Is limited evidence of fossils of predators containing last meal also evidence for a global flood

I note this news story

> There have only been 20 other cases where a carnivorous dinosaur’s last meal had been preserved. On Tuesday, a team of researchers from Canada, the US, the UK and China published their findings describing their discovery of a mammal foot inside the ribcage of a microraptor.

I believe that should the world wide flood event as described in the Bible be a real event, then the lack of predators containing last meals of prey may very well be because over the course of the last few hours or days of the predators life prior to being drowned in the flood, the predator was not eating due to the likelihood it was running for higher ground trying to escape the rising flood waters.

Now I know evolutionary scientists and those who deny the global food will simply discount this, however, in my view this is an interesting piece of information that strongly supports a biblical flood…otherwise a lot more predators would have their last meals preserved inside the location of their ribcage and stomach in the deposit where they are found.

Or it could mean carnivores tend to eat larger meals at once and then go a longer time without eating, unlike herbivores which are more likely to graze.


Good thought, says the layman. ; - ) Along the same line, maybe their gastric system empties quicker too, storing fat and building muscle?

1 Like

Things that do not have very fast metabolisms (i.e. not mammals or birds) do. Crocodilians can go for weeks without eating.


That’s the meanest straw I’ve ever seen a drowning man grasp at. To build an entire fantasy world from a four winged 125 million year old carnivorous chicken having eaten a shrew is so utterly, sadly, desperate.

1 Like

Really? That’s fascinating.

Of course, soft tissue and plant material is seldom preserved, so it is really pretty amazing that any were found. Any bones eaten would be small and chewed up. Coprolites (fossilized stool) may be more common as that presents undigested material, that may be better preserved, and in addition, an animal has only one last meal, but a lifetime of poop, so rare fossilization would be more likely for poop pellets. Same for footprints.


Fossils preserve the state of the animal at death, at end of life and far from prime. Is it not glaringly obvious that predators are more likely to die on an empty stomach rather than full? This is true, right now, in the wild, just as it always has been. How can this possibly be evidence of Noah’s flood? Sometimes I just shake my head.

There are predator dinosaurs, predator Permian amphibians, and predator modern mammals, yet they are never found together whatever the stomach contents. No dinosaurs are found above the KT layer. This fact discounts a global flood from serious discussion. Start there, before appealing to empty stomachs.


how do you figure the bones would be chewed up given that many modern examples of reptilian predators (as just one example) don’t chew anything much. They tear their prey apart and swallow those pieces whole!

I am interested by this, because in studies I have seen, many dinasoars are found in deposits that are of similar depth to far more modern animals.

> If evolution was not true, and if animals did not change over time, I should be able to find modern-appearing plants and modern-appearing animals in the dinosaur rock layers. And this is in fact what I found.

> “I interviewed a scientist at the Museum of Paleontology at Berkeley who discussed a parrot fossil they had found in Cretaceous layers (‘dinosaur rock’). But the parrot fossil was not on display in the museum.”

> But pollen grains have been found in Precambrian layers, rocks thought to have been laid down a billion years before pollen-producing plants were supposed to have evolved. “The rocks concerned are unquestionably ancient (Precambrian) and are so altered that no organic matter should be recognizable in them. Also they are physically dense, with no obvious routes (such as natural permeability/porosity or crack systems) through which solid particles might enter them. Yet standard palynological techniques recovered well-preserved fossil pollen from the samples!!!” (Stainforth, R.M. “Occurrence of pollen and spores in the Roraima Formation of Venezuela and British Guiana,” Nature 210:292–294, 1966.)

simply trying to discount the resources above as crackpots does not detract from the information presented where it is obvious the two existed together and were buried together…unless you want to claim the rock in which the dinosaurs were deposited became sediment again and without disturbing the existing fossil, then modern animals were buried in that layer, then it resolidified again (now that sounds crackpot to me)

I would see the above examples as evidence that both likely died at the same time or in a similar time period. Indeed when these examples are found by non Christian scientists, it seems they intentionally leave their existence out of the record completely. That would seem to me to be highly suspicious and a good example of why Christians should not put Darwinian theory above biblical theology (which is what is happening regularly these days). Gods word must come first and the science interpretation must fit the bible WITHOUT CAUSING THEOLOGICAL DILEMMAS! We know that the Bible speaks of Behemoth and Leviathon existing at the time of Job…so clearly, the O.P question i asked has its basis on the book of Job too. The Christian Creationist view of Science interpretation seems to support the account in Job. I found the news story another supporting piece of evidence and its particularly interesting to me because i don’t see that story as having come from a Christian YEC perspective. Non Christians wouldn’t think anything of it…but i saw the flag immediately.

