Evidence of dinosaurs existing thousands, not millions of years ago.
From [Evolution Defender]: The more you know, the more you see how things tie together and fit a specific theory.
True enough, here is some more evidence:
Carbon dating
Source: Garbe, et al. "Direct Dating of Cretaceous-Jurassic Fossils", 1992, page 8
In fact, Allosauraus/A-5810 from Liberty University (found at Grand Junction, Colorado) has been dated at 16,120 years Before Present (BP) ± 220 years. Camarasaurus/A-6339 and Camarasaurus/A-6340 from the Carnegie Museum (found in Johnson County, WY) have been dated at 11,750 ± 150 and 17,420 ± 330 years BP, respectively, using the carbon 14 beta-counter method. Bone scrapings from Accrocanthosaurus AA-5786 (from Glen Rose, TX) yielded measurements of 23,760 ± 270 years BP using the AMS method.
Dinosaur bones can be dated significantly younger than 50,000 years when done in blind studies. This is evidence in favor of young bones. And this is something scientifically testable. When a dinosaur bone is dug up, be careful with it to prevent contamination and carbon date it. See if it carbon dates younger than 50,000 years.
Non-fossilized dinosaur bones
Source: DINOSAUR blood cells, Science, Research News, V.261, 9/7/'93
Round and tiny and nucleated, they were threaded through the bone like red blood cells in blood vessels. But blood cells in a dinosaur bone should have disappeared eons ago. 'I got goose bumps. ...It was exactly like looking at a slice of modern bone. But, of course, I couldn't believe it. ...The bones are, after all 65 million years old. How could blood cells survive that long?'"
Source: Dr Mary Schweitzer from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4379577.stm
"This is fossilised bone in the sense that it's from an extinct animal but it doesn't have a lot of the characteristics of what people would call a fossil," she told the BBC's Science In Action programme.
"It still has places where there are no secondary minerals, and it's not any more dense than modern bone; it's bone more than anything.
Substances like blood and DNA have been extracted from dinosaur bones. Some bones have only been found partially fossilized. Could these bones be 65 million years old?
Source: DNA SHOULD BE GONE, Nature, Vol.352, 8/91 "This means these compression fossils defy the prediction, from in vitro estimates of the rate of spontaneous hydrolysis, that no DNA would remain intact much beyond 10,000 years. What a good job not everybody knew that, grant reviewers included."
Previous science suggests otherwise, thus it is also evidence for young bones.
Location of bones
http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v3i12f.htm
http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v4i1f.htm
These links are obviously from someone who disagrees with evolution, so I'll just quote some of the evidence presented. This excavation was done in Montana.
Source: We Dug Dinos Part 2
I have been to Dinosaur National Monument and seen the dinosaur bones firmly encased in solid rock. I have read about the 19th century dinosaur hunters who used dynamite to blast T rex bones out of solid rock. I was expecting to be in for some strenuous work. In fact, the “rock” was so soft I could have dug it with a spoon. I actually used a chisel because I only brought one spoon, and I wanted to use it to eat my CheeriosTM every morning. Besides, the chisel had a better handle on it. But I could have used a spoon if necessary.
I used a paintbrush to dust some of the loose sand off some of the bones I was digging, but stopped doing that rather quickly. The brush not only removed the loose sand, it also dug into the “rock” and even the bones. I wished I had brought along one of those battery-powered hand-held fans for blowing the dirt off the bones. I just wasn’t prepared for such soft “rock” and fragile bones.
Is it true that dinosaur eggs are being dug out of dirt? This makes me wonder about the age of the sediment and eggs.
--------
We were instructed that whenever we found any seashells, we were to take them immediately to Anne Wilkins, our invertebrate paleontology expert. She would identify them, and that might help us more firmly establish the date of the rock.
...
I was really excited when my chisel split open a dirt clod, revealing this seashell. I could not wait to take a picture of it.
It was shiny white. It wasn’t fossilized at all! I thought I had made a breakthrough discovery, so I hurriedly took it to Anne.
She was not impressed. Apparently, it is very common to find “75 million-year-old” shells that aren’t fossilized. In fact, that week I found about two dozen shells, and none of them were fossilized at all. They were so unimportant that Anne told me I could keep some of them, so I did. I showed some of them at our booth at the Community Dinner last month.
---------------
The eggs turned out not to be hard rocks at all. The eggshells are even more fragile than modern chicken eggs. You won’t even feel them when you slide your chisel (or spoon) through the “rock”. (Let’s be honest. It is hard dirt.) After you remove each thin section of dirt, you have to look carefully to see if the dirt is discolored. The discoloration is the eggshell.
In summary, the points made are the "rock" the eggs were found in were basically dirt. Nonfossilized shells were found along with the eggs. The eggs were also appear to have been laid after the coulee had been formed. There may be different explanations for this, but one simple explanation is that the eggs were not that old.
Human records
I found this next page so interesting I'll open up a separate topic for it.
http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm
This page documents ancient petroglyphs, pictures, artifacts, etc. having to do with dinosaurs (and dragons)
Some of them are absolutely fascinating. I liked the smiling dinosaur from Utah. The Stegosaurus on the ruined temple in Cambodia was very interesting. And ancient dinosaur figurines found in Mexico?
Now put this in context with other dinosaur and dragon legends. Is it possible that a dragon is in the Chinese Zodiac because when it was put together dragons were actually around? (Like the other Zodiac creatures?)
Source: Herodotus, (1850 reprint), Historiae, trans. Henry Clay (London: Henry G. Bohn).
There is a place in Arabia...to which I went, on hearing of some winged serpents; and when I arrived there, I saw bones and spines of serpents, in such quantities as it would be impossible to describe. The form of the serpent is like that of a water-snake; but he has wings without feathers, and as like as possible to the wings of a bat (1850, pp. 75-76).
Herodotus was a Greek historian from the fifth century B.C. Is this an account he made up, or is it based in fact? Likewise, are there many dragon stories in different cultures because they all made up some fabulous creature or borrowed it from other myths, or might their stories rather be based on some creature they had actually seen?
Anyway, this is some evidence that dinosaurs were around a relatively short time ago. I think some of this evidence might point to less than 1000 years ago.
Written September 2007