Where did all the Dinosaurs Go? Ken Ham’s Climate and Human-Induced Dinosaur Extinction Hypothesis

If dinosaurs lived with people not long ago then what happened to them?  Any Literal Solar-Day Young Earth Creationist is going to have to contend with this question.  At the Answers in Genesis conference that I attended recently the speaker, Bryan Osborne posed this very question to the kids in his audience knowing they would want to know.   After spending a few minutes making light of current theories about dinosaur extinction (comet impact, volcanism, and they evolved into birds – I’m not sure how the latter is a theory about their extinction) he proceeded to claim that dinosaurs simply “faded” from this world not long after departing Noah’s ark.

A slide from Bryan Osborne's dinosaur presentation at a AiG conference in Northeast Ohio recently. Her we see that after the flood dinosaurs "faded" leaving only warped stories of the prior existence. Image: Joel Duff

A slide from Bryan Osborne’s dinosaur presentation at a AiG conference in Northeast Ohio recently. Her we see that after the flood dinosaurs “faded” leaving only warped stories of the prior existence. Image: Joel Duff

What caused this gradual fading into extinction?  He provided several answers filled with contradictory evidence and logic when compared to material he presented in a talk the night before and other LSDYEC writings.  However, I should point out that the speaker, Bryan Osborne, doesn’t appear to be responsible for the content of his talk and lacks expertise on almost every topic that I heard him speak about. He is a bible teacher by training with no science background.  The structure of his talk and much of his what he said was taken nearly verbatim from Chapter 12 entitled “What really happened to the dinosaurs” from The New Answers Book by Ken Ham.  So his talk represents Ken Ham’s understanding of what happened to dinosaurs and like most speakers from Answers in Genesis he is simply delivering that message rather than acting as an expert who has studied the material himself.  It is not surprising then that there are rarely ever opportunities for questions from the audience and the talks I attended were no exception.

AiG speaker Bryan Osborne also showed this picture from Ken Ham's chapter on the disappearance of the dinosaurs. He said that some believe that dinosaurs turned into birds. I think the audience took that to means, especially since the picture suggests this too, that the dinosaur literally turned into birds instead of going extinct.

AiG speaker Bryan Osborne also showed this picture from Ken Ham’s chapter on the disappearance of the dinosaurs. He said that some believe that dinosaurs turned into birds. I think the audience took that to mean, especially since the picture suggests this too, that the dinosaurs literally turned into birds instead of going extinct.

What is Ken Ham’s view of dinosaur extinction: Ken Ham puts it this way: “Post-Flood climatic change, lack of food, disease, and man’s activities caused many types of animals to become extinct.” Osborne reiterated the same points to his young audience.  Sounds simple enough but is there any evidence that dinosaurs recently roamed the earth and that they suffered from climate change, lack of food, had diseases and man hunted them to extinction?

I don’t think so.  None of these claims holds up when scrutinized.  As an aside, I also find the appeal to climate induced or human induced extinction a little ironic given Ham’s stance on modern climate change.

Before we address the question of evidence for and against dinosaurs walking the Earth in recent history we first need to understand a bit more about just what the LSDYEC hypothesis is claiming about dinosaurs.  From earlier in Osborne’s talk we know that he believes that God preserved at least 50 different kinds of dinosaurs on the ark and thus they survived the flood and must have lived for some time after they departed the ark.  But how long?  As we saw in my previous post (Dinosaurs and Humans Living Together?), LSDYECs believe that many cultures had contact with dinosaurs resulting in the legends and drawing of dragons.  Thus dinosaurs must have dispersed far and wide from the Ark prior to their extinction.  In other words, they didn’t simply walk off the ramp and all fall victim to the weather that day or become Noah’s first meaty meal.

We can further surmise that dinosaurs were still alive well after the Tower of Babel incident which itself didn’t occur until several hundred years after Noah’s flood.  Why? Because Ken Ham says that people did not disperse across the globe and diversify culturally until after this event.  But, the LSDYEC literature tells us that the great Ice Age occurred around the same time which allowed land bridges to form between North America and Asia and bridged islands with continents.  So, if dinosaurs reached North and South America after the Flood they also must have waited until after these bridges formed to cross over and thus lived well into the Ice Age if not beyond.

