Advertisement
This article offers numerous evidences of dinosaur man coexistence refuting the evolutionist claim that Dinosaurs existed “millions and millions of years before man and higher mammals. My opponents will of course reject this evidence out of hand as “unscientific”, “myths”, “from a biased source” etc. . They are not interested in the truth, and probably unable to discern it if they see it. Yet an honest reader will be surprised that such overwhelming evidence exists and wonder why this information has been withheld from them by public education, media, textbooks, teachers and professors. The bible teaches that man and dinosaurs were created on day 6, along with all other land dwelling mammals. It also describes a great flood which swept over the world and the world that then was, perished. The fossils we now see in the rocks are largely deposits from this flood, not depositions over millions of years, but rather over a single year.
The full article with pictures can be found here: www.apologeticspress.org/articles/15
An article in the January 1993 National Geographic boldly proclaimed: “No human being has ever seen a live dinosaur” (“Age of the Dinosaurs,” 1993, 183[1]:142). The evidence, however, reveals an entirely different story. Consider the following:
The Doheny Expedition
In the late 1800s, Samuel Hubbard, honorary curator of archaeology at the Oakland, California, Museum of Natural History, was excavating ancient Indian dwellings in the Hava Supai Canyon in Arizona. On the walls of the canyon where the Indians’ ancestors once lived, Dr. Hubbard found elegant drawings of an elephant, an ibex, a dinosaur, and other animals. He stated concerning the dinosaur drawing: “Taken all in all, the proportions are good.” He further suggested that the huge reptile is “depicted in the attitude in which man would be most likely to see it—reared on its hind legs, balancing with the long tail, either feeding or in fighting position, possibly defending itself against a party of men” (as quoted in Verrill, 1954, pp. 155ff.). Dr. Hubbard also noted:
The fact that some prehistoric man made a pictograph of a dinosaur on the walls of this canyon upsets completely all of our theories regarding the antiquity of man.... The fact that the animal is upright and balanced on its tail would seem to indicate that the prehistoric artist must have seen it alive (1925, pp. 5,7, emp. in orig.).
Nearby, Dr. Hubbard and his team of archaeologists discovered dinosaur tracks preserved in strata identified as Triassic—alleged by evolutionists to be more than 165 million years old. Question: How could Indians have known how to draw such a perfect picture of an animal (the dinosaur) that they never had seen (or had described to them by someone who had seen it)?
According to the belief commonly held by evolutionists, no advanced mammals were present during the “age of the dinosaurs.” Artists’ reconstructions generally show the huge reptiles living in swamps, surrounded only by other species of dinosaurs. The late evolutionary paleontologist George Gaylord Simpson suggested that the only mammals that had evolved up to that point in time (even at the very end of the Cretaceous period) were supposedly “small, mostly about mouse-sized, and rare” (Simpson, et al., 1957, p. 797). In his book, Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, Stephen J. Gould addressed the same issue when he wrote:
Mammals evolved at the end of the Triassic, at the same time as dinosaurs, or just a tad later. Mammals spent their first hundred million years—two-thirds of their total history—as small creatures living in the nooks and crannies of a dinosaur’s world. Their sixty million years of success following the demise of the dinosaurs has been something of an afterthought (1989, p. 318).
It thus is completely unthinkable, in evolutionary terms, that dinosaurs and advanced mammals (like elephants or giraffes) could have co-existed. Again, however, Dr. Hubbard’s discoveries have “thrown a monkey wrench” into the evolutionary timescale.
However, a discovery reported in the January 13, 2005, issue of Nature challenged everything evolutionists have ever maintained regarding dinosaurs and mammals. The Associated Press reported: “Villagers digging in China’s rich fossil beds have uncovered the preserved remains of a tiny dinosaur in the belly of a mammal, a startling discovery for scientists who have long believed early mammals couldn’t possibly attack and eat a dinosaur” (Verrengia, 2005). Not only do we now have additional proof of mammals coexisting with dinosaurs, but we also have scientific evidence of a large mammal eating a dinosaur! The authors discovered the fossil remains of two different mammals. One was 50% larger than previous mammal fossils that were considered to be living with the dinosaurs, and was named Repenomamus giganticus. The other, Repenomamus robustus was fully intact—and had a dinosaur in its stomach. Yaoming Hu and his colleagues noted:
During preparation of the specimen a patch of small bones was revealed within the ribcage, on the ventral sides of the posterior left thoracic ribs and vertebrae, where the stomach is positioned in extant mammals. Unduplicated dentition [teeth—BH], limb bones and phalanges [bones of the toes or “fingers”—] in the patch confirm that these bones belong to a juvenile individual of Psittacosaurus, an herbivorous dinosaur that is common in Jehol Biota. The serrated teeth in the patched skeleton are typical of juvenile Psittacosaurus. The skull and most of the skeleton of the juvenile Psittacosaurus are broken, disarticulated and displaced, in contrast to the preservation of the R. robustus skeleton, which is essentially in its original anatomical relation. Although fragmentary, the bones of the Psittacosaurus are packed in a restricted area. These conditions indicate that the juvenile skeleton of Psittacosaurus is the remaining stomach contents of the mammal (Hu, et al., 2005, 433:151).
To complicate matters, researchers reported in the April 18, 2002 issue of Nature, one of the premier science journals in the world, that they now have determined that the “last common ancestor of extant primates” existed (as dated by evolutionary dating methods) 85 million years ago (Tavaré, et al., 2002). Since dinosaurs are supposed to have died out 65 million years ago, that means the primate would have lived with the dinosaurs for at least 20 million years. One of the co-authors of the Nature paper, Christophe Soligo of London’s Natural History Museum, stated in regard to the find: “What we demonstrate is that modern orders of mammals appeared well before dinosaurs disappeared...” (see “Primate Ancestor Lived with Dinos,” 2002). So much for the belief that mammals evolved “just a tad later” than the dinosaurs.
Ica Burial Stones
Javier Cabrera Darquea came into possession of his first burial stone (from the Ica section of the country of Peru) when he was given one as a paperweight for his birthday. Ironically, he could recall his own father also possessing similar oddly carved stones that his family found in their fields in the 1930s. Dr. Darquea sought out the origin of his unique gift, in an effort to amass a collection of these unique stones, and eventually assembled over 11,000 of them. The rocks turned out to be ancient burial stones that the Inca Indians placed with their dead. Almost one-third of the stones depicted specific types of dinosaurs (such as Triceratops and Stegosaurus) and various pterosaurs. The type of art form represented by these stones, and their location, dated them to the time of the Inca Culture, c. A.D. 500-1500. How could these ancient Indians have known the anatomy of these creatures if they never had witnessed them firsthand?
Validation of these stones comes from a full understanding of their history. In the 1570s, the Indian historian and chronicler of the Incas, Juan de Santa Cruz Llamgui, wrote about the engraved stones. He noted that Conquistadors had taken some of the stones back to Spain, and wrote that at the time of the Inca Pachachuti, many carved stones had been found in the kingdom of Chinca, in Chinchayunga. On October 3, 1993, the OJO, Lima Domingo, a major newspaper based in Lima, Peru, reported a Spanish priest traveling in the area of Ica in 1525, inquiring about the unusual stones that had strange animals carved on them. These reports verify that the stones were in existence long before those discovered by Dr. Darquea. Since that time, other investigators have had the opportunity to observe stones in Nasca tombs, as well as to inspect the entire Darquea collection.
Interestingly, several Diplodocus-like dinosaurs on the stones have what appear to be dermal frills—something never previously reported by scientists. In 1992, however, dermal frills were found during an examination of fossilized remains of sauropods. In an article titled “New Look for Sauropod Dinosaurs,” paleontologist Stephen Czerkas noted:
Recent discovery of fossilized sauropod (diplodocid) skin impressions reveals a significantly different appearance for these dinosaurs. The fossilized skin demonstrates that a median row of [dermal] spines was present.... Some are quite narrow, and others are broader and more conical (1992, 20:1068).
Also, the skin of many of the carved dinosaurs resembled bumpy rosettes. For many years, scientists pointed to this as proof that these stones were not scientifically accurate. However, more recent discoveries of fossilized dinosaur skin and embryos have silenced the critics. In more than one report, these bumpy rosettes have been identified and discussed. In fact, one of the discoveries comes from the same continent as the Ica burial stones. Luis Chiappe and colleagues discussed sauropod dinosaur embryos, noting:
The general skin pattern consists of round, non-overlapping, tubercle-like scales.... A rosette pattern of scales is present in PVPH-130 [designation for one of the specimens—BH/BT] (Chiappe, et al., 1998, 396:259).
Again, we must ask: How could the Incas have drawn such accurate pictures of dinosaurs if they never had seen the animals (or had them described by someone who had seen them)? [For a discussion of Dr. Darquea’s research, see Swift, 1997].
Natural Bridges National Monument Petroglyph
Natural Bridges National Monument is located in a desolate area in southeastern Utah. Visitors to this site will see where the White River has carved meandering paths through the sandstone rock. Three natural bridges have formed where these wandering streams have undercut the above rock formations: Sipapu Bridge (the second largest natural bridge in the world); Kachina Bridge; and Owachomo Bridge. It is at Kachina Bridge where an Indian petroglyph depicting a dinosaur was discovered. In fact, visitors to the site can see three or four drawings that appear to be dinosaur-like creatures. Francis Barnes, an evolutionist and widely recognized authority on rock art of the American Southwest, had this to say about this find just outside of Blanding, Utah:
There is a petroglyph in Natural Bridges National Monument that bears a startling resemblance to a dinosaur, specifically a Brontosaurus, with long tail and neck, small head and all. In the San Rafael Swell, there is a pictograph that looks very much like a pterosaur, a Cretaceous flying reptile. The artists who created this “pterosaur,” and the “dinosaur,” could of course, have been trying to portray some other real or imagined creatures. But what about other animals seen on rock art panels, such as “impalas,” “ostriches,” “mammoths” and others that either are long extinct in the western hemisphere or were never here at all? Such anomalous rock art figures can be explained away, but they still tend to cast doubt upon the admittedly flimsy relative-time age-dating schemes used by archaeologists (Barnes and Pendleton, 1979, pp. 201-202).
If National Geographic is correct in stating that “no human being has ever seen a live dinosaur,” then whence came the models for these petroglyphs?
The Acambaro Figurines
On a bright and sunny morning in July 1944, Waldemar Julsrud, a German merchant in Acambaro, Mexico, found himself riding on horseback on the lower slope of El Toro (The Bull) Mountain. From his elevated vantage point, Mr. Julsrud spotted some partially exposed, hewn stones and a ceramic object half buried in the dirt. After climbing off his horse, he dug the stones (and a few ceramic pieces) out of the ground. Being somewhat archaeologically astute, Julsrud immediately realized that these artifacts were unlike anything that he had ever seen. The objects he held in his hand seemed distinctively different than those from other known Indian cultures. He eventually worked out a deal with a local farmer to excavate these precious pieces.
Eventually, over 33,500 figurines and artifacts of ceramic and stone (including some in jade) were uncovered. A key feature of this discovery was the fact that many of the artifacts were highly detailed dinosaur figurines. Charles Hapgood, a professor of history and anthropology at Keene State College (of the University of New Hampshire), became interested in the figurines and decided to investigate firsthand. Initially, Hapgood was a self-confessed (but open-minded) skeptic. However, after witnessing the excavations (even going so far as to dictate specific locations for the workers doing the digging), and after examining the figurines personally, he became a believer. He made his first visit to Acambaro in 1955, returned on numerous occasions, and eventually authored a book about his eighteen years of research into the figurines (see Hapgood, 2000). Consider the following measures, enacted to establish the authenticity of the Acambaro collection:
When Teledynes Isotopes laboratories performed dating tests on the carbon deposited during firing on ceramic samples submitted by Hapgood, dates of up to 4530 B.C. obtained. Arthur M. Young, the inventor of the Bell Helicopter, who had sponsored Hapgood’s investigation along with [Erle Stanley] Gardner [author of the Perry Mason mysteries—BH/BT], submitted Julsrud artifact samples [i.e., the Acambaro figurines—BH/BT] to the University of Pennsylvania for dating. Radiocarbon dating performed by Dr. Froelich Rainey in the laboratories of the University indicated that this culture may have been developed between 6,400 and 3,500 years ago. Additional tests using thermoluminescence method of dating pottery were performed. They produced dates of up to 4,500 B.P. (Before Present), or 2500 B.C., which upset the professional archaeologists and set off within the scientific and museum world a controversy over the accuracy of thermoluminescence dating. Retesting was done, and it was announced that because of anomalous factors in the clays it was impossible to determine an accurate date (Hapgood, p. 17).
According to David Childress, who penned the foreword to Hapgood’s book, the most recent thermoluminescence testing done on Acambaro pottery fragments (taken by Bill Cote and John H. Tierney during the filming of the video, Jurassic Art, in the early 1990s) obtained results of 3,975±55 B.P. (Hapgood, p. 18). Consider also the fact that teeth from an extinct ice-age horse, the skeleton of a woolly mammoth, and a number of human skulls also were found at the same site as the ceramic artifacts. Hapgood noted: “I later took these teeth to Dr. George Gaylord Simpson, America’s leading paleontologist, at the Museum of Natural History. He identified them as the teeth of Equus conversidans owen, an extinct horse of the ice age” (p. 82). Thus, the collection had evidence of extinct animals, human skulls, and dinosaur carvings from the same culture of people. But how could this be?
In 1999, Dennis Swift (who also was personally acquainted with Javier Darquea of Peru) made a trip to view the figurines. After receiving permission from the local authorities, he began to unwrap the ceramic figures. Dr. Swift noted:
There was an absolutely astonishing moment of breathless magnitude as one object was unwrapped and there before us was an Iguanodon dinosaur figurine. [For documentation on the Iguanodon discovery to which Swift alluded, see The Dinosaur Encyclopedia (Michael Benton, 1992, New York: Simon & Schuster, p. 80).]
Childress went on to note in an article titled “In Search of Sea Monsters”:
Adding to the mind-boggling aspects of this controversy is the fact that the Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia through the late Director of Prehispanic Monuments, Dr. Eduardo Noguera, admitted “the apparent scientific legality with which these objects were found.” Despite evidence of their own eyes, however, officials declared that because of the objects’ “fantastic” nature, they had to have been a hoax! (no date).
