Sarah Palin and the Dinosaurs
Politically aware actor Matt Damon is concerned about Sarah Palin's possible ascent to the Presidency of the United States. He says it is "terrifying and crazy" and he wants to know if "Sarah really thinks Dinosaurs were here 4000 years ago because she'll have the nuclear codes." Matt has good reason to be terrified about that prospect. However it is not unreasonable to suppose that dinosaurs survived until the present age. Recently, dinosaur soft tissue was recovered in Madagascar and North America, along with cells that appear to be red blood cells on bones that were not fossilized. 1
It strains credulity to propose that soft tissue can survive for 60 million years: the protein bonds that hold the tissue together simply break down after a few hundred thousand years at most. These astounding discoveries have not been presented for what they are in the mainstream media because they contradict our modern Humanist view of the universe; an atheistic Darwinian worldview that American courts deem to be the only educational system allowed to be taught in our schools. This system, Cosmological Materialism, holds that the Universe is a closed structure that operates under known and measurable material processes with absolutely no spiritual guidance. This philosophy is the essence of Darwinism, which is now the cornerstone of Humanist education in the United States. It sees the entirely of existence as an evolutionary process beginning with a single primordial explosion that then organized itself into atoms, stars, galaxies, organic molecules and you. Have you ever seen an explosion organize itself into anything? This is the fundamental problem with Cosmological materialism: It is ridiculous and is the reason why only 12% of the American people accept it. 2
But what about Sarah Palin and her dinosaurs? Is the notion that dinosaurs lived recently really absurd? Thinking people, liberals among them, must realize that the age of the earth is a completely contemplative matter. No one really knows how old the earth is. There are no accurate or reliable empirical tests to prove the age of the earth one way or another. For example, earth strata are scientifically dated by the use of "index fossils." In other words, geologists date earth strata by the kinds of fossils they find in it. The circular reasoning is obvious. A friend of mine recently found some whale bone fossils and the geology faculty at UCSB told him the fossils were 10 million years old. How did they know that? They feel they know it because there are other fossils in the strata that are thought to be 10 million years old too. Ergo, the whale bones are the same age.
I'd like to state now that I am not a Fundamentalist Christian, I do not belong to a Christian church, don't go to church services and I do not believe in the literal truth of the Bible. That being said, there is no reliable empirical method known to accurately measure the age of rocks. Radio-metric dating has numerous flaws inherent in the method. And the further back you go the more problems there are. In potassium-argon dating used for the oldest rocks, there's a plus/minus accuracy of 500 million years! So the rock might be c. 1.5 billion years old as predicted by radio-metric dating, but there is the inherent assumption that the rock has remained a "closed system" for that length of that time, i.e. nothing has gone in or out, nor has it ever been molten, nor reformed in any way in that whole period of time. Quite an assumption. Both argon (a gas) and potassium are mobile elements and often move freely in and out of rocks in a short period of time, so all this "knowledge" about the age of the earth is actually impossible to know. It's essentially not practical to assume any of this, except that it politically supports the theory of a slow 15 billion year evolutionary development of the entire Universe from the Big Bang to you and your teleprompter.
Dating dinosaurs is a comparable endeavor with similar problems. We only know about dinosaurs because their bones have been fossilized, or turned into mineral; stone for all intents and purposes. Index fossils are used to date the strata at 65 million years and that date is confirmed by radio-metric dating. The process works like this: Numerous radio-metric tests are taken until the date is confirmed. Tests that do not corroborate the accepted date are thrown out as "anomalous." Thus the reality is created and then confirmed. But it is all ideas. After a while, an accepted and standard conceptual view of the universe is arrived at, which is the ultimate object of modern science. However in this case, the dinosaurs in question, Tyrannosaurus rex with soft tissue and blood cells, are thought to be 65 million years old primarily because that is a part of our civilization's social construction of reality. But they were found in an un-fossilized state of natural preservation as if they were cow bones left out in a field to dry.
So what are the implications of it all, aside from the fact that Sarah Palin might not be a complete idiot? Considering that both ancient religious arts in Southeast Asia and Native American pictographs accurately portray dinosaurs, it is not unreasonable that dinosaurs somehow survived, and may still survive in deep in the Congo. But the scientific community will not allow any alternative discussions. Darwinist Richard Lewontin:
We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninformed. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door. 3
Rational and reasonable discussions are not part of the game and this is why divisive polarizing proto-fascist figurines like Palin can walk in the door and take the country by storm. Her reality makes sense to a lot of people sick and tired of being bamboozled by a scientific priest caste who's primary duty is selling Cosmological Materialism, Humanism or agnostic Atheism; whatever you want to call it. It's being sold to us every day in the media and schools by prophets of Materialism like Eugenie Scott, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, but for millions of Americans it's all just another brand of Satanism.
1. Jeff Hecht, "Blood vessels recovered from T. rex bone" NewScientist.com news service, 24 March 2005. Helen Fields, "Dinosaur Shocker"? Smithsonian Magazine, May 2006
2. Gallup Poll, March 5 2001. Gallop began questioning views of evolution in 1982 and the numbers have remained constant ever since. Also, CBS News poll, Oct. 23, 2005.
3. Richard Lewontin, "The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" New York Review of Books, Jan. 9, 19