses two specimens of their workmanship, one of which resembles a nightingale; and, when filled with water, it produces a kind of warbling. There is an instrumental museum at the Paris Conservatory of Music, which is open to the public on Thursday afternoons.

It was founded by Clapisson, and in the beginning consisted only of a single collection — of whistles. This was, moreover, a most curious collection, comprising whistles of all ages and all countries, of terra-cotta, copper, ivory, hard stone, etc., some of which were.”


FIG. 1.?—?ANCIENT PERUVIAN EARTHEN WHISTLES. Nos. 1 and 2, figure of an animal, in face and in profile. No. 3. another form (From specimens in the Sèvres Museum.)

remarkable as specimens of invention and workmanship. Unfortunately, this collection was scattered to the winds at an auction-sale twenty years ago, and the conservatory has not preserved any part of it ; but there are still a great many curiosities in the instrumental museum — serpents in the most distressing shapes, horns and trumpets of crystal, flutes of porcelain, fiddles of faience, Alpine horns, a bassoon of such extraordinary adjustment that it is a day’s work to dismount it; and many other most curious contrivances for producing melodies and accompaniments.”… Popular Science Monthly at Wikipedia

Wouldn’t you be curious to see some of those “serpents in the most distressing shapes”?
Mr. Gutode suggests that the depiction on the far left is of a nightingale but keeping in mind that the ceratopsian order had not yet been named its no wonder that he didn’t consider a short frilled ceratopsian dinosaur. However, I think that’s a better identification than the nightingale.


From this view of the whistle we can see the beak caused by the placement of the rostral bone and as well we see the wide mouth caused by the interior jugal bones on each side of the head. We offer some head shots of modern short frilled ceratopsians for comparison sake.

Photo: Leptoceratops top left and bottom left, protceratops, bottom right.It’s worth noting that Ecuador, the source of our first artifact is only about 750 miles from Panama and the land Bridge between North and South America and that Peru, the source of this artifact, shares a border with Ecuador.
 

 

Bird-Headed Figure Whistle, 8th or 9th century Mexico, Veracruz

Finally, on our brief survey of pre Columbian artfacts depicting ceratopsian dinosaurs is this interesting artifact. The Metropolitan Museum of New York has a ceramic piece in its collection which it describes as bird-headed. It’s a ceramic 20.25 inches high, a part of the Michael C. Rockeller Memorial Collection donated to the museum in 1963.

The artifact is pre Columbian dated to the 8th 0r 9th century A.D. from Veracruz, Mexico.



The head features a bird-like beak and indications of the rostral bone characteristic of ceratopsians. It has a short frill, and has cheeks wide enough to accommodate the jugal hornlike facial projections also a characteristic of ceratopsian dinosaurs.

 

 

 

 

Crypto-Zoo-Archaelological Indications of Elephants in Pre Columbian South America

In viewing this artifact and while reading these pieces on elephants in South America it is important to realize that many female elephants do not have tusks and that tusklessness occurs in male elephants as well.

Science seems to be fragmented on the idea of elephants in the Americas in recent times but will allow elephants down to 10,000 years ago in South America. The problem is, there is evidence of their existence here in North America and in South America as well within the last 1,000 years or even later.

A species of ungulate believed to be ancestral to elephants and which supposedly became extinct more than 23 million year s ago is a possible answer to a question raised by a pre Columbian artifact presumably depicting some type of local fauna.

Recent Survival Of The Elephant In The Americas William Corliss, Science Frontiers OnLine
No. 68: Mar-Apr 1990


Photo:Mayan “elephant motif”.

“Elephants were supposed to have disappeared from the America about 10,000 years ago as the Ice Ages waned. This date is another of those “consensus” scientific facts that no one dares challenge if he or she wishes to get published or win research grants. Although this subject remains “closed off” in normal scientific intercourse, there remain tantalizing hints that elephants roamed the Americas until very recently – perhaps even a few hundred years ago!

The following snippets are culled from two articles written by G. Carter, Texas A&M, now emeritus, but always heretical:

1. Numerous folk memories of the elephamt were retained by American Indians.
2. A mastadon was killed, cooked, and eaten by humans in Ecuador circa 1500 BC.
3. Indians told Thomas Jefferson that elephants could still be seen in the region of the Great Lakes.
4. In Florida, a cache of extinct animals, including elephants, was carbon-dated at 2000 BP.
5. Elephant heads are prominent in art and sculpture from Mexico, Central American, and northern South America.

(Carter, George F.; “A Note on the Elephant in America,” and “The Mammoth in American Epigraphy,” Epigraphic Society, Occasional Publications, 18:90 and 18:213, 1989.) ‘

Sitchin’s Elephant


An Elephant Among the Wheels“Jalapa, a gem of a town, is about two hours’ drive from Veracruz (where the Spanish Conquistador Hernan Cortes landed in 1519).

