RSR's Annual Soft Tissue Show: The Deniers

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
RSR's Annual Soft Tissue Show: The Deniers

This is the show from Friday May 23rd, 2014 [updates at bflist.rsr.org]

Summary:



* Soft Tissue Deniers / Science Deniers: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams list the soft tissue deniers, aka the science deniers, among leading evolutionists, media outlets, and anti-creation websites.

* RSR's List of Soft Tissue Deniers (and Doubters): This brief representative list documents the evolutionist science deniers and doubters for this specific topic. We'll occasionally update it and if any of these popular evolutionists sends a retraction or clarification to RSR, we'll note it here.

After two decades of extensive research and publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals, soft tissue deniers seem to be the rule rather than the exception among atheists and evolutionists. (Further, as of April 2014, the existence of dinosaur soft tissue, likely the greatest paleobiology discovery ever, remains virtually unknown to the general public as anyone can extrapolate by asking a few dozen people. RSR is working toward educating the public through radio shows, websites, and by presenting the information in easy-to-use formats.)

Soft tissue deniers (and such science doubters) include:

- Smithsonian Dinosaur Expert Brian Switek: This evolutionist, as late at Sept. 27, 2012, wrote, "The supposed dinosaur leftovers may be microfossils created by bacterial biofilms..."

- Oxford-educated widely-published anti-creation activist Paul Braterman: On March 8, 2014, wrote, "despite much hype the only surviving material is in the form of a collagen-bone composite.” (Prof. Braterman is a British Eugenie Scott and made his claim even after browsing our rsr.org/dinosaur-soft-tissue, which is the world's most complete catalog of such findings.)

- Anti-creationist YouTube star AronRa: Just click the link and then just search for: No. :)



- RationalWiki: The science deniers over at the atheist, anti-creation RationalWiki.org, as late as May 14, 2014, are still denying the overwhelming hard science that has documented the existence of endogenous, extant dinosaur soft tissue. :)

- Talk Origins quote from their Age of the Earth article as accessed on March 2, 2012 though May 23, 2014:

"Answers in Genesis claims that paleontologist Mary Schweitzer found 'obvious, fresh-looking blood cells' and traces of blood protein hemoglobin in a Tyrannosaurus rex bone… all these claims are absolutely false." -Talk Origins :)

- League of Reason moderators and members (click and search for: soft).

- Sherry Konkus at stupiddinosaurlies.org copyrighted 2010 - 2013 (as retrieved Dec. 3, 2012 and still on June 17, 2013), mocks creationists for claiming "that Paleontologist Mary Schweitzer have [sic] found inside the fossil bone blood cells and hemoglobin... while ignoring the fact that Mary actually found none of it... But that's not all. In 2005... she thought she found soft tissue in the bone [but] Mary, in reality, actually found slime [a claim now falsified] — biofilm created by bacteria... Still, this doesn't stop the creationists from making slanderous, derogatory remarks..."

- Gary, S. Hurd, Ph.D. at noanswersingenesis.org.au, even as of June 2013, has not corrected or even put a disclaimer on his Dino-blood and the Young Earth article which harshly criticized creationists for their optimistic presentation of the early reports of dinosaur blood vessels and cells. Ultimately, the creationist expectations on the existence of dinosaur soft tissue were vindicated, and the countless evolutionists who mocked both Schweitzer and the creationists (for their presumption that soft tissues would be confirmed) have yet to humbly congratulate the creationists for an expectation come true.

- Nigel Deplege, commented at Discover Magazine's site against a challenge by Bob Enyart, posted Sept. 1, 2011. Published evolutionist Deplege wrote, "...soft dinosaur tissue has never been discovered or reported. What you perhaps refer to is the discovery of fossilised impression of soft tissue structures." If Nigel (or any of these evolutionists listed) contacts Real Science Radio admitting error, we will post his admission here.

