What Passes for "Science" at the Creation Museum

The Creation Museum has obtained a dinosaur fossil that they claim "proves" their theory that the world was created only a few thousand years ago. According to a statement from the museum,

As a geologist, Dr. Snelling added that unlike the way most of the Morrison Formation bones had been found scattered and mixed, the intact skeleton of this allosaur is testimony to extremely rapid burial, which is a confirmation of the global catastrophe of a Flood a few thousand years ago.

This is an example of the worst kind of intellectual dishonesty and fallacious "science."

First off, there's more than one way a skeleton can remain intact. The dinosaur could have fallen off a cliff and into a lake, where it drowned. It could have been chased into a swamp by a larger predator and been stuck in the mud. It could have been standing at the bottom of a hill and buried alive by a landslide. There are millions of possible ways that a skeleton could remain intact.

And let's say it did die in a flood. Was Noah's flood the only flood that ever occurred? There are thousands of floods every year, caused by thunderstorms, hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, and so on. How do they know that this one dinosaur died in Noah's flood? Because Dr. Snelling says most of the bones -- but not all -- were found properly articulated. That's it. That's the "evidence." But all that proves is that the body wasn't torn apart by scavengers.

Did they use radiocarbon dating to determine that the dinosaur died exactly 4,500 years old, and was therefore killed in Noah's flood? Did they find spearheads from human hunters in the dinosaur's skeleton, or toolmarks on the bones, or potsherds scattered among them? No? I didn't think so.

They have presented no forensic evidence obtained during the excavation of this fossil that proved it died when they claim it did. They provided no stratigraphic analysis that proved this fossil was concurrent with humanity. (The "human" footprints at the unrelated Paluxy riverbed site were shown to be dinosaur footprints almost 30 years ago.)

We now know that DNA breaks down over time, and under perfect conditions it can survive for at most 1.5 million years (it has a half life of 521 years). Did the creationists find any DNA in the bones of this supposed 4,500-year-old dinosaur?

Scientists have found intact DNA in the bones of Neandertals from 30,000 years ago, and woolly mammoths that have been frozen for 39,000 years. They have even found soft tissue inside the bones of dinosaurs, which creationists falsely claimed as their proof. Scientists have also found organic material inside the bones of dinosaur embryos. And recently a mosquito was discovered with blood in guts (shades of Jurassic Park!).

However, no intact dinosaur DNA has ever been found. The material found in the bones was deteriorated organic goo. Yet we have found 10,000-year-old human mummies in peat bogs. We have found skeletons of a woman, giant sloths, camels, bear, sabre-tooth cats, birds and so on in the La Brea tar pits. We have found hundreds of extinct animals like woolly mammoths frozen in the arctic tundra. Buried everywhere we have found intact DNA in the bones of every kind of creature that has lived over the past 10,000 years, many of them extinct for centuries like the moas of New Zealand, giant ground sloths and sabre-toothed cats. But we've never found a frozen or mummified dinosaur. We've only found fossilized bones, in which the actual bone is replaced with minerals deposited by water that permeates the structure. And there is never any DNA.

And it's not like scientists don't want to find dinosaur DNA. Dinosaur DNA would be the paleontologist's holy grail. It would answer so many questions: were they related to birds (as most scientists now think), or reptiles? Were they warm-blooded? Did they have feathers or reptilian skin? We don't even know this basic information because we've never found an intact dinosaur: only fossilized bones.

In 1991 two German tourists found a frozen mummy in the Alps. Scientists determined he died about 3,300 BCE, or 5,3000 years ago (well before the time of the supposed flood). They know how he was killed (blood loss from an arrow wound). They knew how lived (around a campire that blackened his lungs). They know what tools he used (his axe was 99.7% pure copper). They analyzed his DNA (he belonged to Haplogroup K, maybe European, Kurdish, Ashkenazi or Middle-Eastern). They even know what he ate for breakfast -- an ibex (they analyzed the DNA).

From this it's obvious that scientists can glean a great detail of information from even a frozen human mummy. But we have never found dinosaurs under any such conditions.

There is no shortage of dinosaur remains: we've found thousands of them, on every continent, pretty much everywhere conditions were conducive to preserving their remains. If they lived concurrently with mankind for 1,500 years, why are they the only creatures from that era whose flesh and DNA have never been preserved? Why are dinosaur skeletons always encased in stone and never in loose soil?

Let me guess: Lucifer and his minions have been destroying dinosaur mummies in peat bogs and planting evidence in solid rock to trick scientists since before science even existed...