The fundamental error is the claim “the world wide flood event as described in the Bible”. The biblical account does not fit with a worldwide flood, but rather with a devastating regional flood. The worldwide flood supposedly producing all geologic layers is described in creation science claims, but the Bible puts Eden on top of some of the youngest sedimentary deposits, has live trees accessible in the vicinity of the ark’s landing place, only has selected animals represented, etc. The selling point of young-earth and anti-evolutionary claims is to loudly profess to be the only biblical approach; if you buy into that then you don’t particularly pay any attention to the scientific, historical, and other errors.

On the specific question of carnivory, there are several additional problems, Fundamentally, you haven’t actually examined the questions: what would be expected from the fossil record under a standard geological model? what would be expected under a global flood model? You’ve just taken a news story (without further research) and claimed it supports a global flood. But in reality, you need a coherent model of your flood in order to say what effects it would have. You’re implying that the flood happened in some fashion that would enable predators to generally empty their bowels before getting buried, which does not fit with several young-earth claims about how the flood supposedly happened. You’re also implying that the flood happened gently enough to not totally destroy the carcasses of predators, which contradicts all popular young-earth models. Note also that some young-earth advocates claim that there was no carnivory until after the flood.

Relatively few dinosaur skeletons are preserved well enough to possibly find identifiable gut contents. Although I helped to dig up a different reptile here in North Carolina that did have remains of several prey animals in it, all reported dinosaurs from the Carolinas are stray bones, not skeletons. As expected under an old-earth model, organisms experience varying levels of decay and destruction before and after they are buried. Remains of prey animals in the gut are actually easier to preserve than you might expect, because there’s often a lot of phosphate available to quickly turn softer materials into rock. However, the digestive processes of the predator often damage prey remains beyond recognition. Although no predatory dinosaurs are known to chew (which requires appropriate jaw flexibility and some sort of cheeks to hold the food in), they did use gastroliths to supplement the muscular action of gizzards, etc. and chemical processing. Predators are also generally less common than prey, affecting the numbers of finds. A different complication comes from the fact that excavators looking for an impressive dinosaur skeleton may not carefully save the rock material from inside the body cavity - preparation technique, as well as preservation, comes into play. Thus, there are plenty of reasons to expect a recognizable meal inside a carnivorous dinosaur to be uncommon no matter how old they are. How many human remains from the past 2000 years have remains of their last meal recognizable in them?


Well, it was a disjointed answer, admittedly, but if you piece it together, there are still likely to be some gaps to fill.

I understand the appeal of not causing theological dilemmas, but I don’t know how to get there without simply hand-waving away mountains of evidence, which destroys our credibility and integrity. Even theology itself is full of “dilemmas” and mysteries as well as seemingly contradictory ideas that we have to wrestle with and hold in tension. I don’t think we need to be afraid of where scientific evidence leads. God was under no obligation to inspire an ancient text in a way that fits in with modern, post-enlightenment, Western, 21st century science.


sorry but your theology on this is absolutely wrong. Biblical theology 100% supports a global flood and so does much of the more recent research conducted by Kirt Wise, Andrew Snelling, Dell Hacket and many others who study in this area. Yes these guys are all creation scientists…of course they are, however, one cannot possibly use that as a means of discounting their research which clearly shows a very valid interpretation of the evidence that supports a global flood.