We are left with one big question:  If they survived for that long and under so many different conditions on Earth why then did they all die?  This is getting all quite confusing but such is the logic of the LSDYEC hypothesis once you start trying to piece together explanations for many separate problems. They quickly begin to contradict each other.

Not enough food? We have records of billions of Ice Age mammals they could have eaten.  Also, tropical forests and their bounty may have been reduced in size but they still existed throughout the entire Ice Age. How is it that billions of Ice Age mammals and many other mammals managed to do just fine?   Some LSDYECs suggest that it would not have been “good” for dinosaurs to live today with humans because of the dangers they pose to our well-being.  Thus God made sure they wouldn’t have the skills to survive in the new world after the flood.  But, then why preserve them at all?   In addition, Osborne and others emphasize, because they want to get them all squeezed into the ark, in their talks that the average size of a dinosaur was that of a sheep or small cow and the large ones were therefore unusual. So how could the survival of small dinosaurs be so bad and why couldn’t a few small dinosaurs have survived especially in the many environments that were not affected by the Ice Age.  How could food limit the small dinosaurs when thousands of species of other animals have done just fine?

Disease? That is easy to blame but where is the evidence? Since we have no evidence of dinosaurs existing after a global flood it is hard to find evidence they were more susceptible to disease than any other animal but it also means that this is nothing more than a guess.  Dinosaurs are said to have not be fit for the environments and were out-competed. But this is contrary to the usual LSDYECs belief that God provided amazing diversity of genes to the animals on the Ark such that they were able to come off the ark and adapt and change into thousands of different species (Invoking Super-Speed Evolution: How to squeeze 10,000 bird species onto the ark). It seems odd that God would have left the dinosaurs so deprived of genetic diversity that they would all be killed by disease.  And what disease attacks completely different kinds of animals so well?

Nonetheless, the LSDYEC proposal is that despite being able to migrate across the face of the Earth they grew fewer in numbers and as they did so the memory of them faded in the minds of people eventually becoming just part of distorted myths about dragons in many cultures (see the “faded” figure above).

Which of Ham’s possible causes are we left with?  We are left with Human-Induced Dinosaur Extinction (HIDE).  At the talk I attended, Osborne also finished with this last possible cause for their extinction suggesting that many dinosaurs became extinct due to human trophy hunters. We will see some problems with this a bit later.

Are an Ice Age, lack of food, disease, and human trophy hunting reasonable hypotheses for the extinction of the dinosaurs?   To kids and adults who know nothing about the fossil record, geology or a number of fields of biology this might sound plausible.  To anyone else this hypothesis is nothing more than wishful thinking backed by no observational data.

Let’s explore just one huge problem that illustrates why the recent extinction of dinosaurs  is nothing more than grasping at anything to support their conviction that this must be true because their interpretation of Scripture requires it to be so.

If there were so many dinosaurs around just over 4000 years ago where then is the physical evidence?

This is similar to the question; where are all the human fossils in the flood deposits? But I think this lack of physical evidence of dinosaurs living 4000 years ago is a far more difficult problem for Ken Ham.

Remember, dinosaurs must have existed in some significant numbers across diverse parts of the Earth to account for what LSDYECs say is evidence of co-existence – the presence of stories and presumed drawings of dinosaurs in multiple cultures.

So where are the dinosaur bones? If the Egyptians tamed dinosaurs where are their bones?  Surely, the massive femurs of a dinosaur would have made for incredible trophies.  If people killed dinosaurs surely they would have kept a triceratops horn.   The razor-blade like teeth of all those therapods would have made incredible handy cutting tools that would have had tremendous value and thus passed down from generation to generation.  Why did so many ancient people use crude rock tools when they could have been using dinosaur teeth and claws scavenged from dead dinosaurs to process meat?  When ancient people were buried with their treasures of rhino horn, carved tusks, and eagles’ talons why were none buried with the claws, teeth, or carved bones of a dinosaur?  If humans were dinosaur trophy hunters as Osborne suggested they could be where are their trophies?  Surely they would have brought back dinosaur horns and claws as proof of their kills.

