Dating

WRONG Instead, Mr Neyman proposed the dinosaurs were the product of amateur palaeontologists trying to describe discoveries made in the ground – a possible source of dragon legends.

Dong Zhiming (enero de 1937-, en chino: 董枝明, Pinyin: Dǒng Zhimíng), es un destacado paleontólogo del Instituto de Paleontología de los Vertebrados y Paleoantropología en Pekín.[1]​Comenzó a trabajar en dicha institución en 1962, siendo discípulo de Yang Zhongjian que era el director en aquel momento. Ha descrito muchos dinosaurios incluyendo saurópodosShunosaurus, Datousaurus y Omeisaurus, así como el Archaeoceratops. Desarrolló parte de su trabajo en la Formación Dashanpu, lo que es sumamente importante ya que es un yacimiento del Jurásico medio rico en fósiles, lo que es un evento relativamente extraño.

Dong ha escrito o colaborado en la redacción de varios libros sobre los dinosaurios chinos:

• Dong Zhiming (1988). Dinosaurs from China. China Ocean Press, Pekín & British Museum (Natural History). ISBN 0-565-01073-5.
• Dong Zhiming (1992). Dinosaurian Faunas of China. China Ocean Press, Pekín. ISBN 3-540-52084-8.

Spalding, David (1993). Dinosaur Hunters: Eccentric Amateurs and Obsessed Professionals. Prima Lifestyles. p. 275. ISBN 155958338X. Consultado el 8 de enero de 2010.

Kachina Bridge Dinosaur Petroglyph

Still Good Evidence by Ishmael Abrahams on March 18, 2011Featured in Feedback

It is a composite of two separate items that were formed by pecking (a technique in which small bits of rock are chipped from the surface by a hand-held instrument), plus mineral or mud stains. The “head,” “neck,” and “torso” are a single item: a thick, sinuous shape formed by pecking. The “tail” is a second, Ushaped item formed by pecking. That the two items are indeed two separate items is indicated by a gap between them and also by differences in pecking patterns and densities between the two (Figure 1).

As mentioned, being a composite does not eliminate it from being intentionally done in such a way by the artist.

The “legs” are not part of the image and are not pecked or otherwise human-made but are stains of mud or some light-colored mineral on the irregular surface.

But why assume it is not part of the image? Using stains of mud or other sources of coloring was common for artists. Furthermore, the under surface has been through years of weathering, which we would expect to affect the surface. Such a find is not to be misconstrued as having no original human input.

Kachina Bridge Sauropod Petroglyph, Natural Bridges National Monument, Utah, USA

In Natural Bridges National Monument, located in southeast Utah, there are several Native American petroglyphs (rock carvings and etchings) and pictographs (paintings on rock) on the sandstone canyon walls. Most were done by the Anasazi people from about 1 AD to 1300 AD.

There have been attempts to rationalize away the petroglyph as being a composite depiction with mud stains and therefore originally a depiction of a snake. But the pecking and divots of the petroglyph clearly extend down to the legs making this “debunking” of the petroglyph spurious. The Anasazi people clearly saw living sauropods.

Dragon Petroglyph, Wupatki National Park, Arizona, USA

Although believed to be merely a mythological zoomorphic representation by secularists, the carving is thought to belong to the Puebloan period of 1150–1300 AD.4

But why would the native tribes depict everyday animals they saw and hunted all over the canyon walls and large rocks on the ground in every other case, yet toss in a “mythological creature” right alongside what appears to be a (very faded) horse? And a fire-breathing dragon is one that just happens to be alluded to in Scripture (as a fiery flying serpent in Isaiah 30:6) and depicted in most other cultures worldwide, which from an evolutionary anthropology view is mystifying coming from a pre-Columbian North American culture.

Carved Dragon Petroglyph near Embden, Maine, USA

On the west bank of the Kennebec River at the Hodgdon site near Embden, Maine, is a carving of a horned, long, serpentine, arrow-tailed dragon. It is believed to be from the Late Ceramic period ca. 900–1200 CE.

Carved Sea Dragon Petroglyphs, Vancouver Island, and Gabriola Island, BC, Canada There are several native Snuneymuxw First Nation people carvings of various sea monsters, dated to about 1,000 AD.

Leonardo Da Vinci’s Dragon, Royal Collection, London, England he also sketched several studies of animal movements, including horses, birds, dogs, cattle, bears, and even a crab. Unlike the obvious mythology artistry, all of these “studies” were based on detailed observation of the anatomy and/or movements of domestic or captive animals. Why would the dragon be the sole exception to this rule?