- Random Collection of Anti-Creationists: At Yahoo Answers in April 2014, a crowd of passionate evolutionists mock us creationists for lying about the existence of dinosaur soft tissue. Etc., etc., etc. :)
- Raatz: "I've corrected the creationist 'misinterpretations' ...dozens of times. They continue to repeat them because they don't care. They know they're lying." :)
- Don: "The entire episode is an opportunity to watch creationist lies in the making - not one of them actually knows what they're talking about..."
- Jethom33545: "...creationists are ALL liars or grossly misinformed. I'm going with liars."
- Space Wasp: "The quote you give is a false claim... they are not found as 'soft tissue' as creationist claims tend to imply."
- Andymanec: "Nope. This is one of those creationist misinterpretations that never seems to die, no matter how many times it's corrected. Soft tissue wasn't found in a dinosaur bone... Schweitzer's samples were also contaminated with modern bacteria, and were growing a biofilm that made the results unreliable. ...this one un-reproduced experiment... It's a neat discovery, to be sure..." Hey, why would it be a neat discovery it its bacterial contamination? :)
- "Wasn't it remnants of the extra-cellular bone matrix Schweitzer et al found? You'd think the key words "extra-cellular" would give away the fact that you're not going to find any DNA in it..." :)
- Ladyren: "Soft tissue contains water. Water evaporates very quickly. The claim is false."
- etc.

TrochleaKGOVchallenge.jpg


- PZ Myers and virtually all the evolutionists on his blog doubted or outright denied extant dinosaur soft tissue when the infamous evolutionist PZ Myers replied to our RSR Trochlea Challenge. To his credit, he said, "I don't know," which in itself does not prove that he is wrong nor that I am right, but it is pretty funny that the simplest of anatomy designs could stump one of the world's leading Darwinists.

PZ, being severely out-of-date on what is the greatest paleobiology discovery yet, as late as November 2011 doubted the existence of dinosaur soft tissue by critically writing about "Will's rants here" regarding dinosaur soft tissue for which Myers linked to his long out-dated report of "a good alternative explanation: this is an example of bacterial contamination producing a biofilm." (Update: As late as August 2013, still in denial, PZ continues to irresponsibly suggest the falsified biofilm hypothesis.) If PZ weren't a soft tissue denier (or doubter) he would have instead indicated that the biofilm interpretation against actual primary tissue had been repeatedly refuted in the peer-reviewed literature. Like LoR's AronRa, Myers didn't mention all the confirming studies, and he preferred to keep telling the story, although contrary to the latest science, that is far more comfortable to Darwinists. (And regarding Carbon 14 PZ Myers, like so many evolutionists have, went on to mock Will and me for our $23,000 grant offer to Jack Horner to carbon date his dinosaur fossil, which PZ says, "makes no sense at all," even though peer-reviewed studies are now carbon dating dinosaur soft-tissue fossils.)

- Myers' Fan Base: Ichthyic Post #189 (approvingly quoting another evolutionist, lawilson200, who commented on a YouTube video, Jack Horner Call, about my grant offer to Jack Horner):

YEC's continued claim there was "soft" tissue found, represents a failure to even read the peer reviewed papers. No organic material was ever found. The material that was found was calcified, which became "soft" after a bath in acid. Learn to read!

[Meanwhile, peer-reviewed papers ARE reporting on their carbon 14 tests on dinosaurs even though PZ Myers wrote mocking RSR that "carbon dating is so absurdly inappropriate and useless that only an ignorant clown would… do it.]

In summary, on what is the greatest paleontology discovery in history, PZ Myers and AronRa join those evolutionists who are science deniers and science doubters, all because they intuitively know that even simple changes in temperature gradually breakdown complex biological molecules which all of science uniformly maintained could not exist for even one million years. Now, they've got to deal with Harvard sequencing hardrosaur proteins, blood vessels from a T. rex, biological material from archaeopteryx, and a whole boatload of other related problems, including carbon 14, left-handed amino acids, and a world looking them square in the face and saying: "If you believe soft tissue can last for 65 million years, you'll believe just about anything, won't you?" So, for the short-term, it's a lot easier to be a soft tissue denier. But the cure is now here: DinosaurSoftTissue.com!

RSR Listeners: Please feel free to email other soft tissue deniers to Bob@KGOV.com. And let us know if any of our Darwinist listeners over at TOL, such as Alate_One or Johnnie, are deniers. Thanks!

* From RSR.org/soft-tissue: Real Science Radio presents the scientific journals reporting, the kinds of biological material found so far, and the dinosaurs yielding up these exciting discoveries:

Scientific Journals: Nature, Science, PNAS, PLoS One, Proceedings of the Royal Society, Bone, the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, and others below in our chronological catalog, "the web's most complete list of dinosaur soft tissue discoveries," as published in many leading journals, according to a co-author of one of those papers.