This archaeological “hoax” presents insoluble problems for evolutionists. As Childress put it, “Most ‘respectable’ archaeologists will walk around the Acambaro mystery as if it were a land mine. The very existence of the figurines threatens the ivory tower of the current paradigm of history” (as quoted in Hapgood, 2000, p. 20).
Dinosaur Bones Only Thousands of Years Old?
In 1990, samples of various dinosaur bones were submitted for Carbon-14 dating to the University of Arizona’s department of geosciences’ laboratory of isotope geochemistry. Bones from an Allosaurus and an Acrocanthosaurus were among those sent to the university’s testing facilities to undergo a “blind” dating procedure (which means that the technicians performing the tests did not know that the bones had come from dinosaurs). Not realizing that the samples were from dinosaurs prevented “evolutionary bias,” and helped ensure that the results were as accurate as possible (within the recognized assumptions and limits of the C-14 dating method). We have in our possession—on the official stationery of the University of Arizona—a copy of the test results for the Allosaurus bones (see reproduction at right, sample B). Amazingly, the oldest C-14 date assigned to those bones was a mere 16,120 years (and only 23,760 years for the Acrocanthosaurus fossils; see Dahmer, et al., 1990). Both dates are a far cry from the millions of years that evolutionists suggest should be assigned to dinosaur fossils.
The Monster of Troy
The February 26, 2000 issue of Science News contained an article that diligently attempted to defuse a potential bomb within the evolutionary camp (Hesman, 2000). Sitting inside the Boston Museum of Fine Arts is an ancient Greek vase. This vase is covered by a series of somewhat unusual paintings, including one that is bewildering to both archaeologists and evolutionists. The vase portrays a monster that possesses the head of a dinosaur. And, to make matters worse, the images on the vase depict men and dinosaurs as coexisting.
Known as the Hesione vase, this elegant potteryware was created around 550 B.C., and depicts the Greek hero Heracles rescuing Hesione from the monster of Troy. The tale of the monster was first told by Homer in the eighth century B.C. In this legend, a terrifying monster suddenly appeared on the Trojan coast after a flood, and began preying on the farmers in the neighborhood of Sigeum. The king’s daughter, Hesione, was sent to be offered as a sacrifice to the monster, but according to the legend, Heracles arrived in time to kill it. The painting on the vase shows Hesione and Heracles battling the monster, with Hesione tossing rocks at it, and Heracles shooting arrows. You can understand the obvious plight of evolutionists when confronted with such imagery. Thus, in an effort to “explain” this artwork in light of evolutionary timescales, the editors of Science News concluded that the paintings on this unusual vase simply prove that ancient people dug fossils, too. They believe that this painting was the end result of fossils—possibly of an extinct giraffe—that were dug up thousands of years ago. What’s that old saying? If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a—giraffe?
Human Footprints with Dinosaur Tracks?
Consider also that in 1983, researchers reported in the science and engineering news section of The Moscow News that they had discovered what appeared to be a human footprint in 150-million-year-old Jurassic rock, next to a giant, three-toed dinosaur footprint. The article stated:
This spring, an expedition from the Institute of Geology of the Turkmen SSR Academy of Sciences found over 1,500 tracks left by dinosaurs in the mountains in the southeast of the Republic [Turkmen Republic—BH/BT]. Impressions resembling in shape a human footprint were discovered next to the tracks of prehistoric animals (see “Tracking Dinosaurs,” 1983, 24:10).
Naturally, this report has received precious little attention, given the mindset of evolutionists.
Historical Records of Flying Reptiles
Additional evidence for the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs is derived from various ancient writings. For instance, the largest creature ever known to have soared in the skies above the Earth was a pterosaur identified as Quetzalcoatlus (KWET-zal-COAT-lus). The fossil bones of one of these flying reptiles were unearthed in 1972 at Big Bend National Park in Texas. This Quetzalcoatlus had a wingspan of 48 feet (which is longer than some small airplanes!). While these giant birds are not classified scientifically as dinosaurs (since they are not strictly land-dwelling creatures, as dinosaurs were, by definition), they often are lumped into a group of animals known as “dinosaur-like” creatures. Notice the following quotation taken from Herodotus, a Greek historian from the fifth century B.C., who wrote:
There is a place in Arabia...to which I went, on hearing of some winged serpents; and when I arrived there, I saw bones and spines of serpents, in such quantities as it would be impossible to describe. The form of the serpent is like that of a water-snake; but he has wings without feathers, and as like as possible to the wings of a bat (1850, pp. 75-76, emp. added).
Herodotus knew of flying reptiles, and recognized that these creatures were neither birds, mammals, nor insects—but reptiles with wings. Notice also what the Jewish historian Josephus wrote 2,000 years ago about Moses and his army having a difficult time passing through a particular region because of the presence of flying serpents.
When the ground was difficult to be passed over, because of the multitude of serpents (which it produces in vast numbers...some of which ascend out of the ground unseen, and also fly in the air, and do come upon men at unawares, and do them a mischief)....
[Moses] made baskets like unto arks, of sedge, and filled them with ibes [i.e., birds], and carried them along with them; which animal is the greatest enemy to serpents imaginable, for they fly from them when they come near them; and as they fly they are caught and devoured by them (n.d., 2:10:2, emp. added).
Although these two historians do not mention the extremely large flying reptiles, they do record that snake-like winged creatures, which could fly, did live in the distant past. These reports are consistent with findings that A.H. Verrill reported in 1954 in his book, Strange Prehistoric Animals and Their Stories.
Primitive man, finding a fossil pterodactyl, might assume that the skeleton was that of some strange winged monster which still existed. Being totally ignorant of fossils and geology, an Indian or any other savage or semi-savage human being would never suspect that the bones had been reserved in rock for millions of years. Neither would it be possible for such primitive men to reconstruct mentally the creature as they appeared in life.... It is of course, inconceivable that the Cocle potter had first-hand knowledge of a living pterodactyl, ancient as the pottery is; yet had he been as familiar with the flying monsters as he was with pelicans and jaguars, he could not have depicted them more strikingly and accurately. Not only do the drawings show beak-like jaws armed with sharp teeth, but in addition the wings with two curved claws are depicted. Included also are the short, pointed tail, the reptilian head crest or appendages, and the strong hind feet with five-clawed toes on each (1954, pp. 55,57-58).
Obviously, the scientific evidence for the coexistence of dinosaurs and man speaks loudly, and yet it continues to fall on deaf ears within the evolutionary community. That silence, however, does little to change the documented facts, as we now know them.
CONCLUSION
Contrary to popular opinion, dinosaurs do not present a problem for creationists. In fact, quite the opposite is true. It is evolutionists who have a problem. While they continue to maintain, as the late paleontologist Roland T. Bird of the American Museum of Natural History once put it, that “no man had ever existed in the age of the reptiles” (1939, 43[5]:257), the evidence documents exactly the opposite.
The Mosaic record of the Creation is inexhaustively sublime. In it, we learn of the creation of the heavens and the Earth by an Almighty God. By divine fiat, light was formed and atmosphere was wrapped around this planet. Great seas were gathered together, and separated from dry land. The world of botany miraculously bloomed, and lights burst forth in the heavens. The waters swarmed with living creatures, and birds soared through the pristine air. Varieties of domestic animals and beasts were created and finally, man, the zenith of God’s creation, stood proudly upon the Earth’s bosom.
The dinosaur—one of the most majestic of God’s creatures—stood with man. No doubt they pondered each other’s existence. Today, we still stand amazed at these awesome giants. And as we do, their presence in the past should remind us of the magnificence of the God Who was able to speak them into existence by “the word of His power” (Hebrews 1:3). Awesome creatures—from the hand of an awesome Creator.
REFERENCES
“Age of the Dinosaurs” (1993), National Geographic, 183[1]:142, January.
Bakker, Robert T. (1986), The Dinosaur Heresies (New York: William Morrow).
Barnes F.A., and Michaelene Pendleton (1979), Canyon Country Prehistoric Indians: Their Cultures, Ruins, Artifacts and Rock Art (Salt Lake City, NV: Wasatch Publishers).
Bird, Roland T. (1939), “Thunder in His Footsteps,” Natural History, 43[5]:254-261, May.
Chiappe, Luis M., Rodolfo Coria, et al. (1998), “Sauropod Dinosaur Embryos from the Late Cretaceous of Patagonia,” Nature, 396:258-261, November 19.
Childress, David H. (no date), “In Search of Sea Monsters,” World Explorer, vol. 1 no. 7, [On-line], URL: www.wexclub.com/BackIssues/WEX7.html.
Clayton, John N. (1968a), “The History of Man on Planet Earth,” Does God Exist? Correspondence Course, Lesson 8.
Clayton, John N. (1968b), Teacher’s Manual, Does God Exist? Correspondence Course.
Clayton, John N. (1977), “Dinosaurs and the Bible,” Evidences of God, Volume I (South Bend, IN: Privately published by the author), pp. 149-151.
Clayton, John N. (1982), “Where Are the Dinosaurs?,” Does God Exist?, 9[10]:2-6, October.
Czerkas, Stephen (1992), “New Look for Sauropod Dinosaurs,” Geology, 20:1068-1070.
Dahmer, Lionel, D. Kouznetsov, et al. (1990), “Report on Chemical Analysis and Further Dating of Dinosaur Bones and Dinosaur Petroglyphs,” Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism, ed. Robert E. Walsh and Christopher L. Brooks (Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship), pp. 371-374.
Gould, Stephen Jay (1989), Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History (New York: W.W. Norton).
Hapgood, Charles (2000), Mystery in Acambaro (Kempton, IL: Adventures Unlimited Press).
Herodotus, (1850 reprint), Historiae, trans. Henry Clay (London: Henry G. Bohn).
Hesman, T. (2000), “Vase Shows that Ancients Dug Fossils, Too,” Science News, 157:133, February 26.
Hu, Yaoming, Jin Meng, Yuanqing Wang, and Chuankui Li (2005), “Large Mesozoic Mammals Fed on Young Dinosaurs,” Nature, 433:149-152, January 13.
Hubbard, Samuel (1925), Discoveries Relating to Prehistoric Man by the Doheny Scientific Expedition (Oakland, CA: Oakland Museum of Natural History).
Josephus, Flavius (no date), Antiquities of the Jews (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, reprint).
Morris, Henry M. (1984), The Biblical Basis for Modern Science (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
“Primate Ancestor Lived with Dinos” (2002), [On-line], URL: news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english...935558.stm.
Simpson, George Gaylord, C.S. Pittendrigh, and L.H. Tiffany (1957), Life: An Introduction to Biology (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company).
Swift, Dennis (1997), “Messages on Stone,” Creation Ex Nihilo, 19[2]:20-23, March-May.
Swift, Dennis (no date), “The Dinosaurs of Acambaro,” [On-line], URL: www.omniology.com/3-Ceramic-Dinos.html.
Tavaré, Simon, C.R. Marshall, et al. (2002), “Using the Fossil Record to Estimate the Age of the Last Common Ancestor of Extant Primates,” Nature, 416:726-729, April 18.
“Tracking Dinosaurs” (1983), Moscow News, 24:10.
Verrengia, Joseph B. (2005), “Fossils Show a Mammal Turned Tables, Devoured Dinosaur for Last Meal,” [On-line], URL: www.cp.org/english/onli...011204A.html.
Verrill, A.H. (1954), Strange Prehistoric Animals and Their History (Boston, MA: L.C. Page).
Wilson, Edward O. (1982), “Toward a Humanistic Biology,” The Humanist, September/October.
The full article with pictures can be found here: www.apologeticspress.org/articles/15
An article in the January 1993 National Geographic boldly proclaimed: “No human being has ever seen a live dinosaur” (“Age of the Dinosaurs,” 1993, 183[1]:142). The evidence, however, reveals an entirely different story. Consider the following:
The Doheny Expedition
In the late 1800s, Samuel Hubbard, honorary curator of archaeology at the Oakland, California, Museum of Natural History, was excavating ancient Indian dwellings in the Hava Supai Canyon in Arizona. On the walls of the canyon where the Indians’ ancestors once lived, Dr. Hubbard found elegant drawings of an elephant, an ibex, a dinosaur, and other animals. He stated concerning the dinosaur drawing: “Taken all in all, the proportions are good.” He further suggested that the huge reptile is “depicted in the attitude in which man would be most likely to see it—reared on its hind legs, balancing with the long tail, either feeding or in fighting position, possibly defending itself against a party of men” (as quoted in Verrill, 1954, pp. 155ff.). Dr. Hubbard also noted:
The fact that some prehistoric man made a pictograph of a dinosaur on the walls of this canyon upsets completely all of our theories regarding the antiquity of man.... The fact that the animal is upright and balanced on its tail would seem to indicate that the prehistoric artist must have seen it alive (1925, pp. 5,7, emp. in orig.).
Nearby, Dr. Hubbard and his team of archaeologists discovered dinosaur tracks preserved in strata identified as Triassic—alleged by evolutionists to be more than 165 million years old. Question: How could Indians have known how to draw such a perfect picture of an animal (the dinosaur) that they never had seen (or had described to them by someone who had seen it)?
According to the belief commonly held by evolutionists, no advanced mammals were present during the “age of the dinosaurs.” Artists’ reconstructions generally show the huge reptiles living in swamps, surrounded only by other species of dinosaurs. The late evolutionary paleontologist George Gaylord Simpson suggested that the only mammals that had evolved up to that point in time (even at the very end of the Cretaceous period) were supposedly “small, mostly about mouse-sized, and rare” (Simpson, et al., 1957, p. 797). In his book, Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, Stephen J. Gould addressed the same issue when he wrote:
Mammals evolved at the end of the Triassic, at the same time as dinosaurs, or just a tad later. Mammals spent their first hundred million years—two-thirds of their total history—as small creatures living in the nooks and crannies of a dinosaur’s world. Their sixty million years of success following the demise of the dinosaurs has been something of an afterthought (1989, p. 318).
It thus is completely unthinkable, in evolutionary terms, that dinosaurs and advanced mammals (like elephants or giraffes) could have co-existed. Again, however, Dr. Hubbard’s discoveries have “thrown a monkey wrench” into the evolutionary timescale.
