" 

 :Lookit, ""truthteller"", your contribution is a) from a creationist point of view (POV), and b) unscientific, as in patent nonsense. Your belief represents a minority. Don't answer that evolution is a system of belief, it is not and has never been. You pick out one aspect of indirect dating, and neglect the overwhelming rest. You present answersingenesis and incorrect news websites as sources. Only publications in a PEER-REVIEWED journal add something to the discussion. There are thousands of articles on wikipedia about evolution in general, open your eyes (Just as an aside, what do you think of the rest of the article?)! If you would be consequent, you would have to edit 90 % of this article-heck even the taxobox (that pink thing on top) is based on evolutionary principles. Of course, this proves you are totally ignorant of dinosaurs and biology in general. Oh, and please provide a source for your Canadian and Alaskan ""unfossilized dinosaur bones"". 

 :The mammoth is mummified, the T. rex bones are fossilized. The bones have been demineralized, after which they found the spectacular soft tissue. Your argument is as stupid as: the bones of the chicken I ate last week also have some soft tissue left, which makes dinosaurs contemporary to us. And it's very strange you accept the mammoth to be 30,000 years old, while I thought you can't see further than 6,000 years. I normally don't engage on creationists because they're stubborn as a donkey.   
 "