Its museum is undoubtedly second only to the famed one in Mexico City; but unlike Mexico City’s which displays artifacts from all over the country, the Jalapa one exhibits only locally discovered artifacts — predominantly Olmec ones.

Dramatically and effectively displayed in an innovative setting, the Museum boasts several colossal stone heads as well as other stone sculptures. It also displays smaller objects found at Olmec sites; among them, in special display showcases, are what are considered to be Olmec “toys.” They include animals mounted on wheels — a visual and evidentiary negation of the common claim that the people of Mesoamerica (and America in general) were unfamiliar with the wheel.

And included in the same display case were elephants — “toys” made of clay.

Gone – Where and Why? I, and some of my fans who accompanied me, saw them on previous visits to the Museum.
BUT when I (and again some of my fans with me) was there recently — in December 1999 — the elephants were nowhere in sight!

I could find no one in authority to obtain an explanation from. But that the elephants were once there was a fact indeed, here is a photograph of one, shot on a previous visit:

Now, here is the significance of this small artifact: There are no, and never have been, elephants in the Americas. There are and have been elephants in Africa. And a depiction of an elephant could have been made only by someone who has seen an elephant, i.e. someone who has been to Africa!”

 
Aspire Auction Pre Columbian Coati Muni—Or Elephant?


Recently an auction house specializing in ancient artifacts had this pre Columbian artifact for sale at one of its auctions.
Just for information purposes it eventually sold for $161 dollars which is the kind of price you’re going to realize if your ancient artifact looks like a dinosaur or even, God forbid an elephant which is out of time and place.

 


I would tend to believe that an actual depiction of a pre Columbian coati mundi would have fetched more.

The artifact is small; approximately 4 x 5 x 3.5 inches and is described as a “ Pre-Columbian Coati Mundi Head Fragment “., The piece is terracotta and hollow and is further described by the auction house as having “slit eyes” and an “extended nose”..

 



The South American Coati Mundi is a relative of the raccoon and is common in South America. It is also known as the Quati. Their coloration is variable. Unfortunately, coatis don’t have the nose or the ears for this artifact. One is pictured here along with a front view of the artifact.

 

 

 

Pyrotherium, another possibility over coati mundi?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pyrotherium (‘fire beast’) is an extinct genus of South American ungulate, of the order Pyrotheria, that lived in what is now Argentina, during the Early Oligocene.(between 43 annd 23 million years ago) It was named “Fire Beast” because the first specimens were excavated from an ancient volcanic ashfall.

The vaguely elephant-like Pyrotherium was 3 m (10 ft) long and 1.50 m (5 ft) tall at the shoulders, with a weight up to 3500 kg (3.85 tons). Its heavy body was carried by robust legs. Pyrotherium also had a short trunk on its snout, and two pairs of flat, forward-facing tusks in the upper jaw, with a single pair in the lower jaw.


Photo: Left, Restoration of the head by Robert Bruce HorsfallPossible South American descendants of the xenungulates, the complete study of the tarsus of Pyrotherium fails to support this relationship. In one study, derived characters were not seen in any mammal examined except the embrithopod Arsinoitherium from the Tertiary of Africa.[3] Whether this is due to common ancestry, or to the unusual mode of locomotion used by these animals (graviportal and plantigrade) remains to be seen.”

Were there elephants and/or elephants related to elephants in South America within the last 1,000 years? The artifacts say yes but science says no. Will science carry by labeling trunked animal depictions as coati mundi with extended ears and noses or as macaws as some label the Mayan “elephant”.

Perhaps they can maintain their illusions and their evolutionary allusions if they have enough Darwinsitic faith.

See Also:Crouching Dragon, Hdden Dinosaurs: How Evolutionary Science Hides Historical Man and Dinosaur Interaction Part I

Crouching Dragon, Hdden Dinosaurs: How Evolutionary Science Hides Historical Man and Dinosaur Interaction Part II

‘Britain’s Atlantis’ Found at Bottom of North sea – a Huge Undersea World Swallowed by the Sea in 6500 BC-Claim Scientists

Science, The Flood of Noah, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Jul 03 2012

Genesis 6 “For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits. Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark”.

 

Divers have found traces of ancient land swallowed by waves 8500 years ago
Doggerland once stretched from Scotland to Denmark
Rivers seen underwater by seismic scans
Britain was not an island – and area under North Sea was roamed by mammoths and other giant animals

Described as the ‘real heartland’ of Europe
Had population of tens of thousands – but devastated by sea level rises

Mail Online
By Rob Waugh
PUBLISHED: 18:32 EST, 2 July 2012

‘Britain’s Atlantis’ – a hidden underwater world swallowed by the North Sea – has been discovered by divers working with science teams from the University of St Andrews.