However, a discovery reported in the January 13, 2005, issue of Nature challenged everything evolutionists have ever maintained regarding dinosaurs and mammals. The Associated Press reported: “Villagers digging in China’s rich fossil beds have uncovered the preserved remains of a tiny dinosaur in the belly of a mammal, a startling discovery for scientists who have long believed early mammals couldn’t possibly attack and eat a dinosaur” (Verrengia, 2005). Not only do we now have additional proof of mammals coexisting with dinosaurs, but we also have scientific evidence of a large mammal eating a dinosaur! The authors discovered the fossil remains of two different mammals. One was 50% larger than previous mammal fossils that were considered to be living with the dinosaurs, and was named Repenomamus giganticus. The other, Repenomamus robustus was fully intact—and had a dinosaur in its stomach. Yaoming Hu and his colleagues noted:
During preparation of the specimen a patch of small bones was revealed within the ribcage, on the ventral sides of the posterior left thoracic ribs and vertebrae, where the stomach is positioned in extant mammals. Unduplicated dentition [teeth—BH], limb bones and phalanges [bones of the toes or “fingers”—] in the patch confirm that these bones belong to a juvenile individual of Psittacosaurus, an herbivorous dinosaur that is common in Jehol Biota. The serrated teeth in the patched skeleton are typical of juvenile Psittacosaurus. The skull and most of the skeleton of the juvenile Psittacosaurus are broken, disarticulated and displaced, in contrast to the preservation of the R. robustus skeleton, which is essentially in its original anatomical relation. Although fragmentary, the bones of the Psittacosaurus are packed in a restricted area. These conditions indicate that the juvenile skeleton of Psittacosaurus is the remaining stomach contents of the mammal (Hu, et al., 2005, 433:151).
To complicate matters, researchers reported in the April 18, 2002 issue of Nature, one of the premier science journals in the world, that they now have determined that the “last common ancestor of extant primates” existed (as dated by evolutionary dating methods) 85 million years ago (Tavaré, et al., 2002). Since dinosaurs are supposed to have died out 65 million years ago, that means the primate would have lived with the dinosaurs for at least 20 million years. One of the co-authors of the Nature paper, Christophe Soligo of London’s Natural History Museum, stated in regard to the find: “What we demonstrate is that modern orders of mammals appeared well before dinosaurs disappeared...” (see “Primate Ancestor Lived with Dinos,” 2002). So much for the belief that mammals evolved “just a tad later” than the dinosaurs.
Ica Burial Stones
Javier Cabrera Darquea came into possession of his first burial stone (from the Ica section of the country of Peru) when he was given one as a paperweight for his birthday. Ironically, he could recall his own father also possessing similar oddly carved stones that his family found in their fields in the 1930s. Dr. Darquea sought out the origin of his unique gift, in an effort to amass a collection of these unique stones, and eventually assembled over 11,000 of them. The rocks turned out to be ancient burial stones that the Inca Indians placed with their dead. Almost one-third of the stones depicted specific types of dinosaurs (such as Triceratops and Stegosaurus) and various pterosaurs. The type of art form represented by these stones, and their location, dated them to the time of the Inca Culture, c. A.D. 500-1500. How could these ancient Indians have known the anatomy of these creatures if they never had witnessed them firsthand?
Validation of these stones comes from a full understanding of their history. In the 1570s, the Indian historian and chronicler of the Incas, Juan de Santa Cruz Llamgui, wrote about the engraved stones. He noted that Conquistadors had taken some of the stones back to Spain, and wrote that at the time of the Inca Pachachuti, many carved stones had been found in the kingdom of Chinca, in Chinchayunga. On October 3, 1993, the OJO, Lima Domingo, a major newspaper based in Lima, Peru, reported a Spanish priest traveling in the area of Ica in 1525, inquiring about the unusual stones that had strange animals carved on them. These reports verify that the stones were in existence long before those discovered by Dr. Darquea. Since that time, other investigators have had the opportunity to observe stones in Nasca tombs, as well as to inspect the entire Darquea collection.
Interestingly, several Diplodocus-like dinosaurs on the stones have what appear to be dermal frills—something never previously reported by scientists. In 1992, however, dermal frills were found during an examination of fossilized remains of sauropods. In an article titled “New Look for Sauropod Dinosaurs,” paleontologist Stephen Czerkas noted:
Recent discovery of fossilized sauropod (diplodocid) skin impressions reveals a significantly different appearance for these dinosaurs. The fossilized skin demonstrates that a median row of [dermal] spines was present.... Some are quite narrow, and others are broader and more conical (1992, 20:1068).
Also, the skin of many of the carved dinosaurs resembled bumpy rosettes. For many years, scientists pointed to this as proof that these stones were not scientifically accurate. However, more recent discoveries of fossilized dinosaur skin and embryos have silenced the critics. In more than one report, these bumpy rosettes have been identified and discussed. In fact, one of the discoveries comes from the same continent as the Ica burial stones. Luis Chiappe and colleagues discussed sauropod dinosaur embryos, noting:
The general skin pattern consists of round, non-overlapping, tubercle-like scales.... A rosette pattern of scales is present in PVPH-130 [designation for one of the specimens—BH/BT] (Chiappe, et al., 1998, 396:259).
Again, we must ask: How could the Incas have drawn such accurate pictures of dinosaurs if they never had seen the animals (or had them described by someone who had seen them)? [For a discussion of Dr. Darquea’s research, see Swift, 1997].
Natural Bridges National Monument Petroglyph
Natural Bridges National Monument is located in a desolate area in southeastern Utah. Visitors to this site will see where the White River has carved meandering paths through the sandstone rock. Three natural bridges have formed where these wandering streams have undercut the above rock formations: Sipapu Bridge (the second largest natural bridge in the world); Kachina Bridge; and Owachomo Bridge. It is at Kachina Bridge where an Indian petroglyph depicting a dinosaur was discovered. In fact, visitors to the site can see three or four drawings that appear to be dinosaur-like creatures. Francis Barnes, an evolutionist and widely recognized authority on rock art of the American Southwest, had this to say about this find just outside of Blanding, Utah:
There is a petroglyph in Natural Bridges National Monument that bears a startling resemblance to a dinosaur, specifically a Brontosaurus, with long tail and neck, small head and all. In the San Rafael Swell, there is a pictograph that looks very much like a pterosaur, a Cretaceous flying reptile. The artists who created this “pterosaur,” and the “dinosaur,” could of course, have been trying to portray some other real or imagined creatures. But what about other animals seen on rock art panels, such as “impalas,” “ostriches,” “mammoths” and others that either are long extinct in the western hemisphere or were never here at all? Such anomalous rock art figures can be explained away, but they still tend to cast doubt upon the admittedly flimsy relative-time age-dating schemes used by archaeologists (Barnes and Pendleton, 1979, pp. 201-202).
If National Geographic is correct in stating that “no human being has ever seen a live dinosaur,” then whence came the models for these petroglyphs?
The Acambaro Figurines
On a bright and sunny morning in July 1944, Waldemar Julsrud, a German merchant in Acambaro, Mexico, found himself riding on horseback on the lower slope of El Toro (The Bull) Mountain. From his elevated vantage point, Mr. Julsrud spotted some partially exposed, hewn stones and a ceramic object half buried in the dirt. After climbing off his horse, he dug the stones (and a few ceramic pieces) out of the ground. Being somewhat archaeologically astute, Julsrud immediately realized that these artifacts were unlike anything that he had ever seen. The objects he held in his hand seemed distinctively different than those from other known Indian cultures. He eventually worked out a deal with a local farmer to excavate these precious pieces.
Eventually, over 33,500 figurines and artifacts of ceramic and stone (including some in jade) were uncovered. A key feature of this discovery was the fact that many of the artifacts were highly detailed dinosaur figurines. Charles Hapgood, a professor of history and anthropology at Keene State College (of the University of New Hampshire), became interested in the figurines and decided to investigate firsthand. Initially, Hapgood was a self-confessed (but open-minded) skeptic. However, after witnessing the excavations (even going so far as to dictate specific locations for the workers doing the digging), and after examining the figurines personally, he became a believer. He made his first visit to Acambaro in 1955, returned on numerous occasions, and eventually authored a book about his eighteen years of research into the figurines (see Hapgood, 2000). Consider the following measures, enacted to establish the authenticity of the Acambaro collection:
When Teledynes Isotopes laboratories performed dating tests on the carbon deposited during firing on ceramic samples submitted by Hapgood, dates of up to 4530 B.C. obtained. Arthur M. Young, the inventor of the Bell Helicopter, who had sponsored Hapgood’s investigation along with [Erle Stanley] Gardner [author of the Perry Mason mysteries—BH/BT], submitted Julsrud artifact samples [i.e., the Acambaro figurines—BH/BT] to the University of Pennsylvania for dating. Radiocarbon dating performed by Dr. Froelich Rainey in the laboratories of the University indicated that this culture may have been developed between 6,400 and 3,500 years ago. Additional tests using thermoluminescence method of dating pottery were performed. They produced dates of up to 4,500 B.P. (Before Present), or 2500 B.C., which upset the professional archaeologists and set off within the scientific and museum world a controversy over the accuracy of thermoluminescence dating. Retesting was done, and it was announced that because of anomalous factors in the clays it was impossible to determine an accurate date (Hapgood, p. 17).
According to David Childress, who penned the foreword to Hapgood’s book, the most recent thermoluminescence testing done on Acambaro pottery fragments (taken by Bill Cote and John H. Tierney during the filming of the video, Jurassic Art, in the early 1990s) obtained results of 3,975±55 B.P. (Hapgood, p. 18). Consider also the fact that teeth from an extinct ice-age horse, the skeleton of a woolly mammoth, and a number of human skulls also were found at the same site as the ceramic artifacts. Hapgood noted: “I later took these teeth to Dr. George Gaylord Simpson, America’s leading paleontologist, at the Museum of Natural History. He identified them as the teeth of Equus conversidans owen, an extinct horse of the ice age” (p. 82). Thus, the collection had evidence of extinct animals, human skulls, and dinosaur carvings from the same culture of people. But how could this be?
In 1999, Dennis Swift (who also was personally acquainted with Javier Darquea of Peru) made a trip to view the figurines. After receiving permission from the local authorities, he began to unwrap the ceramic figures. Dr. Swift noted:
There was an absolutely astonishing moment of breathless magnitude as one object was unwrapped and there before us was an Iguanodon dinosaur figurine. [For documentation on the Iguanodon discovery to which Swift alluded, see The Dinosaur Encyclopedia (Michael Benton, 1992, New York: Simon & Schuster, p. 80).]
Childress went on to note in an article titled “In Search of Sea Monsters”:
Adding to the mind-boggling aspects of this controversy is the fact that the Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia through the late Director of Prehispanic Monuments, Dr. Eduardo Noguera, admitted “the apparent scientific legality with which these objects were found.” Despite evidence of their own eyes, however, officials declared that because of the objects’ “fantastic” nature, they had to have been a hoax! (no date).
This archaeological “hoax” presents insoluble problems for evolutionists. As Childress put it, “Most ‘respectable’ archaeologists will walk around the Acambaro mystery as if it were a land mine. The very existence of the figurines threatens the ivory tower of the current paradigm of history” (as quoted in Hapgood, 2000, p. 20).
Dinosaur Bones Only Thousands of Years Old?
In 1990, samples of various dinosaur bones were submitted for Carbon-14 dating to the University of Arizona’s department of geosciences’ laboratory of isotope geochemistry. Bones from an Allosaurus and an Acrocanthosaurus were among those sent to the university’s testing facilities to undergo a “blind” dating procedure (which means that the technicians performing the tests did not know that the bones had come from dinosaurs). Not realizing that the samples were from dinosaurs prevented “evolutionary bias,” and helped ensure that the results were as accurate as possible (within the recognized assumptions and limits of the C-14 dating method). We have in our possession—on the official stationery of the University of Arizona—a copy of the test results for the Allosaurus bones (see reproduction at right, sample B). Amazingly, the oldest C-14 date assigned to those bones was a mere 16,120 years (and only 23,760 years for the Acrocanthosaurus fossils; see Dahmer, et al., 1990). Both dates are a far cry from the millions of years that evolutionists suggest should be assigned to dinosaur fossils.
The Monster of Troy
The February 26, 2000 issue of Science News contained an article that diligently attempted to defuse a potential bomb within the evolutionary camp (Hesman, 2000). Sitting inside the Boston Museum of Fine Arts is an ancient Greek vase. This vase is covered by a series of somewhat unusual paintings, including one that is bewildering to both archaeologists and evolutionists. The vase portrays a monster that possesses the head of a dinosaur. And, to make matters worse, the images on the vase depict men and dinosaurs as coexisting.
Known as the Hesione vase, this elegant potteryware was created around 550 B.C., and depicts the Greek hero Heracles rescuing Hesione from the monster of Troy. The tale of the monster was first told by Homer in the eighth century B.C. In this legend, a terrifying monster suddenly appeared on the Trojan coast after a flood, and began preying on the farmers in the neighborhood of Sigeum. The king’s daughter, Hesione, was sent to be offered as a sacrifice to the monster, but according to the legend, Heracles arrived in time to kill it. The painting on the vase shows Hesione and Heracles battling the monster, with Hesione tossing rocks at it, and Heracles shooting arrows. You can understand the obvious plight of evolutionists when confronted with such imagery. Thus, in an effort to “explain” this artwork in light of evolutionary timescales, the editors of Science News concluded that the paintings on this unusual vase simply prove that ancient people dug fossils, too. They believe that this painting was the end result of fossils—possibly of an extinct giraffe—that were dug up thousands of years ago. What’s that old saying? If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a—giraffe?
Human Footprints with Dinosaur Tracks?
Consider also that in 1983, researchers reported in the science and engineering news section of The Moscow News that they had discovered what appeared to be a human footprint in 150-million-year-old Jurassic rock, next to a giant, three-toed dinosaur footprint. The article stated:
This spring, an expedition from the Institute of Geology of the Turkmen SSR Academy of Sciences found over 1,500 tracks left by dinosaurs in the mountains in the southeast of the Republic [Turkmen Republic—BH/BT]. Impressions resembling in shape a human footprint were discovered next to the tracks of prehistoric animals (see “Tracking Dinosaurs,” 1983, 24:10).
Naturally, this report has received precious little attention, given the mindset of evolutionists.
Historical Records of Flying Reptiles
Additional evidence for the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs is derived from various ancient writings. For instance, the largest creature ever known to have soared in the skies above the Earth was a pterosaur identified as Quetzalcoatlus (KWET-zal-COAT-lus). The fossil bones of one of these flying reptiles were unearthed in 1972 at Big Bend National Park in Texas. This Quetzalcoatlus had a wingspan of 48 feet (which is longer than some small airplanes!). While these giant birds are not classified scientifically as dinosaurs (since they are not strictly land-dwelling creatures, as dinosaurs were, by definition), they often are lumped into a group of animals known as “dinosaur-like” creatures. Notice the following quotation taken from Herodotus, a Greek historian from the fifth century B.C., who wrote:
There is a place in Arabia...to which I went, on hearing of some winged serpents; and when I arrived there, I saw bones and spines of serpents, in such quantities as it would be impossible to describe. The form of the serpent is like that of a water-snake; but he has wings without feathers, and as like as possible to the wings of a bat (1850, pp. 75-76, emp. added).