With 1.7 million known species of insects to consider, the bombardier beetle might not be the world’s most interesting insect. But it is very interesting. It deters would-be attackers, such as ants, frogs and lizards, by shooting boiling-hot, toxic chemicals from its body.

Science, Tech, Math› Animals & Nature

What Does Science Say About Flying and Fire Breathing Dragons?

Believe it or not, real-life flying and fire-breathing dragons are possible

To date, no fire-breathing animals have been found. However, it wouldn’t be impossible for an animal to expel flames. The bombardier beetle (family Carabidae) stores hydroquinones and hydrogen peroxide in its abdomen, which it ejects when threatened. The chemicals mix in the air and undergo an exothermic (heat-releasing) chemical reaction, essentially spraying the offender with irritating, boiling hot fluid.

When you stop to think about it, living organisms produce flammable, reactive compounds and catalysts all the time. Even humans inhale more oxygen than they use. Hydrogen peroxide is a common metabolic by-product. Acids are used for digestion. Methane is a flammable by-product of digestion. Catalases improve the efficiency of chemical reactions.

A dragon could store the necessary chemicals until it’s time to use them, forcefully expel them, and ignite them either chemically or mechanically. Mechanical ignition could be as simple as generating a spark by crushing together piezoelectric crystals. Piezoelectric materials, like flammable chemicals, already exist in animals. Examples include tooth enamel and dentin, dry bone, and tendons.

So, breathing fire is certainly possible. It hasn’t been observed, but that doesn’t mean no species has ever developed the ability. However, it’s just as likely an organism that shoots fire might do so from its anus or a specialized structure in its mouth.

Human and dinosaur fossil footprints in the Upper Cretaceous of North America? by Emil Silvestru Abstract The Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation of British Columbia has yielded some of the best dinosaur footprints in Canada. The area near Tumbler Ridge is one of the few locations in the world with dinosaur footprints and dinosaur bones on the same bedding plane. Human-like footprints were recently discovered in the area, too, but on closer examination they seem to be metatarsal dinosaur footprints. The discoverers of these ichnofossils also found some of the best dinosaur trackways in Canada, described for the first time in this paper. The Paluxy River site, as well as the nearby Dinosaur Valley State Park’s ‘Taylor Site’ and ‘Shelf Site’ are well known and have triggered a hot debate between some creationists and evolutionists.¹² Some creationists have suggested that the elongated, indistinct depressions alongside clear dinosaur tracks are human footprints, based on morphological arguments (i.e. the resemblance to human footprints). The anatomical ratios (see table 1), when compared to modern humans, are not at all convincing. In fact all ichnites are much larger than the modern human foot.

Marine archeology in the Gulf of Khambhat – earlier known as Gulf of Cambay – centers around controversial findings made in December 2000 by the National Institute of Ocean Technology (NIOT) under the Gulf of Khambhat, a bay on the Arabian Sea on the west coast of India.

La ciudad submarina de Cuba es un sitio que se ha descrito como una compleja estructura de granito sumergida cerca de la costa de la península de Guanahacabibes en la provincia de Pinar del Río de Cuba.^[1]​^[2]​^[3]

A comienzos de 2001 se documentaron por primera vez unas imágenes de sonar interpretadas como estructuras de piedra simétricas y geométricas que se parecían a un complejo urbano, cubriendo un área de 2 km² y en una profundidad de entre 600 y 750 metros.^[1]​ El hallazgo fue anunciado por Pauline Zalitzki, una ingeniera marina, y su marido Paul Weinzweig, propietarios de una empresa canadiense llamada Advanced Digital Communications,^[4]​ que trabajaba en un proyecto de exploración y sondeo en colaboración con el gobierno cubano.

1.  ‘Lost city’ found beneath Cuban waters, BBC News, 7 December 2001.
2. ↑ ‘Looking for lost riches in Cuba’s seas: Underwater surveyors say they may have found sunken city’, Reuters, Havana, 14 May 2001.
3. ↑ Handwerk, Brian., New Underwater Finds Raise Questions About Flood Myths, National Geographic News, May 28, 2002.
4. ↑ ^a b Bauza, Vanessa (27 de octubre de 2002). «Submerged Cuban Ruins May Be Manmade, Experts Say». Daily News, Bowling Green, Kentucky. Consultado el 3 de octubre de 2012.
5. ↑ Ballingrud, David (17 de noviembre de 2002). «Underwater world: Man’s doing or nature’s?». St. Petersburg Times. Consultado el 3 de octubre de 2012.