Placer miner Guy Favron holds a woolly mammoth femur found along Last Chance Creek. Photo courtesy of Government of Yukon Link to story: http://uphere.ca/articles/fossil-gold-mines

Mammoth bones are everywhere in the northern hemisphere and yet they have been extinct for more than 4000 years.  Here, Placer miner Guy Favron holds a woolly mammoth femur found along Last Chance Creek. Photo courtesy of Government of Yukon Link to story: http://uphere.ca/articles/fossil-gold-mines

Several species of elephants once lived in the Middle East.  We have evidence of that in the form of their bones and tusks and even fossil footprints (see: Preservation of Behavior: Fossilized elephant tracks from the Arabian peninsula).  The skulls of mastodons were collected in ancient roman times and preserved by communities as revered as the remains of ancient “giants” (see: Dinosaurs, Dragons and Ken Ham: The Literal Reality of Mythological Creatures).  The tusks were displayed and used to carve implements and artwork.

LSDYECs would have us believe that dinosaurs lived 4000 years ago and died and didn’t leave a single bone behind but woolly mammoths and mastodons lived at least that long ago and they have left millions of tusks and as many bones behind for us to see, touch and feel.  The observational evidence is utterly lacking for dinosaurs.  If dinosaurs couldn’t hack the deserts of Egypt and died there, their massive bones would still be laying on the surface or just beneath the sands.  Bones of camels, cows, canines, felines and even humans have been found in the deserts of Egypt that are thousands of years old.   Instead of building an Ark, Ken Ham could be spending far less money to send out expeditions to find the remains of these recently deceased animals that he is sure must exist.

An scan of a page from Ken Ham's "Dinosaurs in Eden" book. Here we can see Tyranosaurus-like dinosaurs with small arms enjoying a diet of flower plants.

A scan of a page from Ken Ham’s “Dinosaurs in Eden” book. Here we can see Tyranosaurus-like dinosaurs with small arms enjoying a diet of flower plants.

Comments

  1. “We are left with one big question: If they survived for that long and under so many different conditions on Earth why then did they all die?”

    Do we know they did?

    “So where are the dinosaur bones? If the Egyptians tamed dinosaurs where are their bones? Surely, the massive femurs of a dinosaur would have made for incredible trophies. If people killed dinosaurs surely they would have kept a triceratops horn. The razor-blade like teeth of all those therapods would have made incredible handy cutting tools that would have had tremendous value and thus passed down from generation to generation.”

    How many items may have been classified as ivory by archaeologists when really dragon teeth?

    How many unicorn remains (Triceratops!) have been classified as elaborate forgeries?

    And how much dino material has vanished because “dragon n” (bones, blood, whatever) has been used in medicine?

    Also, how many of the dinos we find are not from flood but from post flood times?

    If Tuaregs believed in a “mythical creature” called Jobar, where palaeontologists have found a sauropod dubbed Jobaria, are we sure Jobaria is from Flood or could it be from later times?

    As for Egyptians, take a look at the Narmer Palette and the pictorial depiction of “serpopards” – also probably sauropods.

    Like

    • Thanks for comments. Ivory is not bone and dinosaur “horns” are not ivory either. None of what you suggest can be documented. Just look at your last suggestion. I just wrote about it yesterday and a few months ago: https://thenaturalhistorian.com/2015/06/13/nh-notes-can-you-find-the-dinosaur-in-this-image/ If you think those are sauropods I’m afraid you may be inclined to believe just about anything which makes your other points rather difficult to take seriously. How are those “probably sauropods. Can you give one any character aside from a long neck that you could use as evidence?

      Like

      • I think the long neck, and the fact that Behemoth has been linked to elephants, while the “war elephants'” job seems to have been had by sauropods then are suggestive.

        Egyptian draughtsmanship is not totally naturalistic, and also some similarities with what living sauropods could have might be higher than with what sauropods reconstructed by modern artists from just bones have.

        Ivory is not bone, but I was speaking about items misclassified as ivory.

        You conveniently skirted the point about Jobaria by appealing to my supposed gullibility …

        Like

      • Christine Janis says:

        “Egyptian draughtsmanship is not totally naturalistic, and also some similarities with what living sauropods could have might be higher than with what sauropods reconstructed by modern artists from just bones have.?”