Herodotus knew of flying reptiles, and recognized that these creatures were neither birds, mammals, nor insects—but reptiles with wings. Notice also what the Jewish historian Josephus wrote 2,000 years ago about Moses and his army having a difficult time passing through a particular region because of the presence of flying serpents.
When the ground was difficult to be passed over, because of the multitude of serpents (which it produces in vast numbers...some of which ascend out of the ground unseen, and also fly in the air, and do come upon men at unawares, and do them a mischief)....
[Moses] made baskets like unto arks, of sedge, and filled them with ibes [i.e., birds], and carried them along with them; which animal is the greatest enemy to serpents imaginable, for they fly from them when they come near them; and as they fly they are caught and devoured by them (n.d., 2:10:2, emp. added).
Although these two historians do not mention the extremely large flying reptiles, they do record that snake-like winged creatures, which could fly, did live in the distant past. These reports are consistent with findings that A.H. Verrill reported in 1954 in his book, Strange Prehistoric Animals and Their Stories.
Primitive man, finding a fossil pterodactyl, might assume that the skeleton was that of some strange winged monster which still existed. Being totally ignorant of fossils and geology, an Indian or any other savage or semi-savage human being would never suspect that the bones had been reserved in rock for millions of years. Neither would it be possible for such primitive men to reconstruct mentally the creature as they appeared in life.... It is of course, inconceivable that the Cocle potter had first-hand knowledge of a living pterodactyl, ancient as the pottery is; yet had he been as familiar with the flying monsters as he was with pelicans and jaguars, he could not have depicted them more strikingly and accurately. Not only do the drawings show beak-like jaws armed with sharp teeth, but in addition the wings with two curved claws are depicted. Included also are the short, pointed tail, the reptilian head crest or appendages, and the strong hind feet with five-clawed toes on each (1954, pp. 55,57-58).
Obviously, the scientific evidence for the coexistence of dinosaurs and man speaks loudly, and yet it continues to fall on deaf ears within the evolutionary community. That silence, however, does little to change the documented facts, as we now know them.
CONCLUSION
Contrary to popular opinion, dinosaurs do not present a problem for creationists. In fact, quite the opposite is true. It is evolutionists who have a problem. While they continue to maintain, as the late paleontologist Roland T. Bird of the American Museum of Natural History once put it, that “no man had ever existed in the age of the reptiles” (1939, 43[5]:257), the evidence documents exactly the opposite.
The Mosaic record of the Creation is inexhaustively sublime. In it, we learn of the creation of the heavens and the Earth by an Almighty God. By divine fiat, light was formed and atmosphere was wrapped around this planet. Great seas were gathered together, and separated from dry land. The world of botany miraculously bloomed, and lights burst forth in the heavens. The waters swarmed with living creatures, and birds soared through the pristine air. Varieties of domestic animals and beasts were created and finally, man, the zenith of God’s creation, stood proudly upon the Earth’s bosom.
The dinosaur—one of the most majestic of God’s creatures—stood with man. No doubt they pondered each other’s existence. Today, we still stand amazed at these awesome giants. And as we do, their presence in the past should remind us of the magnificence of the God Who was able to speak them into existence by “the word of His power” (Hebrews 1:3). Awesome creatures—from the hand of an awesome Creator.
REFERENCES
“Age of the Dinosaurs” (1993), National Geographic, 183[1]:142, January.
Bakker, Robert T. (1986), The Dinosaur Heresies (New York: William Morrow).
Barnes F.A., and Michaelene Pendleton (1979), Canyon Country Prehistoric Indians: Their Cultures, Ruins, Artifacts and Rock Art (Salt Lake City, NV: Wasatch Publishers).
Bird, Roland T. (1939), “Thunder in His Footsteps,” Natural History, 43[5]:254-261, May.
Chiappe, Luis M., Rodolfo Coria, et al. (1998), “Sauropod Dinosaur Embryos from the Late Cretaceous of Patagonia,” Nature, 396:258-261, November 19.
Childress, David H. (no date), “In Search of Sea Monsters,” World Explorer, vol. 1 no. 7, [On-line], URL: www.wexclub.com/BackIssues/WEX7.html.
Clayton, John N. (1968a), “The History of Man on Planet Earth,” Does God Exist? Correspondence Course, Lesson 8.
Clayton, John N. (1968b), Teacher’s Manual, Does God Exist? Correspondence Course.
Clayton, John N. (1977), “Dinosaurs and the Bible,” Evidences of God, Volume I (South Bend, IN: Privately published by the author), pp. 149-151.
Clayton, John N. (1982), “Where Are the Dinosaurs?,” Does God Exist?, 9[10]:2-6, October.
Czerkas, Stephen (1992), “New Look for Sauropod Dinosaurs,” Geology, 20:1068-1070.
Dahmer, Lionel, D. Kouznetsov, et al. (1990), “Report on Chemical Analysis and Further Dating of Dinosaur Bones and Dinosaur Petroglyphs,” Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism, ed. Robert E. Walsh and Christopher L. Brooks (Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship), pp. 371-374.
Gould, Stephen Jay (1989), Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History (New York: W.W. Norton).
Hapgood, Charles (2000), Mystery in Acambaro (Kempton, IL: Adventures Unlimited Press).
Herodotus, (1850 reprint), Historiae, trans. Henry Clay (London: Henry G. Bohn).
Hesman, T. (2000), “Vase Shows that Ancients Dug Fossils, Too,” Science News, 157:133, February 26.
Hu, Yaoming, Jin Meng, Yuanqing Wang, and Chuankui Li (2005), “Large Mesozoic Mammals Fed on Young Dinosaurs,” Nature, 433:149-152, January 13.
Hubbard, Samuel (1925), Discoveries Relating to Prehistoric Man by the Doheny Scientific Expedition (Oakland, CA: Oakland Museum of Natural History).
Josephus, Flavius (no date), Antiquities of the Jews (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, reprint).
Morris, Henry M. (1984), The Biblical Basis for Modern Science (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
“Primate Ancestor Lived with Dinos” (2002), [On-line], URL: news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english...935558.stm.
Simpson, George Gaylord, C.S. Pittendrigh, and L.H. Tiffany (1957), Life: An Introduction to Biology (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company).
Swift, Dennis (1997), “Messages on Stone,” Creation Ex Nihilo, 19[2]:20-23, March-May.
Swift, Dennis (no date), “The Dinosaurs of Acambaro,” [On-line], URL: www.omniology.com/3-Ceramic-Dinos.html.
Tavaré, Simon, C.R. Marshall, et al. (2002), “Using the Fossil Record to Estimate the Age of the Last Common Ancestor of Extant Primates,” Nature, 416:726-729, April 18.
“Tracking Dinosaurs” (1983), Moscow News, 24:10.
Verrengia, Joseph B. (2005), “Fossils Show a Mammal Turned Tables, Devoured Dinosaur for Last Meal,” [On-line], URL: www.cp.org/english/onli...011204A.html.
Verrill, A.H. (1954), Strange Prehistoric Animals and Their History (Boston, MA: L.C. Page).
Wilson, Edward O. (1982), “Toward a Humanistic Biology,” The Humanist, September/October.
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 8:49 AMYour theory is that because primitive man described images of creatures that could be construed to resemble dinasours, therefore primitive man must have actually seen walking and living dinasours. Otherwise, how could primitive, ancient man have ever gotten these images in his mind?
This theory is full of flaws because if fails to rule out alternative explanations for how or why primitive ancient man came up with these images. There are many possible explanations other than humans having been eye witnesses to walking dinasours. Humans have incredible imaginations and have imagined many things that are not real. They have also imagined things that were real but that they did not know were real at the time.
Humans have imagined many things that did not exist at the time, but later came into existance. Humans imagined that they would fly in aircraft for centuries before the Wright Brothers first flew. Does this mean that people were actually flying in aircraft for centuries before the Wright Brothers? I don't think so.
This flaw is consistent with people who try to prove Bible stuff. Invariably, they fail to rule out alternative explanations and just accept their own theories as fact.
A theory is not proven until alternative explanations have been ruled out. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 9:40 AMHumans have had stories of creature that look like dinosaurs for centuries. If they were part of every day life they would have been depicted as such everywhere humans have existed. It certainly would not be just one painting in one cave in the entire world. Actual living dinosaurs would have made a huge impact on human history. As it is, just the remains of large animals like dinosaurs have had an effect on our myths and legends. From Chinese dragons( the chinese have used dinosaurs fossils for centuries for medicine) to the thunderbirds of the plains Indians. To the cyclops of the Greeks( actually based on the remains of a miniture extinct mammoth which actually did live at the same time as humans)
Sorry Dan, but I cannot believe that if dinosaurs lived with man that the bible would not have mentioned them by name. "and then did Noah gather 2 of the velociraptor and 2 of the tryciratops and put them on the ark."
Even more damming is the fact that they are not mentioned in the flood of Gilgimesh which actually predates the bible. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 11:55 AM"Humans have had stories of creature that look like dinosaurs for centuries. If they were part of every day life they would have been depicted as such everywhere humans have existed. It certainly would not be just one painting in one cave in the entire world."
there isn't just one painting in a cave, there are numerous examples offered and more than just this article.
"Actual living dinosaurs would have made a huge impact on human history. "
they have made a "huge impact", you mention some of this impact below:
"As it is, just the remains of large animals like dinosaurs have had an effect on our myths and legends. From Chinese dragons( the chinese have used dinosaurs fossils for centuries for medicine) to the thunderbirds of the plains Indians. To the cyclops of the Greeks( actually based on the remains of a miniture extinct mammoth which actually did live at the same time as humans)"
"Sorry Dan, but I cannot believe that if dinosaurs lived with man that the bible would not have mentioned them by name. "and then did Noah gather 2 of the velociraptor and 2 of the tryciratops and put them on the ark." "
This is silly, the word "dinosaur" was not even coined until the 1800's. They wouldn't have used these names. They used other words which are translated to "Behemouth", "Leviathan", "Dragon" etc..
"Even more damming is the fact that they are not mentioned in the flood of Gilgimesh which actually predates the bible."
wrong twice. Gilgamesh does mention them and this story is a clear corruption of the biblical noahic version. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 2:36 PMDan, I think you misunderstood. If humans lived with things that large we would have clear evidence of bones and such in the ruins of human settlements. I was not just talking of cave art most cultures made statues and such something as impressive and wonderful as a large dinosaur would have left an impression and would probably be worship by some groups of people. Also the monsters mentioned in the bible could have been the numerous large mammals that were "Proven" to live at the same time as humans. Mammoths, whales and giant squid and octopus have all lived beside humans and can also fit the description from the Bible. Not to mention the other even stranger mammals that you dont hear much about. There could even be a species that hasnt been discovered yet lying in the rocks somewhere in the fertile cresent(not so fertile today) The reality is that there is more evidence people living next to aliens in our art and cultures of the past then dinosaurs. Interestingly, Christians have been some of the best reporters of strange UFO's and many have made it into religious art.Probably because they attributed anything strange in the sky to be of god's realm.
P.S There is no dinosaurs in Gilgimamesh from what Ive read. All the creatures in that saga are humaniod or mammal. Its more likely that the tribes of Israel who were living in the area at the time took the story and gave it a Jewish flair. You cant corrupt a bible that has not been written. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sun, December 21, 2008 - 3:40 PMDragon, after the flood these beasts became rare and likely were encountered rarely. As such, it would not be expected that we would find them in burial sites. In the pre flood world the likelihood is greater. However, there are estimates of 168-350 million cubic miles of sediment which were deposited during the flood. Pre-flood fossils of man are not going to be very common.
"Also the monsters mentioned in the bible could have been the numerous large mammals that were "Proven" to live at the same time as humans."
the descriptions are not consistent with mammals or mammal like organism Dragon but rather reptile like organism consistant with known dinosaurs. Sometimes descriptions are so detailed as to demonstrate knowledge not known generally until recently. I offered examples of detailed carvings of Triceratops for example. People do not imagine stuff like this, they saw it and drew it, accurately!
Your claim that it is more likely that man lived next to aliens betrays a complete lack of knowledge as to what you are talking about. You are simply filtering through your bias that dinosaurs could not have coextisted with man due to unfounded age dating of modern geology.
We have found dinosaur remains which are not even fossilized! We have found dinosaur bones with hemeoglobin still red in the bones! How is any of this consistant with the 65 million year age for the death of dinosaurs? Answer, it is not!!!
You claim that "Christians" are behind the UFO sightings is nonsense. People of all backgrounds, including cultures all over the world have reported such phenomena. You simply disdain Christianity and presume falsely that they are gullible fools. The opposite is the truth, they make great skeptics and atheist believers are among some of the most gullible people on earth, they posit a createrless creation, how dumb is that?
I have read portions of Gilgamesh which read like descriptions of dinosaurs. The Gilgamesh epic is a poor reproduction of the Noahic story. There are numerous world wide flood stories which exist all over the world. All have similarities to the much clear and more reasonable Noahic story. That these stories exist is testimony to the truth of the event. Since all people are descended from the 3 sons of Noah it is understandable that these stories have been orally transmitted and embellished from the biblical one. Scientists today, by in large, ignore all of this evidence for the flood and dinosaur/man coexistance because it doesn't fit preconceived notions. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Mon, December 22, 2008 - 1:58 PM"You simply disdain Christianity and presume falsely that they are gullible fools."
No I dont disdain Christianity. Just the Roman version of it. I certainly dont think they are gullible fools. No I think the reinterpretation of the Torah to fit more modern sensibilities was masterful and most Christians today dont know that the bible was "created" by Roman scribes to further the ends of an empire that no longer exists. I certainly dont think that seeing UFOs makes anyone a fool. Early Christian painters were just seeing something in the sky and they left clues in their art.
www.youtube.com/watch
"Sometimes descriptions are so detailed as to demonstrate knowledge not known generally until recently. I offered examples of detailed carvings of Triceratops for example. People do not imagine stuff like this, they saw it and drew it, accurately!"
