Christian answering questions.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Put bones in the ground and wait to see what happens, that's what happened to the T-Rex wasn't it. It wasn't set on a self and protected from nature. What I was actually referring to was the preparation of the experiment, the T-Rex didn't have that advantage to preserve his red blood cells, what happens in a lab is man made not a natural process, you may say it mimics the process but mimic doesn't replace the real process in nature.

You're seriously suggesting that the only way to figure out a natural mechanism is to wait 70 million* years? That's like saying if I drop a ball in a vacuum and measure its speed, I'm not "really" conducting scientific experimentation because it's under laboratory conditions. Lab conditions are used to eliminate other variables which might contaminate the result (in that case, atmospheric drag on the falling object), and they don't mean that labs are some magical place where the laws of physics/chemistry which occur in the lab are not the same as the ones outside the lab.

* Edit to Add: I rounded. It's actually 68 million years, which you would have known if you had read the article I posted about Dr. Schweitzer. Your "100 million years" remark was one of the giveaways to me that you had not read it.

Tell me why is this process not present in all other T-Rex. Was this one special for some reason?

The same reason fossilization itself is rare, and so we don't find fossils of every creature that ever lived. There are many and varied conditions at each site. The conditions for this one fossil just happened to be right for that particular natural event to occur. Secondly, it may be more common than we know-- scientists happened to accidentally break this femur, which is why the material was found. They don't make a habit of breaking rare and precious fossils.

The experiment isn't done for another 99 million years and out in nature. I use to do taxidermy and to clean skulls and other bones I wanted to keep I put them in the wood behind me and in two weeks the little critters that are there for cleaning up dead things would completely clean a skull, nothing left, I mean nothing. If I hadn't protected them with a cage the larger critters would have eaten the bones for calcium, nature is destructive for a reason, it's a cleaning and reclaiming process not a preservation process.

Yep. That's another reason fossils are so rare, compared to the number of creatures that have existed. You're getting it!

 You weren't, a Christian is a believer in the Christ and one want ever leave what they know to be so awesome, if you were a Christian you would have had a living relationship with Christ and would never been able to deny Him. This is biblical requirement of being a Christian, so unless you are still a believer and hiding it you were never a Christian. I know I'm a Christian, I would never give up what I know as the truth from the One who promised to reveal it to me. I also noticed you said you thought you were a Christian, I read doubt in that statement, I also noticed you never mentioned having a personal relationship with Christ. What new information could there be when if you were a Christian, Christ would have given you truth that no one could refute, what you are calling "thick headed" about me is the result of the revelation of Christ's truth in my life. So don't be astounded, be curious as to why I have stood strong on this site for six plus years and getting stronger all the time. Christianity hasn't insulated me from learning nor questioning God about certain things, I studied and still do to learn and I question to learn and all the new information I have obtained still strengthen me.

Nothing you said here is surprising to me, but it does make me sad to see such prejudice expressed so clearly. The fact that you have to call it "doubt" when I tell you I used to think something that I no longer thought is particularly telling.

Try to think of it this way. I dated a woman for many years, and was madly in love with her. I believed she was madly in love with me until I found photos on her computer (she forgot to log out on her way to work, and I saw them when attempting to log her out and shut down the computer) of her having group sex in our bed, while I was out on the road working as a field biologist. With this new information, I realized that she did not reciprocate my love, as I once thought, and in time I came to realize that I was in love with an imaginary figure and not the real woman. What you are essentially doing is telling me that I was never in love with her, simply because I'm not in love with her now.

My only real challenge to science is that which deny's creation, why, because it's only speculation as to the beginning and many very intelligent Christian scientist have given counter evidence to main stream science and it's rejected and refused to be published to squash anything counter to much of unproven science on the universe. I out right reject evolution because the science behind it is flawed and opinionated and the scientist refuse to consider other ideas and thought's. I listen to the objections to God and His word and have shown many times on this site how wrong atheist have been about scripture verses and ideas, you trust in science, I trust in the Creator who knows the truth.

Um, nope. There is no such thing as "mainstream science", in the context you're using it. There's performing the Scientific Method, and there's pseudoscience. The people to whom you refer are doing the latter, and many people in the scientific community (many of them Christians, themselves) have stepped forward to explain why that is so... Kenneth Miller and Francis Collins come to mind, offhand. Far from "refusing to consider" the Creationists' claims, they go out of their way to consider and then refute them. You're simply not listening because you prefer the claims of the Creationists, which validate your pre-existing beliefs. The HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Christians who are biologists have no problem with evolution, and see evolution as the mechanism of creation... thus, Creation is an ongoing process, and not something done magically all-at-once, then stopping.

Until you can explain why so many devout Christians are outspoken evolutionary biologists (as I said, since I'm from the deep South, most of the biologists and other scientists I've known in my life, including my mentors and professors, and my co-workers and colleagues, were Christians), you'll have a really hard time convincing anyone that the bias is not entirely yours.