Wrecking Three T-Rex Reports

We have items that make reference to Tyrannosaurus rex, some more direct than others. It seems that it is increasingly frequent that the attempts to bolster Darwin's fantasies involve startlingly bad research, and the logic used should be utterly appalling to thinking people.

As several other creationists and I have said, we need to have healthy skepticism about claims made regarding ancient historical science. Also, critical thinking is imperative: Question assertions and whether the evidence is valid; keep the pressure on them and don't be gullible. Now, about T-rex...

Credit: RGBStock / Kevin Tuck

Secular researchers have a habit of working from their naturalistic presuppositions, and interpreting data in a manner that should make Darwin smile. That's not science, old son, that's simply upholding a narrative. Tyrannosaurus rex fossils were found buried together, therefore, they were social animals. Not hardly! Also, researchers acknowledged that a seasonal flood was responsible, but that claim does not hold water.

The secular scientists say that scattered bones of five tyrannosaurs that died together proves that they were “gregarious.”

Evolutionary theory has a way of blinding researchers from their common sense. Scientists found scattered bones of large, heavy predators that perished simultaneously in what was apparently a mass death by flooding. Conclusion? Tyrannosaurs were “social animals.”

See the rest of the article at "Mass Burial of Tyrannosaurs Misinterpreted", but be sure to come back for the rest.

An assortment of dinosaur fossils, including tyrannosaurs, were found way up yonder in Alaska. (Impressive and hazardous trekking was involved which could be made into an interesting movie.) Many juveniles were found. Researchers wondered if dinosaurs migrated up there. However, yet again, the report does not fit the observed evidence. Instead, the evidence fits creation science Genesis Flood models.

Something is terribly wrong with a report that baby dinosaurs hatched and lived in frigid Arctic tundra for millions of years.

. . . 

. . . no cold-blooded animals could survive such harsh conditions where the sun disappears four months of the year and the ground becomes frozen. Now, though, tiny bones of infants and juveniles found in the PCF [Prince Creek Formation] are prompting a rethink. Did dinosaurs live there year round? Did they raise their young there? How did they do it?

You can read the entire article at "Baby Arctic Dinosaurs Challenge Narrative". We have one more bit of bad science to consider.

A tiny bird fossil was discovered in West Taiwan, and scientists think that since it had a jaw similar to T-rex, it is evidence that dinosaurs evolved into birds. The similarity is based on just one trait. This is science? Where is logic? Oh, right, she went home long ago. Even after all the shooting up the ceiling, hollering, and carrying on in the saloon, we find out that the paper admits nothing conclusive happened. Your tax money at work providing evoporn.

It’s not a joke. Evolutionists are actually trying to connect a mighty dinosaur with a delicate tweety bird.

. . .

The two-centimeter-long (0.75 inch) skull of the fossil shares many structural and functional features with the gigantic Tyrannosaurus rex, indicating that early birds kept many features of their dinosaurian ancestors and their skulls functioned much like those of dinosaurs rather than living birds.

The claim of similarity to T. rex is based on one trait: the lower jaw does not move, as it does in modern birds. Is that enough to claim an evolutionary connection between such opposite creatures?

To read the whole article, fly on over to "Tweety Rex Found in China".