Illustrations I can think of off the top of my head that pose a problem for a biblical version of a localised flood:

  1. Sedimentary flows across North America that cover huge distances clearly not localised or even regional flooding

  2. Similar rock layering in different continents around the world that must have been deposited at the same time in history…also containing animal fossils of similar types (so they died at/or near the same time)

  3. A recent news story in Australia where studies have shown that the entire state of Victoria experienced a huge wave that washed across the Australian continent depositing sediment and marine creatures vast distances inland from the edge of the continent.

  4. Coal and oil deposits spread around the globe…evidence of fossil fuels that were once living things (plants and animals)…life that was buried on a huge scale.

On the balance of probabilities, the best explanation seems to match the Bible statement in Genesis Chapter 6,7&8 (a world wide flood that covered the entire earth for 150 days and killed all living things on the land that were not in the ark). I do not think the evidence outside of the Bible supports any theology that believes in a local flood! Add that to the fact the Bible very clearly states in Genesis 7

4 For seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living thing I have made.”

now before you latch onto the “I will wipe every living thing from the face of the earth” read verse 8. The writer clearly describes in verse 8 that God is talking about land animals…he clearly can perform a miracle to save sea creatures so I have no problem with them not being in the ark.

“God’s word must come first and the science interpretation must fit the bible WITHOUT CAUSING THEOLOGICAL DILEMMAS!” That is exactly the reason why we must reject creation science. It directly contradicts the myriad admonitions throughout the Bible to be truthful, in order to pretend that science supports its modernistic interpretation of selected bits of Genesis.

For example, the articles that you cite from ICR are dishonest. Whether or not the authors actually know that their claims are untrue, they have not bothered to check whether they are are accurately representing old-earth geology, evolution, or the evidence. Yet they claim to be providing trustworthy information, thus implying that they have done the research. For example, "I interviewed a scientist at the Museum of Paleontology at Berkeley who discussed a parrot fossil they had found in Cretaceous layers (‘dinosaur rock’). But the parrot fossil was not on display in the museum.” First of all, it is slander, accusing the museum of a coverup. Second of all, it reflects a Lamarckian misunderstanding of evolution as a continual progression. Some modern organisms have not changed much over long periods of time. If your body plan works, evolution will select against change unless the ecosystem changes to the point that the body plan doesn’t work so well. Thirdly, they didn’t investigate further, merely seizing on the news story. The reality is that the fossil in question is a single tiny bone, not particularly suitable for an exhibit aimed at appealing to the general public. Also, the reality is that the identification of the specimen as a parrot (and actually a specific group within parrots) is almost certainly wrong. The original (non-young earth but rather short) publication claimed that the fossil had distinctive features, but no evidence has ever been published to support the assertion that the bone features are actually unique to that group of parrots. Instead, the consensus (among the few people who actually study such stuff) is that the bone in question came from a small dinosaur. Although primitive forms of some modern major groups of birds slightly overlap with the last dinosaurs, many claimed specimens of dino-age modern birds turned out to actually be from something quite different, such as enantornithines. It is the young-earthers who are misleading the public, intentionally omitting evidence.


I’m surprised by that argument…i seem to recall how the apparent missing link between humans and apes was concocted from bones fragments that in fact have now been conclusively shown by creation scientists to have been a manufactured myth. The scientist who apparently pieced together the specimen clearly machined bones from apes to fit the human parts of the skeleton…after doing this then on display went a manufactured fabrication claiming to be the missing link.

was not this specimen ( Australopithecus afarensis) called Lucy?

Here is the problem that Christians cannot get around…one cannot say with any authority “I was there” scientists were there" millions of years ago. The methods we use to date specimens is deeply flawed because the time frames are dramatically altered by environmental factors and even beyond that, humanism is attempting to make a huge claim that the level of the parent element from which the isotope is derived after decay is the same as what is found naturally today. Considering the catastrophic nature of the flood (huge volcanic eruptions and tectonic plate movements), which humanism denies because God is not allowed into their hypothesis about such an event, how is it possible to make such a claim?