Doggerland, a huge area of dry land that stretched from Scotland to Denmark was slowly submerged by water between 18,000 BC and 5,500 BC.

Divers from oil companies have found remains of a ‘drowned world’ with a population of tens of thousands – which might once have been the ‘real heartland’ of Europe.

A team of climatologists, archaeologists and geophysicists has now mapped the area using new data from oil companies – and revealed the full extent of a ‘lost land’ once roamed by mammoths.

The research suggests that the populations of these drowned lands could have been tens of thousands, living in an area that stretched from Northern Scotland across to Denmark and down the English Channel as far as the Channel Islands.

The area was once the ‘real heartland’ of Europe and was hit by ‘a devastating tsunami’, the researchers claim.
The wave was part of a larger process that submerged the low-lying area over the course of thousands of years.

‘The name was coined for Dogger Bank, but it applies to any of several periods when the North Sea was land,’ says Richard Bates of the University of St Andrews. ‘Around 20,000 years ago, there was a ‘maximum’ – although part of this area would have been covered with ice. When the ice melted, more land was revealed – but the sea level also rose.

‘Through a lot of new data from oil and gas companies, we’re able to give form to the landscape – and make sense of the mammoths found out there, and the reindeer. We’re able to understand the types of people who were there.

‘People seem to think rising sea levels are a new thing – but it’s a cycle of Earth history that has happened many many times.’

Organised by Dr Richard Bates of the Department of Earth Sciences at St Andrews, the Drowned Landscapes exhibit reveals the human story behind Doggerland, a now submerged area of the North Sea that was once larger than many modern European countries.

Read more:

Three Cryptozoological Mysteries: The Penn State Dinosaur that Was?; the Ancient Chinese Rhinoceros that Wasn’t; and the 19th Century Pterosaur Displaying Previously Unknown Morphological Features That Might Have Been

Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Science, The Flood of Noah, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Feb 04 2012


By Chris Parker

I’m thinking that maybe the best part of my articles are the titles. Should I just stop right here? After all these years I’m still a hunt and peck typist and that took something out of me already. Where’s that Dragon Naturally speaking program?

The Penn State Dinosaur that Was?

Dragon? Oh yeah, naturally, let’s start with the Penn State “dragon”.

To be fair, they don’t call this one a dragon; they call it “zoomorphic”. If you’re interested in looking for dinosaurs in the art of the ancient peoples-in the art of people who lived within the last 5,000 years or so and have an opportunity to search a database of objects, try the words; dragon, zoomorphic, mythical, beast, grotesque, reptile or unknown creature.

This is not to say that these objects will necessarily be depictions of dinosaurs, I’m just saying searching ancient art using the term “dinosaur” is not a profitable enterprise.

I grew up believing that dinosaurs and man lived together as the Bible would have us believe, (calling them dragons). There was a time when I was less than convinced and so set out to find out the truth for myself. Subsequently it’s been confirmed by me after I’ve had the opportunity to search university databases and to view hundreds of thousands of pieces of ancient art in museum collections and for sale in private auctions that we did live within the time of the dinosaurs and that the proof is there.

As for ancient artifacts, the more they resemble a dinosaur, the less likely they will be on public view in a museum and the less valuable they will be. No museum wants to buy your ancient Aztec dinosaur.

Anyway, I read recently that the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology was opening its collection of over 1 million objects to public view through a free online archive;

“Since its founding in 1887, the Penn Museum has collected around one million objects, many obtained directly through its own field excavations or anthropological research. Search the Penn Museum’s digital collections including 326,000 object records representing 660,000 objects with 51,500 images.”

Naturally, my immediate thought was; “I wonder if I can find some dinosaurs in that collection”. First, I searched for the word, “dragon”. Slim pickings. Then I searched the word zoomorphic. This is one of the items I discovered.

Zoomorphic Vessel,
Object Number:
35618
Provenience:
Bolivia
Cachilaya
Section:
American
Materials:
Stone
Description:
In shape of a lizard
Credit Line:
Max Uhle, William Pepper Peruvian Expedition, Funded by Phebe A. Hearst
Other Number / Type:
362 / Field No SF

In the shape of a lizard! But no lizard ever looked like that in my estimation. However, being able to call the object; “zoomorphic” and a “lizard” is why you’re getting to see the object in the first place. Any objects which would have to be classified a “dinosaur” are by definition; fakes.