        You mean that they really had faces like cats?

        Like

  2. Is Lundahl Poe? Or does he really not know the difference between a dino foot and a cat’s paw?

    But I’m amazed you don’t mention the real reason for the dinos’ disappearance: Nimrod the Mighty Hunter. It’s all explained in “Truth be Told; Exposing the Lie of Evolution”, which I reviewed when it was given out to non-denom public primary schoolkids near Glasgow: https://paulbraterman.wordpress.com/2013/09/16/reviewed-young-earth-creationist-books-handed-out-in-scottish-primary-school/

    Like

    • “Or does he really not know the difference between a dino foot and a cat’s paw?”

      I have seen cat’s paws live, I have not seen sauropod feet live. You may have missed this:

      “Egyptian draughtsmanship is not totally naturalistic” [quoting self]

      Like

      • yes, the egyptian draughtsmanship is not totally naturalistic. But what is the point then in using that image as evidence that dinosaurs lived with humans. You also use Ken Ham’s “where you there?” argument which is just s rhetorical device. To suggest that just because no one has seen a sauropod foot live means that we cant’ have any clue what it looked like is ridiculous. You are working very hard to preserve something for which the preponderance of data doesn’t support.
        You also don’t seem to understand Dr. Janis’ point the Cenozoic. She didn’t say that there were not mammals there just that they are not thes same as mammals found after the disappearance of the dinosaurs. You may accept most rock as being flood-caused but the majority of YECs do not but either way dinosaurs aren’t the only animals for which there is no evidence that they lived in the post-flood world.

        Like

      • I just want to make sure that I understand you correctly; if I do, I will not trouble you further.

        Are you really saying that we don’t know what dino feet looked like, despite having numerous skeletons and footprints? And if that is not evidence, how do we know what anything looked like?

        Like

      • Actually, Egyptian draughtsmanship is quite naturalistic: fish species, bird species, different antilopes (including species that no longer occur in Egypt) can be recognized. Dogs and jackals differ in representation, The only problem I’ve heard of is whether the ritual skin worn by priests is cheetah or leopard (or both). Black leopard is present in the Tutankhamon inventory, but a leopard mask jewel looks cheetah.

        Like

  3. The weight a sauropod has prevents the Narmer tablet animals from being sauropods. Sauropods have their legs as columns beneath their bodies. The leg stance, especially he hind leg stance, of the Narmet tablet animals is impossible with a sauropod’s weight: the animal’s knees would not be able to carry its weight at this stance.
    Unicorn remains are narwhal, not Triceratops

    Like

  4. “If Tuaregs believed in a “mythical creature” called Jobar, where palaeontologists have found a sauropod dubbed Jobaria”
    Tuaregs have never found fossil bones in the desert, I suppose? Fossils are a great source of dragon stories, as is well known.

    Like

  5. Christine Janis says:

    “How many items may have been classified as ivory by archaeologists when really dragon teeth?”

    Probably none. Ivory (elephant tusk) is dentine. The main element in dinosaur teeth was enamel. These can be told apart histologically.

    “How many unicorn remains (Triceratops!) have been classified as elaborate forgeries?”

    None. Unicorn horns are spiralled, Triceratops horns are not. What the preserved “unicorn horns” are is narwhal incisor teeth.

    “And how much dino material has vanished because “dragon n” (bones, blood, whatever) has been used in medicine?”

    Despite this, still masses of fossil mammals known from China, but no dinosaurs from those late Cenozoic beds. (Check out Harun Yayha’s site, where he does strange things like identify percrocutid skulls as belonging to thylacines, and horse skulls as belonging to camels.)

    “Also, how many of the dinos we find are not from flood but from post flood times?”

    Creationists like to pretend that the Cenozoic is “post flood” strata. No dinosaurs known in Cenozoic strata, or in association with Cenozoic mammals.

    Like

    • “Creationists like to pretend that the Cenozoic is “post flood” strata. No dinosaurs known in Cenozoic strata, or in association with Cenozoic mammals.”

      I would say that most Palaeo- Meso- AND Cenozoic remains are from Flood.

