Pollen problem

Researchers have reported finding several types of pollen from flowering plants in ‘dinosaur rock’ (Middle Triassic).¹ On the evolutionary timeline this puts the origin of flowering plants ‘100 million years earlier’ than previously accepted.
Although such extensions in fossil ranges happen quite often,² this one negates a long-held dogma of the evolutionary storyline. That is because these fossils would mean that flowering plants were present even at the beginning of the supposed dinosaur era.
Consequently the dioramas in museums, and children’s books on dinosaurs, ought to show flowering plants living at the same time as dinosaurs. To date, however, you would be hard-pressed to find any such plants illustrated, reinforcing the false idea that dinosaurs lived in an entirely different ‘other world’.

These fossils would mean that flowering plants were present even at the beginning of the supposed dinosaur era.

The Bible tells us that the creation of plants (including flowering plants) on Day 3 of Creation Week actually predated the creation of dinosaurs on Day 6. And the rock strata with fossils do not represent the order of appearance and extinction over billions of years as the evolutionary paradigm would claim, but instead reflect the order of burial during and since the global Flood of Noah’s day (Genesis 6–9; cf. Luke 17:26–27), only about 4,500 years ago.
No wonder that one finds pollen all the way down in Precambrian strata (supposedly more than a billion years before dinosaurs!).³ Pollen, and many other fossils dramatically ‘out of place’ in relation to evolution’s supposed ‘timeline’, present a major problem to defenders of Darwin’s ideas.
http://creation.com/pollen-problem

Good Question...

Snakes with Legs?

by Brian Thomas, M.S. *

Evidence for Creation

As weird as it may sound, some snakes had legs. Fossils reveal little legs on ancient snakes that have apparently been extinct for some time. Yet, those had only hind legs. Now, in the journal Science researchers describe a new fossil with four limbs. They suggest that this new fossil illustrates how legged snakes evolved from legged lizards. Is this accurate?
Researchers have known that all legged snakes looked like snakes. They were long and tubular with many vertebrae. Legged snake fossils also have the characteristic snake skull. For example, lizard skulls have a raised eyebrow ridge, but the top of a snake's skull is flat.
This new fossil named Tetrapodophis found in a private collection is no exception to the trend. The Science study authors wrote, "The snake-like spine and reduced limbs of Tetrapodophis suggest that the animal engaged in characteristic serpentine locomotion, with the limbs playing little or no role in locomotion."¹ Perhaps they didn't play a role in locomotion, but maybe they played a role in mating—like the hind spurs of modern pythons.
http://www.icr.org/article/8949

References

Martill, D. M., H. Tischlinger, and N. R. Longrich. 2015. A four-legged snake from the Early Cretaceous of Gondwana. Science. 349 (6246): 416-419.
Or possibly it was not a snake. Some paleontologists wonder if it was an extinct amphibian. See Perkins, S. Four-legged snake fossil stuns scientists—and ignites controversy. Science News. Posted on news.sciencemag.org July 23, 2015, accessed August 4, 2015.

*Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on August 10, 2015.