On the other hand since my impression of the object is that it represents a dinosaur, I have to ask myself; what kind of dinosaur? It appears to be a quadrupedal dinosaur, but it is not long necked like a sauropod or even a prosauropod and it is not an armored dinosaur, nor one of the horned dinosaurs of the ceratopsian family.

This is what I did; I Googled; short necked South American dinosaurs and began perusing that group to see if modern day paleontologists had discovered a short necked, squat, quadrupedal dinosaur in South America, preferably in the Bolivian area which corresponded with an ancient artists depiction of a dinosaur living in his time. Did you follow that?

Here’s what I found.


“Brachy-trachelopan is an unusual short-necked sauropod dinosaur from the latest Jurassic Period (Tithonian) of Argentina. The holotype and only known specimen (Museo Paleontológico Egidio Feruglio MPEF-PV 1716) was collected from an erosional exposure of fluvial sandstone within the Cañadón Cálcero Formation on a hill approximately 25 km north-northeast of Cerro Cóndor, Chubut Province, in west-central Argentina, South America.

Though very incomplete, the skeletal elements recovered were found in articulation and include eight cervical, twelve dorsal, and three sacral vertebrae, as well as proximal portions of the posterior cervical ribs and all the doral ribs, the distal end of the left femur, the proximal end of the left tibia, and the right ilium. Much of the specimen was probably lost to erosion many years before its discovery. The type species is Brachytrachelopan mesai. The specific name honours Daniel Mesa, a local shepherd who discovered the specimen while searching for lost sheep. The genus name translates as “short-necked Pan”, Pan being the god of the shepherds.”…Wikipedia

Distance from Bolivia to Argentina? 1500 Miles. So could Brachytrachelopan have had a range of 1500 miles on the South American continent? Is this the least scientific investigation possible?

No, see paleontology.

Could this ancient piece represent in an artful, non literal way a quadrupedal dinosaur like Brachytrachelopan living not millions of years ago but less than a thousand years ago on the South American continent or; is it just a fat lizard?

You’ll have to decide that for yourself.

 

The Ancient Chinese Rhinoceros that Wasn’t


I was saving this as an entry in Part 2 of my Article: Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaur; How Evolutionary Science Hides Historical Man and Dinosaur Interaction in Plain Sight but since that hasn’t been compiled yet I’ll place two planned entries for that article here.

Along with euphemisms like “zoomorphic”, “mythical” and ‘dragon” that it turns out are often appended to the rare depiction of the dinosaur found in museum collections and at private auction sales is the tendency to misidentify animal depictions.

This is because when the curator is not sure what creature it is that is being represented by the ancient artist he still likes to come up with an answer that is not outside the realm of currently accepted science and which satisfies the potential customer.

It’s an ancient Chinese bear, a new owner might say proudly to his houseguests as they stare into his lighted display case at what is actually a ground sloth. Everyone still oohs and ahhs.

This particular piece was sold at auction at Christie’s auction house in 2007 for $216,000. Here is the description:

Lot Description A RARE AND SMALL BRONZE FIGURE OF A RHINOCEROS
TANG DYNASTY (618-907 AD)

Shown standing four-square with tail flicked to the left, the head well cast with two horns of different length, ears pricked back, small eyes and downward curved, overlapping muzzle sensitively cast along the upper edges of the mouth with folds in the skin, which can also be seen in the skin of the neck and chest, the thick hide indicated by overlapping wave pattern diminishing in size on the head and legs, with a rectangular aperture in the belly, the dark brownish surface with some patches of dark red patina and green encrustation.

Lot Notes The depiction of the rhinoceros in bronze is very rare, especially during the Tang period. Earlier depictions do exist, however, as evidenced by the late Shang rhinoceros zun in the Avery Brundage Collection, illustrated by d’Argencè, The Ancient Chinese Bronzes, San Francisco, 1966, pl. XIX and another large zun (22 7/8in. long), ornately decorated, but quite realistic in its depiction of a rhinoceros, of late Eastern Zhou/Western Han dynasty date, found in Xingping Xian, Shaanxi province, included in the exhibition, The Great Bronze Age of China, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980, New York, Catalogue, no. 93


Here’s the problem though; this is Not a depiction of a rhinoceros! (I studied economics in college so….). For one thing, I’ve looked at hundreds if not more than a thousand photographs and depictions of rhinoceri and you’ll not find a single one of them who has horns that point forward. All rhinoceros horns curve backwards.

Small detail, I know but if you look closely at and compare this depiction with that of the rhinoceros you’ll begin to see the differences. For instance, this creature has a beak! No self respecting rhino would sport a “beak” because rhinos do not have “beaks’. Additionally, this rhino has a horn that projects straight up out of the top of his skull. That would appear to be a rhino no no.