Actually they do imagine and draw stuff all the time. Seals and manatees become merfolk, Capacorns become unicorns, Elephant birds became Rocs(of Arab legend)whales become leviathan and squid Kraken. All given appendeges they dont have and made larger then life by others who never saw them and relied on tales to draw them. Although I do concede your point about surviving animals. There is no need for a flood though.(that is a purely human experience) There are many animals that were thought extinct that have been found living even recently. Like the Laotion rock rat which has been around for 4 million years and was recently rediscovered alive and well. Did you know there were 6 foot penguins living in New Zealand 500 years ago? Provided that the Inca rock is not a fake it is just as likely the man is riding some form of Rhino or Elephant both of which have come in some really strange shapes and sizes throughout the eras and probably a bit easier to domesticate.
It really comes down to this point. While evolution is a theory it is one that has a large bit of evidence backing it. Genesis is a belief which is in competition with many other equally believable belief systems. I can no more prove or disprove Genesis then I can the idea that the world is made from the corpse of the giant Ymir or that we are balanced on the shell of a turtle that pukes galaxies. Aspects of evolution can be backed up by scientific method while belief can only be believed. More importantly it can be taught in schools without destroying the freedom of religion. So whatever you believe I think things are best the way they are.
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 23, 2008 - 5:41 AMyou are one very confused individual Dragon. I wish had a $5 bill for every anti who felt they had the correct conspiracy theory explaining the phenomena that is Christianity.
"Actually they do imagine and draw stuff all the time. Seals and manatees become merfolk, Capacorns become unicorns, Elephant birds became Rocs(of Arab legend)whales become leviathan and squid Kraken."
How about triceratops being triceratops. The drawings are detailed, accurate to the level which scientists were not aware until recently. This is real evidence of coextance, not some fairy tale for grown ups that is evolution. Wake up Dragon, use the brain which God has given you and think.
Evolution is a belief about the unobservable past by people who were not there and do not know everything. It is no more scientific that than the frog and the prince plus time (and chance). You believe it because you have been force fed it and have failed the learn to think for yourself. The biblical narrative is the historical truth, offered by eyewitness testimony as the events unfolded.
There is no scientific method which leads one to evolution theory as no direct observations are possible! And your only support here for this fairy tale is that it is more suitable for children in the public schools because it needs no "god". pathetic! -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 23, 2008 - 8:41 AMMy friend, Daniel.
Please stop. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 23, 2008 - 11:13 AMstop what? I see that you are traveling around, well wishing, and singling me out on various tribes. Please stop! -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 23, 2008 - 11:18 AMHe's obviously concerned about your mental state, Dan.
You seem rather paranoid.
-
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 23, 2008 - 10:17 AMWhat you just posted is called a projection in Psychology. To set the story straight I was force fed creationism and came to understand evolution through learning the "scientific method". This is a method that you obviously have no understanding of.
The steps of the scientific method are to:
* Ask a Question
* Do Background research (observation)
* Construct a Hypothesis
* Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
* Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
* Communicate Your Results
Of course no one lives long enough to see evolution in action. This is why it is called the "Theory of Evolution" and not the Law of evolution.
Needless to say you do not have to see evolution in action to understand that it exists and prove aspects of it through observation and experimentation. The puzzle is not complete but the picture is still recognizable. Its like any other investigation. You do not have to witness a murder to solve it using whats left of the evidence. Many times investigaters can put together a case from circumstantial evidence. In the case of evolution there is plenty of evidence. If you apply the scientific method to the Triceratops question then you will see that your argument falls apart because there are to many variables that you refuse to research properly. It would be like someone pronouncing that Christianity is death cult that made regular human sacrifices based on a surviving picture of the crucifiction of Jesus and on the rumour that people ate flesh and drank blood at church services. It could very well be a Triceritops and indians could very well have rode around on them. This does not blow evolution out the the water in any shape or form. After all I can go to New Zealand and hold an animal in my hands that was around before the dinosaurs (the Tuatara). I can also pet a pygmy mouse whose forefathers may have ran through dinosuars feet at one time. There is more evidence pointing to a remnant population then there is a worldwide dinotopia society with people living like the flintstones. This is providing that the rock is not a fake. It certainly would not be the first time, People have been facinated with lost worlds and Atlantis cities for a long time and many things were created to take advantage of collecters greed. (Think crystal skulls) You have much to learn about science Dan. We can look at this again if, and when(real) scientists proclaim the rock authentic.
Secondly, evolution is not going to replace peoples faith in God. It is like Jesus said, Give to Cesar what is his and give to God what is Gods.(not a direct quote.)
I think its funny that christains would like creationism taught in classrooms. It would last all about the 10 minutes it took for a Hindu or Pagan to decide to teach creationism their way. A case like that would go to court and it would be won by the Pagans. After all it is very specifically spelled out in our laws. If you teach religion in school then every type of religion can be represented. Imagine all those christan kids learning about the glory of Wicca creationism. Thats the America that the Discovery Instititute will bring about Dan. Be very careful what you wish for....... -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 23, 2008 - 11:47 AM"What you just posted is called a projection in Psychology. To set the story straight I was force fed creationism and came to understand evolution through learning the "scientific method". This is a method that you obviously have no understanding of. "
You are wrong on both counts. My degree is in biology from Michigan State University. I understand the scientific method, but you clearly do not.
"Do Background research (observation) "
research is not equivalent to observations. Observations involve the senses (sight, smell, taste, hearing or touch). No direct observations of the past are possible. All beliefs about the past, scientifically speaking, must be based upon inference.
"Of course no one lives long enough to see evolution in action. This is why it is called the "Theory of Evolution" and not the Law of evolution. "
Evolution is neither a theory or a law. It is not observable. It is not falsifiable. It cannot be observed. It is nothing but a model of origins which can be placed next to known data to see how well it conforms. It conforms poorly.
"Needless to say you do not have to see evolution in action to understand that it exists and prove aspects of it through observation and experimentation. The puzzle is not complete but the picture is still recognizable. Its like any other investigation."
It is not like other investigations. A hypothesis of the past is not subject to verification or falsification. It is a belief based upon the best available evidence. Evolution fails the test of being a good model of origins because it violates known laws such as the law of biogenesis, the second law of thermodynamics etc.. No observations exist anywhere of information gaining mutations in the germ cell of any organism. The fossil record contains no transitional form which one could make a "water tight" case for. Evolution has not chance of even beginning because abiogenesis is a statistical impossibility.
"You do not have to witness a murder to solve it using whats left of the evidence."
true, but if the murder occured 3 million years ago you are going to have trouble piecing together a crime scene! This is not empirical science, it is historical "science", a completely different animal altogether.
"Many times investigaters can put together a case from circumstantial evidence. In the case of evolution there is plenty of evidence. If you apply the scientific method to the Triceratops question then you will see that your argument falls apart because there are to many variables that you refuse to research properly."
which is why you have chosen to dismiss it out of hand and rather choose to accept a completely unverified view of origins.
"It could very well be a Triceritops and indians could very well have rode around on them. This does not blow evolution out the the water in any shape or form."
No it doesn't. It is just another example of why this plastic theory is not falsifiable. It can fit any observed facts, regardless of how at variance they are with the theory. What this does show however, is that the facts are completely in line with the biblical narrative, which of course, they are.
"After all I can go to New Zealand and hold an animal in my hands that was around before the dinosaurs (the Tuatara). I can also pet a pygmy mouse whose forefathers may have ran through dinosuars feet at one time. There is more evidence pointing to a remnant population then there is a worldwide dinotopia society with people living like the flintstones."
There were no people living like the Flintstones. This is simply another myth of the evolution believers. There were no "primitive men". Our ancestors possessed technology we are yet to rediscover.
"This is providing that the rock is not a fake. It certainly would not be the first time, People have been facinated with lost worlds and Atlantis cities for a long time and many things were created to take advantage of collecters greed. (Think crystal skulls) You have much to learn about science Dan. We can look at this again if, and when(real) scientists proclaim the rock authentic."
You didn't read the article or you would not be making such silly statements as this.
"Secondly, evolution is not going to replace peoples faith in God. It is like Jesus said, Give to Cesar what is his and give to God what is Gods.(not a direct quote.)"
Evolution is an unsupported myth. The claim that it does not corrupt faith is irrelevant to this discussion. What is relevent is that it has no predictive value. If an animal is found alive that died out millions of years ago. It is a living fossil! If a "vestigial" organ is found to be useful, evolution believers can accomdate this as well. Gaps in the fossil record are no problem, the fossil record is "inadequate". the lack of information gaining mutations in the germ cells are not a problem, evolution is to slow for us to find these. We know the drill, very well!
"I think its funny that christains would like creationism taught in classrooms. It would last all about the 10 minutes it took for a Hindu or Pagan to decide to teach creationism their way."
First of all, you're ignorant. Creationists are not demanding the Creationism be taught. At least not any I know. What they do wish is for teachers to be able to tell the truth about the supposed "strengths" and weaknesses of evolution. Having taught high school science for 7 years, I know that when students are exposed to those weaknesses, they abandon the silly theory along with Santa and their barbie dolls.
"A case like that would go to court and it would be won by the Pagans. After all it is very specifically spelled out in our laws. If you teach religion in school then every type of religion can be represented. Imagine all those christan kids learning about the glory of Wicca creationism. Thats the America that the Discovery Instititute will bring about Dan. Be very careful what you wish for....... "
You are ignorant. The Discovery Institute is not "creationism". It is intelligent design. They by in large reject young earth creationism. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 23, 2008 - 2:47 PMIt appears you call everyone here who disagrees with you to be "ignorant."
It must be very lonely for you.
My friends, please help Dan. He is in pain. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 23, 2008 - 3:25 PMMore like he is a pain. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 11:24 AMYea, the fuckin little bitch followed me to another tribe to post his bullshit calling ME a troll. I just joined this site and he is already following me around thinking he is going to somehow discredit me through underhanded means because his arguments dont hold water. Typical Christian Occultist...Lying to win his arguments...That's fucking sad. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 3:35 PMI have not followed you to any other forum. You are drinking Wendy's coolade.
-
-
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 12:39 AM"You are ignorant. The Discovery Institute is not "creationism". It is intelligent design. They by in large reject young earth creationism. "
Thats the official line not the truth. Its a front for young earth creationists and untill they stop acting shady and refusing interviews I have no reason to believe otherwise.
"Evolution is neither a theory or a law. It is not observable. It is not falsifiable. It cannot be observed. It is nothing but a model of origins which can be placed next to known data to see how well it conforms. It conforms poorly."
Actually it is a Theory and your personal opinion does not change that fact. To this date no one has come up with a smoking gun that can reduce evolution to a hypothethis or less. This should tell you something. Also your reasoning is exactly the same reasoning some athesits use to discount belief in God. Evolution has more evidence backing it up.
"Evolution fails the test of being a good model of origins because it violates known laws such as the law of biogenesis, the second law of thermodynamics etc.."
Shame on you Dan!
You know both of those laws have loopholes that allow for Evolution. The fact that single celled organisms can survive in a vacuum can explain how life actually got to earth. Organisms like viruses could be floating around on comets and such in our solar system and througt the universe.This would circumvent the law of Biogenesis.. As a Deist I have no problem with this. They could have been floating out there since the universe began. Viruses are interesting in the fact that they just seem to evolve and reproduce. They have the ability to geneticly alter DNA in a cell to do its bidding. They are basically just a blueprint. They are not even alive.This may account for the fast evolutionary changes that sometimes happen to a species. A virus could cause a mutation that a species finds useful. Incidently the church was against the law of Biogenesis. They felt it was a direct attack on the Bible.There is also this
scholar.google.com/scholar
I dont know all the answers and there will always be pieces to the puzzle we dont know. However even a law can be overturned. Einstien did so when he overturned Newtons law of Gravity.
"What this does show however, is that the facts are completely in line with the biblical narrative, which of course, they are."
Actually it doesnt. no one today has any idea what the people in the bible were talking about. You were not there. You have no actual idea what a Leviathon is or for that matter a Nephilim. They were so common that no one thought to describe them. I imagine there will be stuff like that about our culture someday. "And then man flew in the air in metal planes and played sweet music on cds It was truelly an age of wonder..." Lord knows what people will think of words like plane or cd.
"Our ancestors possessed technology we are yet to rediscover. "
This I agree with. Did you see the video of the ufos in my last post? There are men flying around in machines in some of the religous pictures! Not to mention the Indian sagas(india) that talk about airs ship battles and nuke like weapons of mass destruction. Too bad christains burnt down the library of Alexandria. It probably contains percent of our history now lost
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 5:02 AM"Thats the official line not the truth. Its a front for young earth creationists and untill they stop acting shady and refusing interviews I have no reason to believe otherwise."
This is not true Dragon, but if you believe it to be true you must have some evidence to support the contention. What is happening here is that ID is being ridiculed as YEC in an effort to discredit it. To be a YEC'r you must accept a young earth view and ID'ers do not.
"Shame on you Dan!
You know both of those laws have loopholes that allow for Evolution. "
Laws with loopholes:-) are we still talking about science now? There has never been a known exception to the law of biogenesis Dragon, that is why it is called a law. In regards to thermodynamics, what you are referring to is the view that an additional lumpiness over here is offset by reduced order somewhere else. This bunch of baloney does not allow a loophole for the complexity of living things. This magnitude of complexity requires a designer and ALL observations of the physical world agree with this statement.
Describing how living things can survive does not assist you in describing how living things got here Dragon. This is illogical. Viruses are obligate parasites and cannot survive and reproduce without cell machinary. Any idea that they were the cell precursers is not based upon observations, but rather pure fantasy.
Your link doesn't go anywhere as far as I can tell. But the bible affirms biogenesis from the very first chapter. Organism were created and reproduced after their kind. Great Christian Scientists such as Rudolph Virchow and Louis Pasteur killed the spontaneous generation lie (pre - evolution) in its tracks. Pasteur's flask which is still germ free today, is evidence that abiogenesis could never happen!
"Actually it doesnt. no one today has any idea what the people in the bible were talking about. You were not there. You have no actual idea what a Leviathon is or for that matter a Nephilim."
I do know what Leviathon was, it was a water dwelling dinosaur, perhaps a plesiosaurus. But this is not my point. The bible teaches basic scientific truth such as life comes from life and that spontaneous generation is false. Evolutionists believe in old, discredited superstitions which have long ago been dealt the death blow by real Christian scientists.