Biological Material Found: As of April 2014, in fossils from dinosaur-layer and deeper strata, researchers have discovered flexible and transparent blood vessels, red blood cells, many various proteins including the microtubule building block tubulin, collagen, the cytoskeleton component actin, and hemoglobin, bone maintenance osteocyte cells, and powerful evidence for DNA.

Dinosaur and Dinosaur-Layer Creatures: The dinosaurs and other Mesozoic creatures that have yielded their biological material are hadrosaur, titanosaur, ornithomimosaur [ostrich-like dinosaurs], mosasaur, triceratops, Lufengosaurs, T. rex, and Archaeopteryx.



* "65-million" Year Old T. rex Soft Tissue
: The T. rex photos above are actually old news, whereas all the latest published journal papers, through 2014, are listed chronologically at rsr.org/soft. As for these photos though, North Carolina State University discovered this original biological tissue from a supposedly 65-million year old Tyrannosaurus Rex thighbone, with transparent and pliable blood vessels containing red blood cells. See these and other T. rex photos at Smithsonian Magazine and MS-NBC, and see an early Nat'l Geographic report. Famed paleontologist Jack Horner of Montana State University worked the excavation site. In a 2011 development, ten leading universities and institutes including Harvard, the University of Manchester, and the University of Pennsylvania published in PLoS One, a peer-reviewed journal, that they had verified that presumed dinosaur material is indeed original biological tissue from a dinosaur! Creationists refer to dinosaurs as missionary lizards for many reasons including:
- the short-lived Carbon 14 everywhere including in dinosaur bones
- the 521-year half-life of DNA that helps date the actual age of fossils containing dinosaurian genetic material, and
- the mostly left-handed amino acids that should be equally right and left handed if they were "Jurassic", and
- the research on Egyptian mummies that established 10,000 years as an upper limit for how long original biological molecules could survive. Interestingly, the renowned evolutionist PZ Myers ridiculed our Real Science Radio program by repeating what had been a widely-discredited secular hope that the "soft-tissue" dinosaur finds were "biofilm" contamination from bacteria. But as 60 Minutes shows and Bob Enyart sums it up, "This is dinosaur."


Today’s Resource: Get the fabulous Carl Werner DVD Living Fossils and his great prequel, Evolution: The Grand Experiment! And have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? For the best of the best in creation books, debates, and videos, click on our Science Department or just call us at 1-800-8Enyart (836-9278).

HOT OFF THE PRESSES! Another RSR Prediction Fulfilled! NOW, allegedly 530 million-year-old soft tissue: Tune into the above program for our excerpts from a Journal of Paleontology paper on the soft tissue in Precambrian "beard worm" fossils that we've added to our list of dinosaur soft tissue discoveries!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jukia

New member
More, "Oh my, this is unusual and not expected therefore goddidit".

More generalized misrepresentation from Pastor Bob and his minyon
 

Bob Enyart

Deceased
Staff member
Administrator
More, "Oh my, this is unusual and not expected therefore goddidit".
Hi Jukia! Actually, it is expected and there is nothing unusual at all, sadly, when atheists and evolutionists show themselves as science deniers whenever that science challenges their dogma that nothing created everything.

As for God did it, you must have me confused with Mr. Religion. He's the one who attributes an atheist's rebellion to the eternal decree of God. As for me, I know that the confusion, misrepresentation, and lies of each atheist come from his own heart, and not from the mind of God. It's not God did it, but you did it.

-Bob Enyart
 

Jukia

New member
Hi Jukia! Actually, it is expected and there is nothing unusual at all, sadly, when atheists and evolutionists show themselves as science deniers whenever that science challenges their dogma that nothing created everything.

As for God did it, you must have me confused with Mr. Religion. He's the one who attributes an atheist's rebellion to the eternal decree of God. As for me, I know that the confusion, misrepresentation, and lies of each atheist come from his own heart, and not from the mind of God. It's not God did it, but you did it.

-Bob Enyart

Actually Pastor Bob you helped. It was one of your shows a # of years ago about a dinosaur found with "grass" in its mouth therefore the universe was really only as old as the Bible and Bishop Ussher claim and therefore, the only assumption was "goddidit" that almost made me drive off the road laughing, until I realized that this was supposed to be serious. So thank you.

I am confused by your first paragraph here. Are you suggesting that crack creation scientists were writing about how to expect soft tissue to be found? Evolutionists are "science deniers"? Oh my, who wouda thunk it? Easy to make claims especially to your followers, they eat that stuff up. You'll get Nicky all juiced up, Pahu will channel Walt Brown and Stripe will have to find more emoticons somewhere.