There are other differences; the rhino has a sway back, this creature’s back is convex, etc. etc. Did you notice that he’s not wearing the little rhino coat that rhinos seem to wear where there legs seems to be poking out of the short sleeves?

Is there an ancient, perhaps extinct creature with perhaps the size of a rhino, (or larger) horned but with a “beak”? (I may have tipped my hand with the adjacent photo).


Well, the ceratopsia certainly had beaks and ceratopsia does mean “horned face”. After studying members of the ceratopsian family it appears that the comparison with this artifact is pretty solid but; there is one thing missing; the neck frill.

Most if not all known ceratopsian dinosaurs were supposed to have a neck frill although there are some differences among scientists as too how the neck frill appeared.

Also, I can find no photo of the object that shows the tail; only the statement that it curves off to the left. But can a rhino tail do anything but hang? Seeing the tail would answer some questions perhaps because a ceratopsian like tail would certainly rule out the rhino while a rhino like tail would create more questions.

Could this be a yet undiscovered version of a ceratopsian dinosaur without the neck frill? I am put in mind of the Emela-ntouka.
(Although it could also be perspective. The outline of the frill along with the convincing detail of the ceratopsian ‘cheek” may be in evidence).

“The Emela-ntouka is an African legendary creature in the mythology of the Pygmy tribes, and a cryptid purported to live in Central Africa. Its name means “killer of the elephants” in the Lingala language.

In other languages it is known as the Aseka-moke, Njago-gunda, Ngamba-namae, Chipekwe or Irizima. The Emela-ntouka is claimed to be around the size of an African Bush Elephant, brownish to gray in color, with a heavy tail, and with a body of similar shape and appearance to a rhinoceros, including one long horn on its snout. Keeping its massive bulky body above ground level supposedly requires four short, stump-like legs.

It is described as having no frills or ridges along the neck. The animal is alleged to be semi-aquatic and feed on Malombo and other leafy plants. The Emela-ntouka is claimed to utter a vocalization, described as a snort, rumble or growl….Wikipedia

For more information on Emela-ntouka here is a story on Cryptomundo

Here is another aspect of this mystery; Chinese unicorns.

I was researching ancient Chinese rhinos and discovered that somehow there had come to be a conflagration of the rhino and the unicorn; the combo is known today as the “rhinoceros unicorn”. The ancient Chinese unicorn has a frame around its head that somewhat reminds one of the ceratopsian neck frill.

One Chinese site (Chinese-Unicorn.coms) sets out to prove in what would be our 4th cryptozoological mystery that the supposed 50,000 years extinct Elasmotherium is the actual creature being depicted as the ancient Chinese unicorn. Since monokeros is the Greek word meaning “one horn” from which the word unicorn comes to us, the elasmotherium is accurately described as a unicorn whether or not it was the “unicorn”.

Elasmotherium (“Thin Plate Beast”) is an extinct genus of giant rhinoceros endemic to Eurasia during the Late Pliocene through the Pleistocene, documented from 2.6 Ma to as late as 50,000 years ago, possibly later, in the Late Pleistocene, an approximate span of slightly less than 2.6 million years. Three species are recognised. The best known, E. sibiricum was the size of a mammoth and is thought to have borne a large, thick horn on its forehead which was used for defense, attracting mates, driving away competitors, sweeping snow from the grass in winter and digging for water and plant roots”….Wikipedia

Here we show an artists depiction of elasmotherium along with two ancient depictions of the unicorn. Left, Eastern Han Dynasty, 206 B.C. – 220 A.D. right, also Eastern Han Dynasty.

What is the being depicted in the object that sold at Christie’s auction in 2007 for $216K? A mythical creature? A ceratopsian? Emela-ntouka?

What it is is a genuine crptozoological mystery.

What it ain’t is a rhinoceros.

 

20th Century Pterosaur Displaying Previously Unknown Morphological Features That Might Have Been

Iola Register, September 25, 1896
CAUGHT IN FLORIDA. MARKET REPORTS.
Marine Monster Tbat Is Part Fish Part
Bird Part Animal
.

“Sea serpents are becoming too common, and when Florida people decided to produce a marine monster the serpent family was ignored and the Diabolus Maris was produced.

The picture which is presented was made from a drawing sent to the Kansas City Journal by Capt. George Bier, of the United States Navy.


The animal was caught off the coast of Florida, at Malanzas inlet, in 72 feet of water. It was caught on a hook and line, and when dragged aboard the boat was full of fight.
In order to preserve the strange monster it was found necessary to kill it, for it was so vicious that it could not be handled.