      Non-Association with Cenozoic animals is not total, ducks and small mammals have been found in Cretaceous biotopes.

      Like

      • Since when are Cretaceous and Cenozoic identical?
        Vegavis is not a duck, but has been classified as an early Anseriform, from the Cretacous. It is different from Cenozoic Anseriforms. Mesozoic mammals are not identical to Cenozoic mammals.
        Anyway, no Cenozoic dinosaurs have ever been found. Non-association of dinosaurs with Cenozoic animals (of all types) and plants is total.

        Like

  6. There’s a dino eating fruit from a tree. That’s not Biblical! ;)

    Like

  7. Ham and co CANNOT explain ie they don’t even TRY to explain why every single one of HUNDREDS of different species of dinosaur allegedly went extinct very ‘recently’ ie less than around 4,000 years ago (rather than more slowly millions of years ago). Surely some would have hung on? Especially given Bible verses like Genesis 8:17.
    More here which some may already have seen (of course it is NOT a ‘conversation’ with AiG because they are apparently BLOCKING all communications I send to them):
    http://forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=2967&p=49942&hilit=extinct#p49942
    It is no mystery why AiG target young kids.

    Like

    • Anthony Whitney says:

      Some have hung on – modern Crocs are basically downsized versions of fossilised ancestors.

      Like

      • Crocodiles – yes they are an ancient kind of animal – are not, and have never been, ‘dinosaurs’ if that is what you are implying. Nobody has ever to my knowledge suggested that crocodiles are now extinct – only to be proven wrong because some have hung on. But no scientist seriously doubts that dinosaurs (which unlike say mammoths lived millions of years ago) are extinct today – and did not finally disappear totally very ‘recently’.

        Like

      • Anthony Whitney says:

        No, but your point was that ‘surely some must have hung on’. And “Today’s crocodiles and alligators are little changed from their prehistoric ancestors” according to a Dinosaur education website. So apart from the smaller specimens being selected for, at least one ‘dinosaur’ has hung on.

        Like

      • Christine Janis says:

        I’ll also note that modern crocodiles are in fact not like their Triassic ancestors. Modern types of crocodiles appeared in the Late Cretaceous, near the end of the “age of dinosaurs”. The sluggish, semi-aquatic types of crocodiles today are very unlike the Mesozoic and early Cenozoic diversity of crocodiles, which included many more terrestrial forms (including small bipeds, and large predators with hoof-like feet), herbivorous forms, and several different types of fully marine forms.

        Like

      • Anthony Whitney says:

        Paul, what you’ve said there speaks volumes about the evolutionary paradigm. I’m not having a go at you, I know you’re just repeating the conventional evolutionary wisdom that birds are, more or less, dinos. But if we take a step back for a moment and consider, modern crocodiles, reptiles, are almost exactly the same as some of the fossilised specimens from the ‘dinosaur age’. Yet they’re not dinosaurs. However then we consider birds, with all their highly specialised design features – for example feathers, hollow bones, avian lung. These amazingly specialised animals are nothing like reptiles, yet we say they’re dinosaurs and crocs aren’t!

        Like

        • Hi Anthony, you are asking a question that I spend several weeks discussing in my biological systematics class (upperclass undergrads). It is partly a question of school of taxonomy (evolutionary vs cladistic). Cladist recognize birds as dinosaurs in terms of classification while evolutionary taxonomists wish to acknowledge the uniqueness of birds, despite their heritage, and give them a higher order position equivalent to dinosaurs. Regarding crocs yes species alive today are similar to those in the past though not as similar as you might first think. But there are a couple of things to consider. One, evolutionary theory does not say that all organism must evolve into new and distinct morphological. Some are well adapted for their environment and have been able to find that same environment through time. In this case they undergo stabilizing selection. But other populations or sister species may be in new environments and thus undergo directional selection. That selection can be quite strong and can therefore cause rapid diversification. So one group will undergo rapid morphological change while another group may not. I suppose even YECs accept this in some compressed way. They have a finch kind flying off the Ark and becoming 1500 species of finches with very wide morphological and behavioral difference in just a 1000 years but other “kinds” have left the ark and barely changed at all and hardly become any new species.
          Here is another more dramatic way to think about it. Imagine your crocs are bacteria. Would you make the same argument. Bacteria have existed for possibly billions of years and yet a bacteria from 1 billion years ago would look to our eyes nearly the same as those we have today. Does this mean that they have not evolved? Certainly not, their genetic code would probably be quite different today but stabilizing selection means that that genome has will retains the ability to produce the body and basic abilities that it has always had even if it might use very different codes to do so. The same thing is true of crocs. If I read their leptin gene today and had access to their leptin gene from 100 million years ago I wouldn’t be surprised if it were 10 to 20% different. Overall their genomes might only have 25% sequence similarity. On the other hand an ostrich and trex genome may well be more similar to each other despite their many morphological differences. In fact we have collagen protein sequence from T-rex and it is more similar to birds than it is to crocs which is exactly what was predicted by phylogenetic studies prior to obtaining that sequence. I hope that is helpful.