Also, nice jump to "nothing created everything" from the finding of soft tissue. Just so I have it straight, to use your logic, the finding of soft tissue means "goddidit".

Your second paragraph is so pretentious and condescending at the same time it has become standard. Are atheists the only ones who are confused, misrepresent and lie? Pastor Bob, I have been here long enough, read enough real science, enough religion, creationism and am pushing 70 years old, I think that I understand that everyone---atheists, fundamentalists, televangelists, pantheists, Walt Brown, Kenny Ham,---take your pick, misrepresent and lie when it suits them. But there is a difference when the misrepresentations and lies are based on science--if you look hard enough you can get to the truth. You cannot do that with religion because each thinks it has the Truth and they simply cannot all be correct.

In any event, enjoy your Memorial Day. Don't bother your pretty head about any immortal soul you think I have.
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
More, "Oh my, this is unusual and not expected therefore goddidit".

More generalized misrepresentation from Pastor Bob and his minyon
We are not the ones who are uttering the words, "This is unusual and not expected." We are never surprised by the results. It's the evolutionists and old-earthers who are constantly surprised because the results contradict their theories.
 

Jukia

New member
We are not the ones who are uttering the words, "This is unusual and not expected." We are never surprised by the results. It's the evolutionists and old-earthers who are constantly surprised because the results contradict their theories.

Yet you are gobsmacked when scientists laugh at the thought of man and dinosaurs living together.
Finding tissue that was not mineralized was surprising but I fail to see the end of evolution, a 6000 year old universe and a goddidit result.
Yep, scientific discoveries surprise us all the time. Remember Copernicus, Galileo, Wegener, Watson & Crick? All pretty much surprises. First the earth not being the center of the solar system, etc., then continental drift (ala plate tectonics, and no not the same as Stripey's hero Dr. Brown, and then genetic material was not based on proteins but something much simpler and more elegant). Surprises all.
And you have---the same old tired goat herder myths. Basing science on your Holy Book is just ignorant no matter how much education you have. All part of a $ making scheme and an attempt to control.
Once again, thank you Pastor Bob for showing me the silliness of Christianity.
 

Jukia

New member
You will be meeting God soon.

Cool, then I can ask him why he made the universe to look so old when it really isn't. Also, why did he kill all the little babies along with the bad adults in the Big Flood? What do you think his answers will be?

Or will he send me straight to hell always to be tortured by my lack of understanding of his reasoning?

Such a conundrum.
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Cool, then I can ask him why he made the universe to look so old when it really isn't. Also, why did he kill all the little babies along with the bad adults in the Big Flood? What do you think his answers will be?

Or will he send me straight to hell always to be tortured by my lack of understanding of his reasoning?

Such a conundrum.
He's not going to be answering to you. You will be answering to Him.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Yes, believe it or not scientists are capable of surprise. That's part of the beauty of science: Discovery.
 

6days

New member
Jukia said:
Or will he send me straight to hell always to be tortured by my lack of understanding of his reasoning?

God loves you Jukia.**God so loved*the world that he gave*his one and only Son,*that whoever believes*in him shall not perish but have eternal life.*For God did not send his Son into the world*to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.*Whoever believes in him is not condemned,*but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.This is the verdict: Light*has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.**Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed.**But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

John 3:16-21
 

Jukia

New member
God loves you Jukia.**God so loved*the world that he gave*his one and only Son,*that whoever believes*in him shall not perish but have eternal life.*For God did not send his Son into the world*to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.*Whoever believes in him is not condemned,*but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.This is the verdict: Light*has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.**Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed.**But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

John 3:16-21

Well aware of those verses. But this is the same god who killed all the little children in the great Flood.
 

Lighthouse

Star-Spangled Kid
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
God loves you Jukia.**God so loved*the world that he gave*his one and only Son,*that whoever believes*in him shall not perish but have eternal life.*For God did not send his Son into the world*to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.*Whoever believes in him is not condemned,*but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.This is the verdict: Light*has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.**Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed.**But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

John 3:16-21
You forgot Psalm 5:4-5, 139:21-22, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Romans 5:8
 

Jukia

New member
The level of ignorance in your brain is astounding.
Really, then help me out, show some Christian charity, why is your god only fair after you are dead? Clearly, before you die he does not really care about you, else life would be much easier. Oh, or is this all Adam and Eve's fault?
 
Top