This remarkable relic of the antediluvian monster seemed to be part bird, part fish and part animal.

Capt. Bier described it as follows:

“It has no scales, although it can swim. A portion of its body is covered with hair and when it wants to fly it inflates two windbags behind its wings. This Inflation is through its gills, which are situated on its breast. It stands upright upon its feet, which are shaped like hoofs. Its face and body are more human like than anything else and its mouth is like that of a raccoon, garnished with two rows of teeth. It stood about 20 inches high and strutted like a rooster.”

Above and below the creature compared to a “modern” pteosaur depiction and below to an antique African pterosaur depiction.

>
After its capture the monster was christened DIABOLUS MARIS, and was transferred to Tampa. Fla. where it has since been on exhibition. Naturalists who have seen it can find no other name for it, and it’s like has never been seen before.

Some fish have fins that resemble wings, and can be used for flying, but fish do not wear hair.

The presence of legs prove that it is not a fish, and its ability to live under water and the gills
prove that it is not a bird.”…End of article

Question? If pterosaurs had an air bladder on their backs that could be filled with air to assist them in flight would we be able to determine this from fossils?

Would an air bladder help to explain how such large creatures could get off the ground? Paleontologists are so confused by the subject that they recently released to widely separated “studies” reported heavily in the media that reached two opposite conclusions; pterosaurs could not fly and alternatively they were the best flyers ever. (Couldn’t Fly-Mar 2009
Could Fly 10,000 Miles-Oct 2010)

Did we know that pterosaurs had “hair” or that they may have been able to breathe under water? That they had gills?

“The pterosaurs seem to have been able to fly soon after birth ( as possibly were some ancestral birds which means that during this prodigious growth their aerodynamics had to be functional at all times. In contrast, modern birds are born flightless and only begin to fly at nearly adult size.” .BBC Science

It makes more sense that God created pterosaurs with the ability to fly utilizing wings and air bladders than to believe that mutation and survival of the fittest created winged flightless creatures, eh Paleontologists?

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.

Survival of the Fittest? The Creation Museum A Natural Selection? Museum Thriving in its Environment

Church of Darwin, Dinosaurs in Literature, Religious, Science, The Flood of Noah, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Mar 17 2011


After Three Years Creation Museum Is Evolving (But Not In That Way)
By Dennis O’Connor

Religion News Service, November 2010
The Huffington Post

Ken Ham, the Australian-born creator of the Creation Museum looks around the throng of about a thousand guests on a hot, August morning and notes that “for a Tuesday, this is not a bad crowd.”

In fact, more than three years after it opened in this remote corner of Kentucky, the 70,000-square-foot “walk through the Bible,” consisting of animatronic displays, video features, theaters and restaurants has evolved into a thriving enterprise.

“We have consistently surpassed our own forecasts for attendance,” said Mark Looy, a co-founder of the museum and spokesman for the center. Last month (August), the Creation Museum counted more than 1.2 million guests since it opened in 2007, he added.

While Ham and Looy expected attendance to be high for the first year because of the curiosity factor — there were about 500,000 guests in the museum’s first year — no one predicted the continuing growth in attendance.

Ham, who was instrumental in the startup of the museum’s sponsoring organization, Answers in Genesis, said that despite the economic recession, families, individuals, church groups and even bus tours continue to pour into the Creation Museum, often spending a couple of days in the region to sample other attractions in the Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky market.

“The recession has not in any way affected us,” Ham said. “Many people who were going to come here were going to make this their destination anyway. Add to that people who decided instead of taking an expensive vacation in Florida, they wanted to either stay in this area or make the trip here. Either way, the museum has really helped the local economy more than people may realize.”

Tom Caradonio, president of the Northern Kentucky Convention and Visitors Bureau, said that one of the Creation Museum’s greatest strengths is the interest and support it has garnered from evangelicals, a large demographic group.

“When Answers in Genesis did their demographic studies for the museum, they obviously knew that they had a group of people who would be highly motivated to visit,” Caradonio said.

Pastor Brad Bigney of nearby Grace Fellowship Church in Florence, Ky., said another reason for the museum’s steady flow of guests is Ham’s frenetic schedule, which puts him on the road up to 250 times a year.

“He’s a great spokesman for the museum, and he plants the seed for individuals and groups to make the trip to Northern Kentucky,” Bigney said.

Four years ago, the museum was beset by feuds over zoning issues and opposition from many corners of the scientific community.

That sideshow has not gone away, Ham said. Anti-creationist bloggers continue to pan the facility, and some critics have taken shots at the museum’s concept and staff. The pinnacle of ridicule came in the form of cable television star Bill Maher, who snuck into Ham’s office one day to do a taping for his movie “Religulous.”

