Can Scientists really create Dinosaurs with other animal DNA?

We can't do it yet. But in the not too distant future I believe we will be able to produce animals which look more like their genetic ancestors than their genetic source. And birds were once dinosaurs, so they carry all the codes needed.

Technically no. A damaged set of DNA cannot merge with another damaged set of DNA chromosomes.
Separating the chromosomes does permanent damage and there is no way for a sperm or egg cell to accept them. Cells do not create chromosomes they multiply. When you take a chromosomes and break it apart from it's full set to attach it to a sperm cell or egg cell they lack the necessary Habitual qualities and physical components to actually co-exist and prevail.

in addition. When you take DNA from or put it in a cell. That cell has no means of actually surviving. It ahs no environment to continue in, and the cell without a natural environment has no Intent, and thus does not develop.
It requires a map/illustration of genetic code which is was designed to fulfill to do anything.

Cloning is a conspiracy to prove how gullible people are. multi million dollar experiment thorough advertising to promote atheist perspectives and ideologies to college girls, machineries, and ruthless capitalist business men.

2 half cells(sex cells) are not the same thing as two halves of a full healthy cell.

the half cells are meant to unite. A full cell is not intended to split, and does not have reconstructive components.

1 full cell DNA does not = 2 sex cell chromosome sets.
< + > = X ,
X divided by 2 = | + |
chemistry.

When I think about this topic, it always occurs to me that many birds are absolutely brilliant. It makes me wonder if any of the dinosaurs were that smart.

So I take it you failed your chemistry, biology and math classes?

Are you even aware of how they would conduct a dinosaur/animal hybrid?

They take the DNA of the dinosaur and infuse it into a healthy cell by first removing the DNA of the healthy cell. Then fertilize it with the target animal.

So it's not half of anything. It's a fully functioning cell with dinosaur DNA and the fertilization of healthy animal DNA.

I think there's a good chance they posessed very similar intelligence.

Krumple.. have you passed Biology class? DNA decomposes. XD ahahahahah. holy cow.

IN addition DNA transferred into another cell has never been observed to accomplish anything. The cells they do that to do not replicate.

You are a moron.

Is exactly how they clone animals .

We must talk softly or Gomer will barge in yelling who the hell said that they have dinosaur DNA .

NOBODY HAS ANY DINO DNA with which to base the genome. Pwrhaps ANU can tell you how we do it.
So far, the only way is to turn existing genes off or on in various sequences in birds and we may see some small theropod dinosaur- like reptiles. OR NOT

Jack Horner is trying to get funding to have some genomics group do just that. My pet crow was waaay more intelligent than ANUS.
Hed know when to shut up when he was losing an argument, apparently thats something ANUS has never learnt.

Oh great ! Now look what you've done ! Gomer's here with his rock collection and will never admit to being wrong, especially when he totally screws up the idea of a thread or post and it is obvious to everyone he is making a fool of himself . He will just assume no one reads his posts so they wont know .

On this occasion, he is correct . There is also a process of finding proteins that suggest certain DNA existed, but at the moment these are way too broad an suggestion to warrant attention . IF we knew all the DNA of a particular animal and IF we could manipulate its DNA to the skeletal structure of a dinosaur, we will still be at a loss as to all the soft tissue DNA .

This will probably always be based on assumption and we will have no way of knowing IF it is correct or not . So we might end up with something that LOOKS like what we think a dinosaur looked like, but how close is it really ?

Some examples : The Brachiosaurus was displayed with its head up . Then someone's experiments found it couldn't keep up the blood pressure to that height but this was full of assumptions and doesn't prove anything . Its circulation system may have had methods, such as a second "type of heart" half way up its neck, or it may have used capillary action, or any mechanism that we are not aware of . Another example is T-Rex being a tail dragger . This is how it was displayed in museums . Current opinion is that it walked with its head and tail in a straight horizontal line . Every generation things it has a handle on things, but the next generation always finds mistakes and then thinks it has a handle on things .

Krumple.. have you passed Biology class? DNA decomposes. XD ahahahahah. holy cow.

DNA without somatic cells is like a pizza without a crust.

I don't like the crust. I eat it only out of a sense of duty.

It's true that DNA does decompose however; not all sources decompose at the same rate. But regardless of that there are ways in which dinosaur DNA get's preserved. If you have ever seen the first Jurassic Park movie they actually use one of these methods that is a legitimate source. Ancient mosquitoes that were trapped in the sap of an amber tree shortly after they sucked the blood from a dinosaur. They fed on the dinosaur and then landed on an amber tree that was dripping sap and the sap happened to land on the mosquito trapping it and preserving not only the mosquito's body but the blood with in it. The sap hardened like a crystal and got buried in the dirt later then discovered by dinosaur bone hunters. They are actually very common, a few museums have a few dozen of these with different types of ancient insects preserved perfectly.

that was fiction. Theyve actually tried to search for DNA based on the book and, after wasting a bit f money, a report was done in PLOS several years ago.
"Diagenesis (hardening) of resin into amber will, alone, degrade any residual DNA"