\"they were so common that no one thought to describe them. I imagine there will be stuff like that about our culture someday. "And then man flew in the air in metal planes and played sweet music on cds It was truelly an age of wonder..." Lord knows what people will think of words like plane or cd."
LOL, yes, dinosaurs were common back then. Thanks for making my point and bringing us back to the discussion at hand:
15 "Look at the behemoth, [a]
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
16 What strength he has in his loins,
what power in the muscles of his belly!
17 His tail [b] sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his thighs are close-knit.
18 His bones are tubes of bronze,
his limbs like rods of iron.
19 He ranks first among the works of God,
yet his Maker can approach him with his sword.
20 The hills bring him their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby.
21 Under the lotus plants he lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal him in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround him.
23 When the river rages, he is not alarmed;
he is secure, though the Jordan should surge against his mouth.
24 Can anyone capture him by the eyes, [c]
or trap him and pierce his nose?
No known mammal fits the description above Dragon, but known dinosaurs do! The same is true for Leviathan below:
"Job 41
1 "Can you pull in the leviathan [a] with a fishhook
or tie down his tongue with a rope?
2 Can you put a cord through his nose
or pierce his jaw with a hook?
3 Will he keep begging you for mercy?
Will he speak to you with gentle words?
4 Will he make an agreement with you
for you to take him as your slave for life?
5 Can you make a pet of him like a bird
or put him on a leash for your girls?
6 Will traders barter for him?
Will they divide him up among the merchants?
7 Can you fill his hide with harpoons
or his head with fishing spears?
8 If you lay a hand on him,
you will remember the struggle and never do it again!
9 Any hope of subduing him is false;
the mere sight of him is overpowering.
10 No one is fierce enough to rouse him.
Who then is able to stand against me?
11 Who has a claim against me that I must pay?
Everything under heaven belongs to me.
12 "I will not fail to speak of his limbs,
his strength and his graceful form.
13 Who can strip off his outer coat?
Who would approach him with a bridle?
14 Who dares open the doors of his mouth,
ringed about with his fearsome teeth?
15 His back has [b] rows of shields
tightly sealed together;
16 each is so close to the next
that no air can pass between.
17 They are joined fast to one another;
they cling together and cannot be parted.
18 His snorting throws out flashes of light;
his eyes are like the rays of dawn.
19 Firebrands stream from his mouth;
sparks of fire shoot out.
20 Smoke pours from his nostrils
as from a boiling pot over a fire of reeds.
21 His breath sets coals ablaze,
and flames dart from his mouth.
22 Strength resides in his neck;
dismay goes before him.
23 The folds of his flesh are tightly joined;
they are firm and immovable.
24 His chest is hard as rock,
hard as a lower millstone.
25 When he rises up, the mighty are terrified;
they retreat before his thrashing.
26 The sword that reaches him has no effect,
nor does the spear or the dart or the javelin.
27 Iron he treats like straw
and bronze like rotten wood.
28 Arrows do not make him flee;
slingstones are like chaff to him.
29 A club seems to him but a piece of straw;
he laughs at the rattling of the lance.
30 His undersides are jagged potsherds,
leaving a trail in the mud like a threshing sledge.
31 He makes the depths churn like a boiling caldron
and stirs up the sea like a pot of ointment.
32 Behind him he leaves a glistening wake;
one would think the deep had white hair.
33 Nothing on earth is his equal—
a creature without fear.
34 He looks down on all that are haughty;
he is king over all that are proud."
"This I agree with. Did you see the video of the ufos in my last post? There are men flying around in machines in some of the religous pictures! Not to mention the Indian sagas(india) that talk about airs ship battles and nuke like weapons of mass destruction. Too bad christains burnt down the library of Alexandria. It probably contains percent of our history now lost "
The evidence of advanced human life is a direct refutation of the evolution story Dragon. Our ancestors were not dumb beasts, there were bright, intelligent superior human beings. The had technology which allowed them to move 20 ton rocks over land and sea. They possessed batteries and some feel even wireless communication (pre flood). Technology is often lost and found. Edison rediscovered concrete technology lost since the Romans. The bible provides eye witness testimony to a lost world.
Thanks for participating in discussion rather than making me into the issue here Dragon. I appreciate folks who are interested in thinking, rather than turning this forum into a childish chat site and some referendum on "dan".
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 1:01 PMLaws with loopholes:-) are we still talking about science now? There has never been a known exception to the law of biogenesis Dragon, that is why it is called a law. In regards to thermodynamics, what you are referring to is the view that an additional lumpiness over here is offset by reduced order somewhere else. This bunch of baloney does not allow a loophole for the complexity of living things. This magnitude of complexity requires a designer and ALL observations of the physical world agree with this statement.
Loophole was not the right choice of words but my point is valid. Complex structures use less energy. Stars are responsible for most of the matter in the universe. This means all the complex structures around today came from hot plasma like states. By your definition the law of Thermodynamics is broken every time a baby is born. Simple organisms like sperm and eggs come together and create more complex lifeforms. By your definition life itself does not exist. When I said that one cell organisms could exist in a vacuum I was not talking about viruses. I do think viruses are a part of the puzzle. After all you have theses none living blueprints just floating around.
I still dont understand why you are taking a stand against the Christan(and greek) idea of abiogenesis. It is after all the easiest way to explain how God brought forth the life on earth. It certainly does not invalidate evolution because it has nothing to do with it. Evolution is about change and adaptation in response to enviormental conditions. A sealed flask of distilled water will no more create life then putting an empty pan in the oven will create bread. However if the right ingredients(yeast ,flour sugar) enviorment (breadpan) temperature and time and pressure are applied sooner or later you have bread. And if I take a piece of the finished dough I can recreate that same bread indefinitely as long as the correct ingredients are avaliable. This is the same analogy for the origin of life it appeared because the conditions were right for it to appear. Of course Darwin never looked to the sky for answers and it very well may be that some ingrediants may have to come from elsewhere.Whether its from some intellegence or a steller nursery is up for question.The viruses of today are designed to attack modern cells. However that does not mean they were always the same. Modern cells may have started as several different organisms coming together for protective purposes. mitochondria for instance still have many elements of a distinct cell.
"No known mammal fits the description above Dragon, but known dinosaurs do! The same is true for Leviathan below:"
Funny you should say that because when I read the passage a large Hippo immidiately came to mind. Not only does a hippo fit the description but the passage describes hippo behavior perfectly. A short google brought up this counter claim.
paleo.cc/paluxy/behemoth.htm
Read the 3rd note on the bottom of the page. This ties in with what I was saying about our culture not thinking the same way as biblical culture. We would deem such descriptions inappropriate. However fertility and bloodlines were extremely important back then. As far as the Leviathon the descrption would also fit a turtle which is considerably more armored then a ocean bearing dinosaur. Even in fairly modern times there are stories of saliors landing on an island only to find that its the back of a giant turtle.
"The evidence of advanced human life is a direct refutation of the evolution story Dragon. Our ancestors were not dumb beasts, there were bright, intelligent superior human beings. The had technology which allowed them to move 20 ton rocks over land and sea. They possessed batteries and some feel even wireless communication (pre flood). Technology is often lost and found. Edison rediscovered concrete technology lost since the Romans. The bible provides eye witness testimony to a lost world."
That is a strawman argument. Our ancesters were Homo Sapien, so of course they were not dumb beasts. In fact even before Homosapiens our none human forefathers were anything but dumb. Many still used tools. Technology is controlled by social pressures not intellegence. Evolution has very little to do with our technology besides the fact we evolved the ability to make tools.
It only took us 150 years to go from horses to rocketships and some techno revolutions may have been faster. Many have also failed. The Romans missed an industrial revolution by a scant thread. Unfortunately no one saw value in the steam engine precurser that an inventer nicknamed "Mechanos" built. In the middle east people used primitive batteries to treat pain but never thought to power anything else with it. There is an unfortunate human trend to destroy everything we make so much of our history is currently lost. However Human history began with the first humans. Evolutionists have no argument with this and every time a new civilization or evidence comes to light the estimated dates are adjusted for it.
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 5:13 PM“Loophole was not the right choice of words but my point is valid. Complex structures use less energy. Stars are responsible for most of the matter in the universe.”
Supposedly, but no one knows how since they don’t possess most of the elements in the universe.
“This means all the complex structures around today came from hot plasma like states. By your definition the law of Thermodynamics is broken every time a baby is born.”
Not at all. Because we have an energy conversion mechanism. There was no energy conversion mechanism on the early earth. Pouring gas over an automobile doesn’t make it go uphill, it just goes up in smoke. You must feed the chemical energy into the engine where it converts the chemical energy into mechanical energy which is then transferred to the wheels. Now the car goes up hill. This kind of thing requires intelligent design.
“I still dont understand why you are taking a stand against the Christan(and greek) idea of abiogenesis.”
It is not a Christian stand. It is an atheist stand. Abiogenesis is required in the atheist world view. Yet it has been shown to be impossible. Dr. Dean Kenyan who wrote the book “Biological Predestination” had to reverse himself and admit it was not possible. He is now a Christian in the ID movement. Former Atheist Sir Fred Hoyle also abandoned the notion once he realized it was similar to positing an tornado sweeping through a junk yard and accidently assembling a 757 Jet. I have had evolutionists claim this is possible! Amazing faith these guys have. I wish I could attain to it
“It is after all the easiest way to explain how God brought forth the life on earth. It certainly does not invalidate evolution because it has nothing to do with it. Evolution is about change and adaptation in response to enviormental conditions.”
It has a whole lot to do with it, which is why evolutionists back peddle whenever I mention it. The understand the absurdity, but they must live with absurdities every day. Without abiogenesis, there would be nothing for evolution to “change”. And you deist god is too impotent to begin life, he just rolled the first ball and left the scene, leaving naturalistic cause and effect to do its thing. This is why deism is also, irrational.
“A sealed flask of distilled water will no more create life then putting an empty pan in the oven will create bread.”
The flask is not sealed. You must not have been paying attention in your college biology class. Nevertheless, we have only proven this in the last few hundred years, but the bible proclaimed it thousands of years ago. Getting the picture as to why this ancient book is entire relevent to our lives today? Likely not, but you should.
“However if the right ingredients(yeast ,flour sugar) enviorment (breadpan) temperature and time and pressure are applied sooner or later you have bread.”
True, but what is the point here? Yeast is a living thing, cooked bread is dead.
“ And if I take a piece of the finished dough I can recreate that same bread indefinitely as long as the correct ingredients are avaliable. This is the same analogy for the origin of life it appeared because the conditions were right for it to appear.”
First of all, no conditions are right for life to form, unless a Creator is present. Secondly, no one knows the exact conditions of the early earth. Even so, scientists have attempted to recreate these unknown conditions and were still unsuccessful at creating life. (Funny thing is, should they have been able to, they would only have proven that it took intelligence to do it in the beginning)
“Of course Darwin never looked to the sky for answers and it very well may be that some ingrediants may have to come from elsewhere.Whether its from some intellegence or a steller nursery is up for question.”
There is no question, to quote former atheist the late Sir Fred Hoyle, “there must be a God”. End of story!
“The viruses of today are designed to attack modern cells. However that does not mean they were always the same. “
Are we now constructing an argument of silence?
“Modern cells may have started as several different organisms coming together for protective purposes.”
This is not a “start”, you have already left the start and are not conjecturing in absence of any observational evidence.
“mitochondria for instance still have many elements of a distinct cell.”
True, but it is not the cell, but only part. My stomach has many elements as the rest of my body, but it is not capable of standing alone. A cell is one of the most complex things in the world and there is no known thing as a “simple cell”. Take cell biology and biochemistry and you will know.
"No known mammal fits the description above Dragon, but known dinosaurs do! The same is true for Leviathan below:"
“Funny you should say that because when I read the passage a large Hippo immidiately came to mind. Not only does a hippo fit the description but the passage describes hippo behavior perfectly. A short google brought up this counter claim.
paleo.cc/paluxy/behemoth.htm”
LOL, funny is right! Have you ever been to the zoo where you live? I have yet to see a hypo with a tail like a cedar tree!!!!! There is no known animal, alive or extant, which fits the description, except for a dinosaur. Why not just acknowledge the truth and admit that perhaps you might be wrong?
“As far as the Leviathon the descrption would also fit a turtle which is considerably more armored then a ocean bearing dinosaur. Even in fairly modern times there are stories of saliors landing on an island only to find that its the back of a giant turtle.”
A fire breathing turtle at that!:-) I have pulled in turtles with fish hooks. But you are not likely to get an amphibious dinosaur such as the pleasiosaurus in the boat! Turles are not very visious and can easily be overcome, but not the animal being described here:
8 If you lay a hand on him,
you will remember the struggle and never do it again!
9 Any hope of subduing him is false;
the mere sight of him is overpowering.
10 No one is fierce enough to rouse him.
Who then is able to stand against me?
Note this beast has fearsome teeth. Have you every looked at a turtle in the mouth?
When he rises up, the mighty are terrified;
they retreat before his thrashing.
Dagan, when is the last time you saw a turtle “rise up”????
I guarantee you I can pierce a turtle with a sword or Javelin, but not the beast in this description!
This beast looks down on people, have you ever seen a turtle so large it can look down on people?
33 Nothing on earth is his equal—
a creature without fear.
34 He looks down on all that are haughty;
he is king over all that are proud."
Dan: "The evidence of advanced human life is a direct refutation of the evolution story Dragon. Our ancestors were not dumb beasts, there were bright, intelligent superior human beings. The had technology which allowed them to move 20 ton rocks over land and sea. They possessed batteries and some feel even wireless communication (pre flood). Technology is often lost and found. Edison rediscovered concrete technology lost since the Romans. The bible provides eye witness testimony to a lost world."
“That is a strawman argument. Our ancesters were Homo Sapien, so of course they were not dumb beasts.”
Evolutionists have tried to make claims that early humans were dumb Dagon. They refused to acknowledge the story of Abraham which referenced an advanced society in UR. At least until they dug up a library at the site!
“Evolutionists have no argument with this and every time a new civilization or evidence comes to light the estimated dates are adjusted for it.”
Evolution has no problem with any fact Dagan, it is a plastic theory, unfalsifiable, irrefutable and ridiculous, all at the same time! Amazing -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Thu, December 25, 2008 - 10:27 PMHa I knew you would totally ignore the link I posted. If you had actually bothered to read it you would have learned that "Tail" was more then likely a mistranslation. The most likely translation and the one Hebrew linguists think is the right on is this one:
"What strength he has in his loins,
what power in the muscles of his belly!