But the biggest doubt over Answers in Genesis’ project was questions about whether organizers could raise the $27 million it would need to launch the project, Caradonio said.

“If you go back to the issue of private funding — there was no government money involved in this project — you will see that about $5 million came from big donors, but by and large the other contributions came from individuals who were giving $25 or $50 from all over the country,” Caradonio said. “With that many people invested in the project, you have built a huge audience that says, `Hey, I’ve put some money into this, and now I want to see the place.’ That became a tremendous incentive for people to visit.”

Looy said that more than half of the museum’s visitors come from outside a 250-mile radius of the region, which has bolstered the bottom line for numerous hotels in and around the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, located just a few miles from the museum.

“That has been kind of a surprising development, with the hotel packages for museum visitors,” Caradonio said. “It goes back to this whole issue of the kind of people the Creation Museum attracts: wholesome family-oriented people who the hotel folks love to have. And their arrival has helped make up for the loss in business because of the cutbacks (at Delta Airlines hub operations at the airport).”

Ham estimated that the museum has generated $65 million in overall financial impact on the community, helping support more than 2,000 jobs,in the region.

Ham and co-founder Looy said that the museum’s success has allowed them to plan for expansion, including transforming warehouse space into additional room for a theater, and a new hall for visiting exhibits.

Ham noted that museum staffers already are planning for 20,000 guests to visit for the annual live Nativity exhibit, a substantial increase from last year’s attendance, which was about 15,000.

“We are growing,” Ham said. “And we don’t see that stopping any time soon.”

Creation Museum Website
Original Source:The Huffington Post

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

Christian Morality Scientific Support; Abortions Lead to Higher Depression Statistics and Waiting Until Marriage for Sexual Relations Creates Measureable Benefits

Church of Darwin, Religious, Science, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 26 2010

Clinical Depression After Unintended Pregnancy Linked To Abortion Springfield, IL (January 18, 2002)

– This week’s prestigious British Medical Journal reports that women who abort a first pregnancy are at greater risk of subsequent long term clinical depression compared to women who carry an unintended first pregnancy to term. Publication of the study coincides with anniversary events related to the Supreme Court’s January 22, 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion.

Data from a national study of American youths, begun in 1979, was used to conduct the research. In 1992, a subset of 4,463 women were surveyed about depression, intendedness of pregnancy, and pregnancy outcome. A total of 421 women had had their first abortion or first unintended delivery between 1980 and 1992.

An average of eight years after their abortions, married women were 138 percent more likely to be at high risk of clinical depression compared to similar women who carried their unintended first pregnancies to term.

Among women who were unmarried in 1992, rates of high risk depression were not significantly different. The authors suggest that the lack of significance in unmarried women may be explained by the higher rate of nonreporting of abortions among unmarried women. Compared with national averages, unmarried women in this study report only 30 percent of the expected abortions compared with married women, who report 74 percent of the expected abortions.

This may make the results for married women more reliable, say the authors. Another explanation is that unmarried women who are raising a child without the support of a husband experience significantly more depression than their married counterparts.

Study: Couples Who Delay Having Sex Get Benefits Later

December 22, 2010
While there are still couples who wait for a deep level of commitment before having sex, today it’s far more common for two people to explore their sexual compatibility before making long-term plans together.

So does either method lead to better marriages?

A new study in the American Psychological Association’s Journal of Family Psychology sides with a delayed approach.

The study involves 2,035 married individuals who participated in a popular online marital assessment called “RELATE.” From the assessment’s database, researchers selected a sample designed to match the demographics of the married American population. The extensive questionnaire includes the question “When did you become sexual in this relationship?”

A statistical analysis showed the following benefits enjoyed by couples who waited until marriage compared to those who started having sex in the early part of their relationship:

Relationship stability was rated 22 percent higher
Relationship satisfaction was rated 20 percent higher

Sexual quality of the relationship was rated 15 percent better

Communication was rated 12 percent better

For couples in between – those that became sexually involved later in the relationship but prior to marriage – the benefits were about half as strong.

“Most research on the topic is focused on individuals’ experiences and not the timing within a relationship,” said lead study author Dean Busby, a professor in Brigham Young University’s School of Family Life.

“There’s more to a relationship than sex, but we did find that those who waited longer were happier with the sexual aspect of their relationship,” Busby added. “I think it’s because they’ve learned to talk and have the skills to work with issues that come up.”

Sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin, who was not involved with this research, read the study and shared his take on the findings.

“Couples who hit the honeymoon too early – that is, prioritize sex promptly at the outset of a relationship – often find their relationships underdeveloped when it comes to the qualities that make relationships stable and spouses reliable and trustworthy,” said Regnerus, author of Premarital Sex in America, a book forthcoming from Oxford University Press.