You cannot make the claim…“oh but its such a tiny sample”. I can throw that straight back at you with the Big Bang. A mathematician attempted to write an equation that claims that if the energy and matter and that started the Big Bang was so tiny, and appeared for such a tiny period of time…essentially it never existed, then the lack of explanation for where the energy and matter came from that is the Big Bang is not a problem for the fundamental theory of all science (that energy and matter can neither be created nor destroyed)


might I also add at this point an important theological dilemma one faces with a solution proposed by Answers in Genesis that I disagree with,

It is their claim that the fossil fuel deposits may have been already in existence…ie that God created them. Presently my gut instinct is that I cannot support such a view because it goes down the pathway of the “mature earth” solution. If one accepts a mature earth, then one immediately must take upon the theological doctrine of predestination. I disagree with such a doctrine because God did not create robots. He knows the future yes, but I do not believe he intentionally predetermined that all mankind must sin in order to fulfill some sense of omnipotent all knowing gloating!

Our creator did not create this earth to fail. That I do not believe is biblically supported…God very clearly created a perfect earth and inhabitants and he allowed us to choose whether or not we would sin. He did not refuse Satan access to this world in order to try to elevated his (satans) own attempts at gaining power in heaven. God has allowed this to play out to show that indeed Satan really is evil. The plan of salvation is aimed at two things:

  1. to restore us, His creation back to Himself and its former glory
  2. to show that God is just and the charge Lucifer made against Him in heaven is unfounded.

Actually this leads me to a new question that I will post on a new thread…its hopefully interesting to others.

Ignorance is louder than knowledge, than truth, than soundness, than rationality. It takes no effort at all.


Fascinating that the article is about a microraptor, which was a small flightless dinosaur with feathers. One link in a chain of evolution from dinosaurs to birds. I’d also note that “a team of researchers” worked on the paper. You can find it here, by the way. It’s open access:

The rising flood waters? A global flood isn’t responsible for fossils or sediment deposition. How many of the following fossils from various eras were made by flood?
Source: Gbob, our late friend Glenn Morton.

Humans are the apex predator. How many human fossils have been found with their last meals preserved? I’ll come back to the rest in a separate post.

1 Like

Not just humanists. The Bible does not teach that huge volcanic eruptions and tectonic plate movements were associated with the flood either.


OK Adam, let’s assume that this assertion (for which you haven’t cited any sources whatsoever) is true and accurate, and that one scientist did indeed “clearly machine bones from apes to fit the human parts of the skeleton”—a claim that is basically an accusation of scientific fraud. Would that reduce the entirety of the theory of evolution to rubble and justify claims that the earth is six thousand years old?

It wouldn’t come anywhere close.

Here’s why. The evolutionary history of life on earth, and the multi-million-year ages of the individual rock strata, are established on the basis of hundreds of thousands if not millions of different scientific studies over the past two hundred years. The history that these studies testify to is extensive, complex, detailed, coherent and mathematically precise.

If you want to falsify something on that scale, a couple of isolated examples of casual scientific fraud aren’t going to cut it. You would need to provide evidence for a global, systematic, deeply entrenched conspiracy encompassing tens of thousands of scientists over a period of nearly two centuries, fabricating data on an industrial scale in a tightly coordinated manner at a cost of billions if not trillions of dollars.

And then on top of that, you would need to explain why there hasn’t been a single whistleblower anywhere in all that time exposing it, despite the fact that it would have to include everyone from undergraduates and postgraduates right through to retirees, people no longer working in the field who had moved onto different careers, people who had moved on from the field with some kind of chip on their shoulders, researchers in Islamic countries where the prevailing religious and cultural environment would incentivise blowing the whistle on something like that, and people in the oil industry who needed to get information on the history of the rocks they are drilling into that is accurate rather than just ideologically convenient.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: conspiracies on that scale simply do not happen. Period. End of story.

And here is the problem that young earthists cannot get around…one doesn’t need to be able to say with any authority “I was there, scientists were there” millions of years ago. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the “were you there?” argument is a lie. There are ways that you can figure out what happened in the past without having been there to see it happen. There are ways to test historical assumptions without watching them from end to end. There are ways to distinguish between which interpretations are valid and which ones are not. This has been explained to you over and over and over and over again.