Reconsideration of Many Long-Standing Assumptions
It is amazing what a little bit of fossilized dinosaur dung can do to prevailing theories of evolutionary time scales. For many years, evolutionary artists and theorizers suggested that plant-eating dinosaurs dined on ferns and tree leaves, and could not have eaten grass because it supposedly did not “evolve” until several million years after the “dinosaur era.” In fact, Lauran Neergaard, author of the Associated Press article “Dinosaurs May Have Eaten Grass,” suggested that “the earliest grass fossils ever found were about 55 million years old—from the post-dinosaur era” (2005).
Neergaard reported the findings of coprolites (the technical term for fossilized dinosaur dung) by researchers led by Caroline Stromberg of the Swedish Museum of Natural History. Stromberg and her colleagues noted traces of plants which they suggested were “certain to have come from the grass family” (Neergaard, 2005). Neergaard noted that these researchers indicate that “grasses must have originated considerably earlier, well over 80 million years ago, for such a wide variety to have evolved and spread to the Indian subcontinent in time to be munched by sauropods…” (2005).
She then quoted Dolores Piperno and Hans-Dieter Sues from the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History, who commented: “‘These remarkable results will force reconsideration of many long-standing assumptions’ about dinosaur ecology” (2005).
Think about that comment for just a second. A sample of dinosaur dung shows up with traces of grass in it and the theories for the “evolution” of grass have to be adjusted by more than 10 million years. And, this remarkable find of grass in dinosaur dung forces the reconsideration of many “long-standing assumptions.” It seems clear that the Smithsonian representatives have inadvertently conceded more than the scientific community usually is willing to admit: that much of their information is nothing more than long-standing assumptions that can be completely discounted with a handful of fossilized manure! In truth, not only does the evolutionary scientific establishment need to reconsider its faulty assumptions about grass evolution, they need to reconsider their faulty, long-standing assumptions about evolution in general. Among those assumptions would be the fallacious ideas that dinosaurs did not live with humans (see Harrub and Thompson, 2003), that the Universe and Earth are billions of years old (see Thompson, 2001), and that life arose from non-living matter (see Harrub, 2002).
When a scoop of fossilized dinosaur dung can adjust evolutionary theory by millions of years and force the reconsideration of many long-standing assumptions, it is time to step back and make a critical analysis of all the refuse we have uncovered—not just the fossilized kind.
REFERENCES
Harrub, Brad and Bert Thompson (2003), “Walking Amidst the Dinosaurs,” [On-line], URL: https://apologeticspress.org/articles/15.
Harrub, Brad (2002), “The Origin of Life—Try, Try Again,” [On-line], URL: https://apologeticspress.org/articles/2072.
Neergaard, Lauran (2005), “Dinosaurs May Have Eaten Grass,” [On-line], URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051117/ap_on_sc/dino_grass_eaters;_ylt=Ao Io3nJYwOASNEqMCwzlo4.s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MzV0MTdmBHNlYwM3NTM-.
Thompson, Bert (2001), “The Young Earth,” [On-line], URL: https://apologeticspress.org/articles/1991.
REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.