Because religious belief often plays a role for couples who choose to wait, Busby and his co-authors controlled for the influence of religious involvement in their analysis.

“Regardless of religiosity, waiting helps the relationship form better communication processes, and these help improve long-term stability and relationship satisfaction,” Busby said.

Provided by Brigham Young University (news : web)
Source: Physorg.com

Since shame, secrecy, and thought suppression regarding an abortion are all associated with greater post-abortion depression, anxiety, and hostility, the authors conclude that the high rate of concealing past abortions in this population (60 percent overall) would tend to suppress the full effect of abortion on subsequent depression. Unreported abortions would result in women who experience depression following an abortion being misclassified as delivering women.

“Given the very high rate of concealment of past abortions “the fact that significant differences still emerged suggests that we are just catching the tip of the iceberg,” said David C. Reardon, Ph.D., the study’s lead author.

Reardon, the director of the Elliot Institute in Springfield, Illinois, says the study’s findings are consistent with other recent research that has shown a four to six fold increased risk of suicide and substance abuse associated with prior abortion. He says the findings are also important because this is the first national representative study to examine rates of rates of depression many years after an abortion, on average approximately eight years later in this sample.

The data set used was the same as that used by feminist psychologist Nancy Russo of Arizona State University, whose examination of a self-esteem scale revealed no significant difference between aborting women and women who carried to term. Russo concluded that the absence of difference in self-esteem scores in this large national data set proved that abortion has no “substantial and important impact on women’s well-being.” (see critique of Russo study here.)

According to Reardon, Russo’s much publicized study has frequently been used to support the claim that, on average, abortion has no significant effect on women’s mental health. The Elliot Institute’s new analysis of the same data set reveals that significant differences do exist.

“The most serious flaw of the Russo study is that the authors did not even comment on the extraordinarily high rate of concealment of past abortions in the sample,” Reardon said. “Women who do not want to mention a past abortion are most likely the ones who will have unresolved feelings of shame, guilt, or grief.”

Reardon says that another problem with the prior analysis was that Russo’s team relied solely on a measure of self-esteem that is not sensitive to post-abortion stress. He says the examination of depression scores is more relevant to the known negative reactions to abortion.

“Russo’s previous analysis of this data set was methodologically weak and was frankly a poor basis on which to build the claim that abortion has no measurable effect on women’s well- being,” he said. “The results of our reexamination of this data set—especially in combination with other studies showing higher rates of suicide, substance abuse, and other mental health disorders associated with prior abortion—shows that the ‘no effect’ hypothesis should be rejected. Something is going on here. Where there is this much smoke, despite the problem of high concealment rates, there is likely to be a fire beneath the haze.”

Another important aspect of this study, says Reardon, is that is one of only a few studies to use any pre-pregnancy psychological score as a control variable. The most commonly used control variable used in regarding emotional reactions is “pre-abortion” evaluation on the day of the abortion when the woman is in the crux of emotional distress. This is why a pre-pregnancy score is much more useful than a pre-abortion score for evaluating the independent effect of abortion on long term emotional reactions.

Asked what the practical implications of this study are for physicians, Reardon said: “We recommend that physicians should routinely inquire about the outcome of all the patient’s pregnancies. The simple question, ‘Have you experienced any pregnancy losses such as miscarriage, abortion, adoption, or stillbirth?’ may be sufficient to give women permission to discuss unresolved issues related to prior pregnancy losses. Physician’s should remember that there are few social contexts in which women feel it is appropriate to discuss unresolved feelings about prior pregnancy loss. Many patients will appreciate the opportunity to discuss their pregnancy losses with an empathetic person and may welcome referrals for additional counseling.”

The new study was funded by the Elliot Institute, a non-profit organization that is involved in research and education regarding post-abortion complications and also promotes outreach and counseling programs for women. Reardon is the author of numerous books on post-abortion issues, including The Jericho Plan: Breaking Down the Walls Which Prevent Post-Abortion Healing and Making Abortion Rare: A Healing Strategy for a Divided Nation. His newest book, Forbidden Grief: The Unspoken Pain of Abortion, co-authored with Theresa Burke, will be published in March of 2002. Information on these titles and other research conducted by Dr. Reardon and the Elliot Institute can be found at www.afterabortion.org.

KEY POINTS:
* The association between abortion and subsequent depression persists over at least eight years.

* Screening patients for a history of abortion may help physicians to identify women who would benefit by a referral to counseling.

* The null hypothesis (the conjecture that there are no differences on average between having an abortion and carrying an unintended pregnancy to term) is rejected.

Source: AfterAbortion.org