          Like

      • Christine Janis says:

        “But if we take a step back for a moment and consider, modern crocodiles, reptiles, are almost exactly the same as some of the fossilised specimens from the ‘dinosaur age’.”

        No, they really are not. Crocodiles share nothing unique with dinosaurs that is not also seen in other archosaurian reptiles (e.g., “thecodonts”, pterosaurs, etc.). You might like to note, for a start, that quadrupedal dinosaurs do not have the sprawling posture of modern crocodiles.

        “Yet they’re not dinosaurs. However then we consider birds, with all their highly specialised design features – for example feathers, hollow bones, avian lung. ”

        Many theropod dinosaurs have feathers —- and indeed the evidence now seems to be that some sort of feather is basal for dinosaurs as a whole. Dinosaurs, theropods in particular, also share many features of the bony anatomy with birds not seen in dinosaurs — for example in the structure of the hind limb, and the ankle joint in particular. The skeleton of Archaeopteryx is almost exactly like that of a small theropod dinosaur.

        The avian lung does not fossilize, so we cannot compare birds and dinosaurs in this fashion. Although it does seem to be true that many of the avian lung features (e.g., unidirectional airflow) are held in common with crocodiles, and also other reptiles such as lizards.(see the work of Colleen Farmer). So probably a basal trait for most reptiles, dinosaurs included.

        Like

      • Anthony Whitney says:

        Ah, here is where terminology can get us tied into knots! Just what is evolution? To me, and many others, it’s the process of simple organisms (bacteria) evolving into complex organisms (people). Joel as you’d be aware YEC’s accept that natural selection acts on the normal variability within a species – you mentioned finches. But I don’t regard that as evolution, because it is almost always a ‘de-volving’ process ie animals getting more specialised but losing genetic info in the process. YEC’s also accept that mutations and copying mistakes happen at a genetic level, but likewise we don’t see that as evolution because it’s also a degredation of the genome. So your example of bacteria, to me, is not evolution. The bacteria always has been and always will be bacteria.

        Like

  8. Anthony Whitney says:

    Joel, you ask why a single bone hasn’t been left behind by recently deceased dinos. I am surprised you ask this question, being generally well informed as you are. What about the famous T-Rex find by Mary Schweitzer? Unfossilized, blood cells present etc etc. To say this beast expired 65 million years ago, yet it’s remains contain detectable DNA is far fetched indeed. Joel, you’re a biologist so you’d know how reactive DNA actually is. What’s the upper limit of surviving, in best possible circumstances? I read somewhere that maybe, at a constant -5c, it could last a maximum of 6.8mya? And that’s a stretch. Still far short of 65 mya.

    Like

    • My post was about dinosaurs alive after the Flood not those that were killed during it. The T-rex bones examined by Dr. Schweitzer were not found on the surface but were from rocks that all YEC agree was deposited in the Flood. That find would not be evidence that dinos lived with people hundreds of years after a global flood. And I do know the literature and the DNA claims are controversial and have not be replicated and nothing has been reported in almost 10 years about DNA after that one note in one paper. However, I think you may be thinking of proteins not DNA but those are much more stable. Lots written on the topic but I would suggest this for a quick summary: http://biologos.org/blogs/jim-stump-faith-and-science-seeking-understanding/soft-tissue-in-dinosaur-bones-what-does-the-evidence-really-say

      Like

      • Anthony Whitney says:

        Apparently she isolated some DNA in 2013. I’m trying to find a reference.