The concept for the automated parking system was and is driven by two factors: a need for parking spaces and a scarcity of available land. The earliest use of an APS was in Paris, France in 1905 at the Garage Rue de Ponthieu.^[2]

^[2] Sanders McDonald, Shannon.“Cars, Parking and Sustainability”Archived 2013-08-10 at the Wayback Machine, The Transportation Research Forum .Retrieved on 16 October 2012.

The London Hammer (also known as the “London Artifact”) is a name given to a hammer made of iron and wood that was found in London, Texas in 1936. Part of the hammer is embedded in a limey rock concretion, leading to it being regarded by some as an anomalous artifact, asking how a man-made tool could come to be encased in Lower Cretaceous rock.^[1][2]

1. Cole, J.R. (Winter 1985). “If I Had a Hammer”. Creation Evolution Journal. National Center for Science Education Inc. 5 (15): 46–47. One of his principal pieces of evidence for human contemporaneity with supposedly ancient geological strata is an iron hammer with a wooden handle found near London, Texas by others in the 1930s in an “Ordovician” stone concretion “in the scenario” (but not in the Glen Rose region). “Humanists,” Baugh said, claim it is an “18th-century miner’s hammer.” Noting the appearance of the handle, Baugh said a similar-looking piece of wood from Michigan had just been radiocarbon dated 11,500 years old. (He gave no reference and did not blink at the date earlier than his view of creation.) Apparently this was meant to suggest that the hammer was earlier than the 19th (not 18th) century date other observers have suggested and to imply that the hammer itself had been subjected to radiocarbon dating, although it had not been (Baugh, 1983b).
2. ^ ^a b Kuban, Glen J. (14 July 2006). “The London Hammer: An Alleged Out-of-Place Artifact”. Glen Kuban’s Web Sites. Retrieved 7 July 2015. An iron and wooden hammer, sometimes called the “London Artifact” or “London Hammer,” found by local hikers in a creek bed near London, Texas in 1936, has been promoted by Carl Baugh and other strict creationists as an out-of-place artifact. They maintain that the hammer, which was partially embedded in a small, limy rock concretion, originated in a Cretaceous rock formation (or an Ordovician or Silurian one, depending on the account), thus contradicting the standard geologic timetable. However, the hammer was not documented in situ and has not been reliably associated with any specific host formation. Other relatively recent implements have been found encased in by similar nodules and can form within centuries or even decades under proper conditions (Stromberg, 2004). The hammer in question was probably dropped or discarded by a local miner or craftsman within the last few hundred years, after which dissolved limy sediment hardened into a nodule around it. Although a brief rebuttal to Baugh’s hammer claims was made by Cole (1985), Baugh and a few other creationists continue to promote it. This review provides further analysis of the hammer and creationist claims about it.“

Scientists create diamonds in minutes, first time in lab without added heat WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS | USA TODAY | 1:22 pm EST November 23, 2020

Fossilization is the process of remains becoming fossils. Fossilization is rare. Most organisms decompose fairly quickly after they die. For an organism to be fossilized, the remains usually need to be covered by sediment soon after death.22 feb. 2013https://;› … fossil | National Geographic Society

Experiment: Fast-Formed Fossils

by Heather Brinson Bruce on October 1, 2011; last featured January 6, 2019Featured in Answers MagazineAlso available in Español

Do fossils require millions of years to form? Hardly! Even secular geologists now recognize that rocks form very quickly. The key is the right chemical conditions, not time. See for yourself with a simple experiment.

But scientists have long recognized that carbon dating is subject to error because of a variety of factors, including contamination by outside sources of carbon. Therefore they have sought ways to calibrate and correct the carbon dating method.31 may. 1990https://;› errors-ar… ERRORS ARE FEARED IN CARBON DATING – The New York Times

Often, laypersons are not aware the C-14 testing involves ratios of C-14 and C-12, NOT DATES! The dates must be calibrated and are based on unprovable assumptions about the past. The same problem is found in dating Jericho and other sites in the ANE in the Second Millenium B.C. Dr. Wood has commented here briefly on this important subject: Carbon 14 Dating at Jericho

A Crucial Archaeological Dating Tool Is Wrong, And It Could Change History as We Know It MIKE MCRAE 6 JUNE 2018