17 His erection sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his stones(teste) are close-knit.
This along with the waters of jordon flowing through him point more to a hippo then a pleasaur. Ever seen a grown hippo naked Dan?
"It is not a Christian stand. It is an atheist stand. Abiogenesis is required in the atheist world view."
Why would an atheist trade one form of magic for another? Most Atheists I have talked to are deeply skeptical of anything they cannot touch or sense or scientifically authenticate. I serously doubt abiogenesis would pass the smell test. The only article I can find on the subject not written by a creationist is on ask.com. Since you dont read posted links Ill put the counter arguement below.
"The important thing to remember is that evolutionary theory is a scientific theory about how life has developed — this means that it begins with the premise that life already exists. It makes no claims as to how that life got here. It could have developed naturally through abiogenesis. It could have been started by a divine power. It could have been started by aliens. Whatever the explanation, evolutionary explanations begin to apply once life appears and begins to reproduce."
Dan says:
"It has a whole lot to do with it, which is why evolutionists back peddle whenever I mention it. The understand the absurdity, but they must live with absurdities every day. Without abiogenesis, there would be nothing for evolution to “change”"\
Thankfully the article also cover this topic. In short abiogenisis has nothing to do with evolution. Just like I said in my last post.
"the creationists spreading this misunderstanding are doing so for one of two reasons. The first possibility is that they simply do not understand the nature of evolutionary theory. In not having a clear idea about what evolution is, they mistakenly include ideas which do not belong. This failure to understand the topic sheds some interesting light on their attempts to critique it, however.
The second possibility is that some creationists do understand what evolution is and do understand that neither the origin of life nor the origin of the universe are really relevant to the truth or validity of evolutionary theory. In such cases, the creationists in question are being consciously and deliberately dishonest with their audience. Perhaps they imagine that by confusing people as to the true nature of evolution, they will be able to gain more support for their own position — a position which is, according to them, more in accordance with the will of God and Christian doctrines. "
So which are you Dan?
True, but what is the point here? Yeast is a living thing, cooked bread is dead.
Yes so for the sake of the analogy think of yeast as the spark that creates bread as we know it. Without it bread if flat dull and lifeless. However for thousands of years people have put bread ingrediants out on the windowsill to catch that spark without knowing what it was or why it happen. I same thing could have happen here. Nature creates the structures needed over time and then the special ingrediant does the rest. We do not have the name of that ingrediant...yet. We may not have the scientific mind to grasp it yet.
"And you deist god is too impotent to begin life, he just rolled the first ball and left the scene, leaving naturalistic cause and effect to do its thing. This is why deism is also, irrational. "
Typical,when you cant fight reason try offending. Ok Dan we can try it your way this time.
So here we come to the aphex of ignorant thinking. The reality of the creationist movement There is no intelligent design.There is only Genesis.There is just some magic guy wrinking his nose like in bewitched and things just spring to life in a way that is exactly like abiogenesis but not because we christains say so. The intelligent design movement is a fraud and has always been a front to forcefeed school children Bible studies.
Here is some news for you. We share the same God Dan. I see it both as ironic and telling that you would call our God Impotent. The Rome based Christian movement has always been terribly flawed. You blame the jews for the death of Jesus but the reality is that if Jesus came tommorrow you would proclaim him a liberal commie and revile him just like the the roman controlled Rabbis did. He would change everything and people like you fear change. I completely understand why you would find the concept of evolution scary. It is of course about change. If most christians think like you Dan, Im guessing the Antichrist will have a very faithful and willing army waiting for him all thinking they are doing "Gods" work. Then again perhaps the bible should be taken with a grain of salt.
P.S the sealed flask overturned the idea of abiogenesis. Go back and revisit your biology classes.
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 6:14 AM""What strength he has in his loins,
what power in the muscles of his belly!
17 His erection sways like a cedar;
the sinews of his stones(teste) are close-knit."
You are hilarious! No translation of the bible I have ever seen offers an erection as a possible translation. One offers "Trunk" in the margins only. But all have tail in the text. And no bias is at work here because no one suggests that this beast is a dinosaur. All have been influenced by modern views that Dinosaurs and man did not coexist! Clear, no animal alive or dead, ever had an erect penis the size of a cedar tree!!!:-)
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 6:16 AM"Ever seen a grown hippo naked Dan?"
I have never seen one dressed, have you?:-)
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 6:20 AM"It is not a Christian stand. It is an atheist stand. Abiogenesis is required in the atheist world view."
Dragon: Why would an atheist trade one form of magic for another? Most Atheists I have talked to are deeply skeptical of anything they cannot touch or sense or scientifically authenticate. I serously doubt abiogenesis would pass the smell test. The only article I can find on the subject not written by a creationist is on ask.com. Since you dont read posted links Ill put the counter arguement below.
Because they have no other choice (other then the view we were seeded by extra-terrestrials, which makes them look even stupider than they already are). You give atheists way more credit for being rationnal that they really are. All atheists I have debated on the internet on numerous forums, defend abiogenesis. What other choice do they have? They have abondaned the far more rational position that "there must be a God"!
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 6:33 AM"The important thing to remember is that evolutionary theory is a scientific theory about how life has developed — this means that it begins with the premise that life already exists. It makes no claims as to how that life got here. It could have developed naturally through abiogenesis. It could have been started by a divine power. It could have been started by aliens. Whatever the explanation, evolutionary explanations begin to apply once life appears and begins to reproduce."
I know the current drill evolutionists are using. However, evolutionists of the past have suggested that evolution encompasses abiogenesis, "stellar evolution" and all manner of nonsense. They are cleaning up their act these days in an attempt to make the fairy tail invincible. They define the "theory" now as "change" for example. Who could argue with that? They have chopped off abiogenesis as it is a tough sell, but note that it is in all of the textbooks regardless!
Even the name "abiogensis" was coined by huxley to remove the connection in peoples minds that what was being advanced was anything but spontaneous generation. Note this revealing quote:
"'In a series of investigations he [Pouchet] tried to prove that the micro-organisms arising upon fermentation and putrefaction are spontaneously generated … . In the view of such a theory Pasteur's fermentation experiments were, of course, pure irrational nonsense, and thus began a lengthy controversy between these two experimental scientists… . The two antagonists were allowed to carry out their experiments before the French Academy of Science, and Pasteur succeeded at once in convincing some of its foremost members … . Pouchet likewise had his supporters, and especially among the scientifically educated and the half-educated public he gained many adherents who regarded spontaneous generation as a 'philosophic necessity', indispensible for a natural-scientific explanation of the origin of life, which Pasteur, faithful Catholic that he was, naturally felt himself compelled to explain dogmatically. Thus argument opposed argument, and party faced party. In these circumstances the solution of the problem would never have become possible had not Pasteur been able to put his ideas into practice on a large scale. … Pasteur's views on the origin of the micro-organisms received splendid practical confirmation as a result of the development of modern medicine; antiseptics and asepsis during surgery, disinfection, and the treatment of infectious disease. Owing to these facts, which found fresh confirmation daily, spontaneous generation has entirely ceased to exist as a possibility to be reckoned with in modern biology, nor does it come into serious question when we have to explain actual phenomena.2 (Emphases added).' Nordenskiöld, E., (1928) History of Biology: a Survey, republished by Tudor Publishing Co., MI, USA, pp. 433-435, 1976.
Pasteur, a Christian, was the greatest biologist to have ever lived and he blew the spontaneous generation crowd of "naturalists" out of the water! There is no spontaneous generation and therefore can be no evolution, because one must preceed the other! life comes from life, this is what we know by observation and experiementation. Your atheists friends are irrational buffoons, accepting a lie to avoid confrontation with the Creator of life!
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 6:49 AM"Yes so for the sake of the analogy think of yeast as the spark that creates bread as we know it. Without it bread if flat dull and lifeless. However for thousands of years people have put bread ingrediants out on the windowsill to catch that spark without knowing what it was or why it happen. I same thing could have happen here. Nature creates the structures needed over time and then the special ingrediant does the rest. We do not have the name of that ingrediant...yet. We may not have the scientific mind to grasp it yet."
analogy's are only useful to the degree they mirror reality. There is no reality here, just a fanciful story which has no merit, no science, no rationality behind it.
"And you deist god is too impotent to begin life, he just rolled the first ball and left the scene, leaving naturalistic cause and effect to do its thing. This is why deism is also, irrational. "
"Typical,when you cant fight reason try offending. Ok Dan we can try it your way this time."
You are joking right? You have offered no convincing arguments at all.
"So here we come to the aphex of ignorant thinking. The reality of the creationist movement There is no intelligent design.There is only Genesis.There is just some magic guy wrinking his nose like in bewitched and things just spring to life in a way that is exactly like abiogenesis but not because we christains say so. The intelligent design movement is a fraud and has always been a front to forcefeed school children Bible studies."
can you go over the logic of your reasoning here again? I don't think you employed any frankly. YEC'ers debate ID folks. Sure, there are some points of overlap, but they are not the same at all.
But if you are trying to get me to admit that i accept the scripture above science, we could have avoided this discussion at the start, I am guilty! I accept the eye witness testimony of those who were there, over the fanciful fairy tales of those who were not.
"Here is some news for you. We share the same God Dan. I see it both as ironic and telling that you would call our God Impotent."
the deist God is impotent and he is not my god, he is yours.
"The Rome based Christian movement has always been terribly flawed."
of course, this explains why it overtook the world, launched modern science and boosts some of the greatest intellects the world has ever known! Get a grip, you have been brainwashed.
"You blame the jews for the death of Jesus"
I do not nor have I ever stated this. I blame myself and every other person who ever lived. Yet he laid his life down willingly, no one could take it from him.
" I completely understand why you would find the concept of evolution scary."
but I don't, I find it silly and desparate.
"P.S the sealed flask overturned the idea of abiogenesis. Go back and revisit your biology classes."
I taught biology and I understand the propaganda Dragon. I also know the history, something guys like you did not get taught in the 20 second sound bite of a college biology text. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 8:32 AM"of course, this explains why it overtook the world, launched modern science and boosts some of the greatest intellects the world has ever known! Get a grip, you have been brainwashed. "
Like Nazi Germany this is true to a certain extent.Just like Germany many of these "great intellects" were escaping it and usually prosecuted by it.
"the deist God is impotent and he is not my god, he is yours. "
Yes Im now aware that your "God" is the one talked about in revelations the one who promises the world to you and insists you get a nice tattoo so he knows who you are. Your "God" tells you what you want to hear and will certainly help you torture and hurt all those bad people who disagree with your views. He is after all, the perfect god for you.
I taught biology and I understand the propaganda Dragon. I also know the history, something guys like you did not get taught in the 20 second sound bite of a college biology text.
This would mean something perhaps to other sheep but teaching Biology does not make you an authority on evolution or even Biology. It doesnt even mean you were an adequate teacher.The fact that you mixed up the research on the biogenesis experiments is telling.Though, judging from your posts here its obvious you are well versed in propaganda. -
-
Should we teach ID with Evolution?
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 9:34 AMHere is a good article on the subject.
www.csicop.org/intelligen...oversy.html
For those to lazy to read it here are the good parts.
"Suppose I decide that I believe the Ptolemaic system is more plausible than the Copernican system. Does that mean there is now a controversy among scientists about the proper theory to teach in physics classes? Suppose I get a handful of my PhD holding friends to go along with me, particularly those who are not physicists and who therefore do not need an accurate theory of planetary motion to carry out their day-to-day work. Maybe we even write a book presenting our ideas. Is that enough to have the Ptolemaic system taught with respect in science classes?
Surely not. Surely it counts for something that the enormous majority of scientists are on one side of the issue, while it is only I and a handful of friends who are on the other. Surely an idea has to gain some currency within the scientific community before it is taught with respect in science classes.
The fact is that every scientific theory presented as orthodoxy in science classes began in exactly the place ID finds itself now: A heresy believed by a handful of people dissatisfied with the orthodox view. In no case, however, did the supporters of the heresy earn their place in the curriculum by appealing directly to school boards and state legislatures. Rather, the heresy won out only by producing evidence adequate to convince a large majority of scientists.
And that is exactly what ID proponents refuse to do. The arguments they are making now are identical to the ones they were making a decade ago. As a scientific enterprise they have made no progress at all. At no point have they shown how their theory accounts for the data of the fossil record, or the findings of genetics, or the evidence from embryology, or the data from any other branch of science. Evolution accounts for all that data. Nor have they described, let alone carried out, any innovative research program based on their ideas.
If we present ID respectfully in science classes we are saying that the mere existence of a handful of dissenters from the orthodox view is enough to have the dissent presented in science classes.
It is a standard that would be laughed at in any other context. There are millions of Americans, some of them with PhD’s, who believe in astrology. No one seriously argues that is sufficient reason to present astrology respectfully in science classes. Why not? Surely the reason is that very few scientists believe astrology has merit, coupled with the inability of astrologers to produce any useful insights based on their theories.
So that is why ID should not be taught: The overwhelming majority of the scientific community believes its claims to be false, its defenders have not shown that their theory can account for any of the data evolution accounts for, and they have not provided any reason for believing that their theory even has the potential to produce anything useful to science. If Diepenbrock believes I should be applying different standards in deciding what should get taught in science classes, I invite him to tell me what those standards are. " -
-
Re: Should we teach ID with Evolution?
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 6:22 PM"The arguments they are making now are identical to the ones they were making a decade ago. As a scientific enterprise they have made no progress at all. "
This statement is silly and useless. If one has good arguments, there is no need to revise them just to look progressive. Evolutionists are still using the same arguments they did when I was in college, I guess this means they have made no progress.
However ID advocates have developed many interesting arguments, you are simply not aware of them because you filter everything through their opposition.
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 6:18 PM"Like Nazi Germany this is true to a certain extent.Just like Germany many of these "great intellects" were escaping it and usually prosecuted by it. "
this is not coherent. nor does it answer my statement. Scientists such as Newton, Linnaus, Kepler, Pastuer, Mendel and others were not persecuted by anyone, they were ardent believers in God and the bible. Even Galileo and Copernicus were both biblical apologests. On another tribe, I answered the Galileo "persecution issue" in detail. Secularists have tried to rewrite history here, but they have no case.
The God of the bible, the only true God, does not tell me what I want to hear. He tells me the truth and I am willing to listen, while you are not. He does not appoint me to hurt or judge anyone, but simply to tell the truth. It is his job to judge (ie inflict punishment) and his alone.
