Re: Your thoughts on evolution?
Here's an exerpt from Jonathan Gray. If this is typical of many different sites, then the Tavistock time-table being shoved down our throats is obviously wrong.
In the United States in 1990, the bones of a beautifully preserved Tyrannosaurus Rex skeleton were unearthed. When these were brought to the Montana State University's laboratory, it was noticed that “some parts deep inside the long bone of the leg had not completely fossilized.” ( M.Schweitzer and T. Staedter, 'The Real Jurassic Park', Earth ,June 1997 pp. 55-57)
Mary Schweitzer and her co-workers took turns looking through a microscope at a thin section of this dinosaur bone, complete with blood vessel channels. She says: “The lab filled with murmurs of amazement, for I had focused on something inside the vessels that none of us had ever noticed before: tiny round objects, translucent red with a dark center. Then a colleague took one look at them and shouted, 'You've got red blood cells. You've got red blood cells!'”
Schweitzer says, “I got goose bumps. It was exactly like looking at a slice of modern bone.”
She confronted her boss, famous paleontologist
'Dinosaur' Jack Horner. “I can’t believe it,” she said. “The bones, after all, are 65 million years old. How could blood cells survive that long?”
The evidence that hemoglobin (the protein which makes blood red and carries oxygen) has indeed survived in this dinosaur bone casts immense doubt upon the 'millions of years' idea.
It hasn’t been so long!
If you would like to know more about this and related matters, please go to http://www.archaeologyanswers.com/first.php