        Like

        • She didn’t isolate DNA exactly, what she did is use a stain for DNA to detect its possible presence. That stains gave a small positive response but there are other reasons why she may have seen a response and no DNA was extracted or sequenced. She was able to extract remnants of the collagen protein and from that compare its sequence to that of other animals.

          Like

      • Anthony Whitney says:

        Joel, I read the BioLogos article. To be frank I’ll state that I don’t think much generally of the articles they publish. I have been reading over the years different pieces in regards to Schweitzers work, so am reasonably aware. I think the Biologos article was extremely casual in its dismissal of the youthful appearance of the bones. As to be expected it promoted the iron preserving possibility, which has been refuted elsewhere. And at the end he basically said we ‘know’ radio metric dating is accurate, so these soft tissues must have been preserved somehow. The whole article smacked of the authors bias that these bones must be millions of years old, even despite appearances. You’re a fan of ‘Ockham’s razor’, the Biologos article seemed to avoid it.

        Like

  9. Anthony Whitney says:

    She published here, you need to subscribe to read the full article.

    http://www.thebonejournal.com/#/article/S8756-3282(12)01318-X/fulltext

    Like

    • Yes, that is the paper I am referring to. I have read it and that is where she reports the staining for possible DNA. That is a far cry from proof of Dino DNA yet, I hear this claim that DNA has been extracted from dinosaurs all the time. Maybe it will be someday but at present there is little support for the presence of Dino DNA. Here is the deal though,if Ken Ham really believes there was 50 some kinds of dinosaurs roaming the earth after the Flood less than 4300 years ago then we should find bones and those bones YECs should predict will have DNA and so we absolutely should be able to get an entire dinosaur genome sequenced someday. That would be huge for YECs and I really think they should spending real money looking for these bones.

      Like

      • Anthony Whitney says:

        Joel, ok so DNA hasn’t been extracted, however Schweitzer seems quite positive that it has been positively detected. Here is a quote from her paper:
        “While ultimately, sequence data is required to verify the endogeneity of this material, it is unlikely that four independent assays, each capitalizing on different aspects of the chemistry of DNA, would show identical patterns of localization interior to these cellular structures, and different from antibodies to various proteins.”
        Apparently, the DAPI test is especially strong evidence of quite intact DNA, since it requires a double helix to work.

        Like

        • I am hoping the DNA tests are right and there is some intact DNA. Just today in my DNA Techniques class today we talked about ancient DNA and the possibilities of getting DNA from samples older than 5 million years years. I have spoken with Schweitzer about the DNA results. I’m not sure i’m convinced that those assays can only be interpreted as DNA but they could be. It is important to note that DNA present doesn’t mean that long strands of intact DNA are present. DNA degrades but when you get down to DNA fragments that are only 5bp on average no one knows how long such short fragments can last. I think it is quite possible that if you start with trillions of strands of DNA that by chance there is going to be enough short strands that survive and with our new abilities to directly sequence DNA that we might be able to get millions of 4 to 10 bp pieces of degraded DNA and from that concatenate some genes back together. I am cautiously optimistic that we will get DNA sequences even from dinosaurs. I will point out what I’ve said many times before, if dino bones are only 4000 years old then I would fully expect that we should be able to completely sequence the dinosaur genome with relative ease.

          Like

    • @Anthony Witney, she regularly compalins about this kind of misrepresentation

      Like

  10. I think the discussion of crocodiles is somewhat of a red herring. Probably the only thing they have in common with (hundreds of extinct species of) dinosaurs is that they are classed as reptiles.

    Personally if I was a YEC I think I would have suggested instead that Komodo dragons might be ‘dinosaurs’. Though I gather – from Wikipedia – that from the existing fossil record their genus appears to have evolved around 15 million years or so after the dinosaurs were wiped out.

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. […] zien, om te zien hoe historische gebeurtenissen daarbinnen passen. Het probleem dat ik voorzie is onlangs beschreven door Joel Duff op zijn site Natural […]

    Like

Comments or Questions?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: