Is the Chicken Really Related to the Dinosaur?

AC content producer Eric Fleming, in April of 2007, published a fascinating article entitled, "Did Dinosaurs Taste like Chicken?" It was a news report on the discovery of some partly-destroyed collagen inside a bone of a Tyrannosaurus Rex skeleton uncovered in Montana. This collagen reportedly had protein analysis study, since DNA testing could not possibly succeed, and was identified as having enough similarity to the modern-day collagen of the chicken to relate the two in some sense.

To quote Mr. Fleming:

"According to John Horner, of Montana State University, this discovery - not just the process - is huge. "It changes the idea that birds and dinosaurs are related from a hypothesis to a theory."

There is a YouTube video where Dave Micklos and Jan Witkowski at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory discuss this topic and reveal the technique used to discover the amino acids involved as mass spectrometry:

YouTube Video

Another YouTube video that appears to be from a point before the analyses were conducted, is a news interview of Mary H. Schweitzer of North Carolina State University (Raleigh), who headed the study. Interestingly enough, and probably standard procedure, the newscasters seem to press the individual being interviewed into making the story more fantastic than it actually is. See if you do not think this the case in the following interview:

YouTube Interview

Whenever one feels they are on the brink of discovering something major, adrenaline flows. Adrenaline is a great thing, but when it flows, sometimes cool, deductive reasoning suffers. Or sometimes conclusions go a little beyond what data truly reveals.

You know, I can see this image of a Tyrannosaurus Rex on a treadmill, slowly being morphed out and replaced with this chicken... No. It's just too ridiculous to believe anyone can fall for this stuff.

Now despite being a chemist, I do not wish to discuss the validity of the scientific methodology. I was not there and I am not qualified. Besides, I do not doubt that testing was properly done. It is merely the evaluation attached to whatever data was derived. There is one really direct and conclusive source that dispels the notion of the Chickosaur or Tyrochicken once roaming this earth. That source is the Bible. Now I am not a Creationist. Creationists have probably alienated more people than evolutionists ever could. All I wish to do is to reveal a small portion of scripture that rules out the possibility of the chicken and the dinosaur having any sort of family connection. Well, now, how is it possible to get the information from the Bible, which never truly refers specifically to dinosaurs at all?

In the Bible book of Genesis, it speaks of seven creative days. Not twenty-four hour creative days, but lengthy periods of time in which objects and life on earth were gradually created by God in stages. Now how does this help us see that the chicken has no connection with the dinosaur? Simple. In the Bible, flying creatures and aquatic life were created during the fifth Creative day. The land animals were not created until the sixth Creative day. Birds thus were created before dinosaurs. So the chicken could not have come from the dinosaur. Even some evolutionists believe that the appearance on earth of land animals followed the appearance of birds. Thus, the revelations provided by the team of scientists mentioned above is certainly of interest, but far from conclusive, and as in many other instances, one should not be quickly shaken in his power of reason by so-termed "Emerging Science."