"The fact that you mixed up the research on the biogenesis experiments is telling."
I mixed up no research Dragon in regards to biogenesis experiments.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 9:34 PM"This is silly, the word "dinosaur" was not even coined until the 1800's. They wouldn't have used these names. They used other words which are translated to "Behemouth", "Leviathan", "Dragon" etc..
"Even more damming is the fact that they are not mentioned in the flood of Gilgimesh which actually predates the bible."
wrong twice. Gilgamesh does mention them and this story is a clear corruption of the biblical noahic version."
You might be thinking of Humbaba
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humbaba
but Leviathan means various things. Tiamat was basically the Dragon, Leviathan-like creature in Mesopotamian myths.
The Jewish explaination for things like this is that they emerged from the Tehom
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehom
Would we actually have wanted to co-exist in the same time-frame as such things, is my question?
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 9:36 PMBarney
iz
real. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 11:39 PMNot on the basketball court. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 4:50 PMThis thread's topic is fatuous bullshit. Obviously.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 11:48 AM"Your theory is that because primitive man described images of creatures that could be construed to resemble dinasours, therefore primitive man must have actually seen walking and living dinasours. Otherwise, how could primitive, ancient man have ever gotten these images in his mind?"
Clearly, you didn't both to read the post. It mentions detailed drawings which depict details only known to those who have seen the actual dinosaurs, including aspects of the scales scientists were not even aware of until recently. There are also historical reports from historians such as herodatus and conquerors such as Alexander the great. Open your closed mind, read and then discuss.
"This theory is full of flaws because if fails to rule out alternative explanations for how or why primitive ancient man came up with these images. There are many possible explanations other than humans having been eye witnesses to walking dinasours. Humans have incredible imaginations and have imagined many things that are not real. They have also imagined things that were real but that they did not know were real at the time."
People do not imagine things which are real that they have not seen or heard of, in any detail like we see in the examples provided. Detailed drawings showing known dinosaurs in upright positions as well as detailled depictions of scales, eyewitness stories etc.. You of course are free to believe what you want, but you are ignoring a lot of data in favor of an hypothesis about a world no one has ever seen. Your extreme bias is evident in everything you write, yet you accuse me of being blind and ignorant.
"Humans have imagined many things that did not exist at the time, but later came into existance. Humans imagined that they would fly in aircraft for centuries before the Wright Brothers first flew. Does this mean that people were actually flying in aircraft for centuries before the Wright Brothers? I don't think so"
But they didn't draw pictures of 757 aircraft with engines, windows and cockpit all detailed.
"This flaw is consistent with people who try to prove Bible stuff. Invariably, they fail to rule out alternative explanations and just accept their own theories as fact.
A theory is not proven until alternative explanations have been ruled out."
LOL, you might want to apply this to your own pet beliefs about the past. Historical documents and eye witness testimonies are not "theories", they are facts. These facts argue strongly for the existance of man and dinosaurs, you simply are not willing to consider the evidence. I don't think any evidence would be sufficient for you, but there is more to come anyway.
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 11:03 AMThis is a very feeble attempt to correct your incorrect ancient book of hearsay. Because it has been a good laugh for many years to ask the Christian why the Bible didnt mention dinosaurs in the scheme of things when it was attempting to lay out how we got here. I want to know how Moses got those two T-Rexes on his fucking little boat. In this long winded to do about nothing you said that the creator who created itself from nothingness created dinosaurs and man on the sixth day. Now I MIGHT have been able to fathom man existing possible around the very end of the dinosaurs existance. But you make the foolish assertion that they were created side by side....I was glad to see the article where other Christians are trying to push this too. I like to know what those nut cases are up to since they have graduated to domestic terrorism these days.
Here's something you can use when defending this theory. The reason they havent found any human remains from the same time as the dinosaur bones is because they were eaten by the dinosaurs and were in the dino shit. History will remain in tact because what you have posted here is nowhere near truth.
BTW, have you ever read comic books? Have you ever seen the things that are drawn from the human imagination? What about the face of Jesus on the potatos? You are trying to base history on an ancient comic book on a cave wall...
Not buying it, but nice try though. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 12:00 PMwho says Noah would have had adult T-Rex's on the boat Adam when young small dinosuars would do just fine? Numerous capacity studies reveal that there was plenty of room on the ark for all species which existed at the time. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 2:13 PMOOOOHHHH, okay.That ark was a cool piece of work wasnt it? I mean, look at what it held.
Amphibians 6,199
Birds 9,956
Mammals 5,416
Reptiles 8,240
Insects 950,000
Dinosaurs 1,500
And all of the different specific foods they all ate including but not limited to EXTRA species of those used for said foods. It is amazing that man has been around for 230 million years when scientists can only trace the human fossil record back to 200,000 years.
Almost as amazing as the exodus.... -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 2:39 PM"And all of the different specific foods they all ate including but not limited to EXTRA species of those used for said foods. It is amazing that man has been around for 230 million years when scientists can only trace the human fossil record back to 200,000 years."
Adam
Im pretty sure Dan is a young earth creationist so what you said would not make sense. He probably believes the earth is only 6000 years old. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sat, December 20, 2008 - 3:31 PMThat would not suprise me at all. But hey, that would make my 3000yr old arrowhead worth more money.Ha!Ha!
You want to really see him trip with no luggage, watch this next tribe post.Ha!Ha!
-
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 11:06 AM<who says Noah would have had adult T-Rex's on the boat Adam when young small dinosuars would do just fine? Numerous capacity studies reveal that there was plenty of room on the ark for all species which existed at the time. >
You can't be serious.... The Noah story is about as ridicules as you can get. Capacity studies? Are these the same studies that determined Santa Claus's slay would have enough room to carry toys for all the worlds children?
This is why nobody will ever take you seriously Dan, you gullibility is unfathomable. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 3:37 PMScurvy, you do not debate, you simply attack. If you and I were to have a formal debate I would skin you alive. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 4:27 PMSure thing there cowboy, if the moderator was an 8 year old child.
Dan, you are a fool. You'll bellieve anything that comes down the pike if it suits your bible lust.
Your what con men call a mark.
Your what snake oil salesmen call a shill.
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 4:30 PMWhats next, jesus riding a flying unicorn into the battle with a cloven hooved goat man?
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, December 24, 2008 - 5:15 PMand you're an ass, so what do we do now, shall we get together and have a fist fight? say something or please excuse yourself, you are not intelligent enough to offer debate. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Thu, December 25, 2008 - 11:18 AMohhhh, don't like to be challenged eh?
You can dish it out passive aggressive style but ya can't take it.
You get all flustered and challenge me to a fist fight like some knuckle dragging ape.
Dan, you wilds claims are antiquated 15th century bullshit, just like that the mojo voodoo book you put so much stock in. The book that makes you feel justified in being a righteous asshole, but a rightous asshole is still an asshole.
Your universaly reviled and on this forum and you may want to take pause and ask yourself why.
You stomp your feet and huff and puff. You refuse to concede any good points. You view every challenge as a attack on your dogma and you snidely denigrate everyone else as christian haters and atheist fools.
Your not here to evangelize or win people over, your here to agitate.
Admit it, own it, and stop whining like a candy ass. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Thu, December 25, 2008 - 3:19 PMDan has not felt the spirit of God. He defends God in these debates but his heart stays empty and without God.
This is why he is angry. Angry at you, angry with God.
Pray for him. Ask God to help him. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Thu, December 25, 2008 - 6:35 PMHow do you, a god hating stalker and alt, recommend someone pray Ma'mo? Who are you anyway. Are you deep water, your only friend?:-)
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Thu, December 25, 2008 - 6:34 PMI just know that most most atheists are limp wristed sissy's. There is a difference between the two of us. I will engage people in serious discussion, you will not. You simply throw you stupid ad homs and pretend to be above it all. You are a pitiful fool.
Do you really think that I care about whether I am "universally" liked or disliked? I can assure you that I do not. Wendy is the but kisser, not me. I tell it like it is and let the chips fall where they fall. In spite of this, you are incorrect about this. I have had many cordial discussions and PM's with folks with whom I disagree passionately. They understand that there is a person behind my rhetoric. The only reason you don't is because you are a shallow non thinking individual, so kicking your butt is about the only way to connect with you.
I have admitted many times that my main purpose here is not to evangelize. I am here to debate, argue and quarrel. I felt "heated debate" was a reasonable place to be for a guy like me. The day I arrived, I was treated to Wendy encouraging bigfoot to have oral intercourse with a well endowed black man. I guess that is the discussion you and others were looking for. Well have at it, I will refrain from those thoughtful threads.
Christianity, atheism, homosexuality etc. are all relevent subjects in our culture today. I am willing to discuss these things while others are apparently not. I have also discussed global warming, the light bulb ban and many other issues so the bible is not my only interest. It is however, central to my thinking. It is fascinating to see the differences in outlook just based upon how a person feels about this book.
In spite of what you think, I am not a hateful person, but please don't pass this around, I have a reputation to uphold:-)
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 1:44 PM"Christianity, atheism, homosexuality etc. are all relevent subjects in our culture today. I am willing to discuss these things while others are apparently not. I have also discussed global warming, the light bulb ban and many other issues so the bible is not my only interest. It is however, central to my thinking. It is fascinating to see the differences in outlook just based upon how a person feels about this book."
Dan you do not discuss these things. You just quote others from the ancient book of hearsay. There's no discussion value in that. And without it you are brainless. It is nice however to see that I am not the only one you talk shit about and degrade to elevate yourself. But so far you have lied in EVERY POST.Ha!Ha!
You are at the very least CONSISTANT.. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Fri, December 26, 2008 - 6:26 PMActually, I do discuss things and although I did not resort to the bible at all in my opening statement on this thread (not that you would notice). However, I will quote the bible whenever I feel the need or desire to so and will not be the least intimidated simply because you lack the understanding of its importance. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Mon, December 29, 2008 - 9:23 AM"his is not coherent. nor does it answer my statement. Scientists such as Newton, Linnaus, Kepler, Pastuer, Mendel and others were not persecuted by anyone, they were ardent believers in God and the bible. Even Galileo and Copernicus were both biblical apologests. On another tribe, I answered the Galileo "persecution issue" in detail. Secularists have tried to rewrite history here, but they have no case."
This is a silly argument considering they were all raised as christians and knew no other way. Your argument can be applied to any religion that produced scientists or great men(or women) of learning. The fact that Aristotle was a multigod worshiping pagan did not stop the church from declaring much of his philosophy as absolute truth. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Mon, December 29, 2008 - 9:32 AM"This statement is silly and useless. If one has good arguments, there is no need to revise them just to look progressive. Evolutionists are still using the same arguments they did when I was in college, I guess this means they have made no progress."
There are two fundimental flaws in your statement. First you assume that the ID arguement "its good because we say so" is actually a good arguemnt. Its not. Secondly evolutionists have been adapting Darwin's work as they go along. The theory of Evolution has been expanded and tweaked and continues to do so. So the basic argument may be the same but the evidence is mounting through other fields of science like genetics.
The biggest problem here is that the creationist movement has offically denied the very science that they could use to find evidence, things like carbon dating. They have no tools to work with because they deny the tools exist or are accurate.
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Mon, December 29, 2008 - 6:53 PMGenetics is no friend of evolution Dragon. Had genetics been around during Darwins day he would not have been able to advance his lamarkian views.
You, like many educated folks, assume that evolution has been validated by overwhelming amounts of scientific evidence, when in actuallity it is the biggest fraud of modern times. On the surface, it seems plausible to many, but when you dig a little deeper you run into the complete absurdity of it all. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 8:48 AM"Genetics is no friend of evolution Dragon. Had genetics been around during Darwins day he would not have been able to advance his lamarkian views.
You, like many educated folks, assume that evolution has been validated by overwhelming amounts of scientific evidence, when in actuallity it is the biggest fraud of modern times. On the surface, it seems plausible to many, but when you dig a little deeper you run into the complete absurdity of it all."
Im well aware of what your opinion is Dan. Now could you please post some data from a reliable scientific source (not an ID or creationist site) showing the genetic evidence against evolution? Show me the absurdity of the entire scientific community.
"On the surface, it seems plausible to many, but when you dig a little deeper you run into the complete absurdity of it all"
Ironically I hear this from athiests describing the bible from time to time.. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 9:01 AM"Nearly every branch of science was founded by a bible believing Christian. I maintain that this is no coincidence but due to the fact Christianity encourages exploration."
Remember how I said that technology is directly affected by social pressures? Religion is one of the big ones. It is as a rule unfriendly to both technology and science. Christianity has always been unfriendly to new ideas from the time its brethren burnt down the library of Alexandria. Your statement above has no real value as it was practically a crime not to be christian at the time these sciences were founded. A pagan scientist would not have been taken serously even if he was right. More then likely he would have been jailed or worse for his views. As it was many founders of today's science were hounded and even killed for their beliefs and evidence in contrast to the church's views regardless of their faith in God. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 11:18 AM"Remember how I said that technology is directly affected by social pressures? Religion is one of the big ones. It is as a rule unfriendly to both technology and science."
You state this but what objective evidence do you advance in support of this assertion? None! As stated, and demonstrated, modern science sprang from Christianity and biblical axioms. No proof exists of a war between science and biblical faith. This myth has been advanced by virtue of public ignorance of history and likely you are not competent to defend this propaganda either.
"Your statement above has no real value as it was practically a crime not to be christian at the time these sciences were founded. A pagan scientist would not have been taken serously even if he was right."
untrue and irrelevent .The point remains that the timing of the modern science movement was near the peak of the reformation. These scientists were not under constrant to believe, they were ardent believers who often stated that they were "thinking Gods thoughts after Him." There faith is well documented and the argument stands.
"As it was many founders of today's science were hounded and even killed for their beliefs and evidence in contrast to the church's views regardless of their faith in God."
Name two scientists the church has hounded and two that the church has killed for their scientific convictions.
-
-
Genetics no Friend of Evolution
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 10:53 AMAs the following Geneticist explains, all selection processes in nature end with a genetically "poorer" result. We see no sequences anywhere on planet earth of the opposite occuring. Organism change is always downhill, never uphill. If evolution were true, we should find thousands upon thousands of information gaining mutations in the germ cells of organisms around the world. But we don't find any!
Mutations are usually deleterious, sometimes neutral, rarely beneficial BUT NEVER CONTRIBUTE TOWARD AN INFORMATION GAIN IN THE GERM CELL OF ANY ORGANISM. When evolutionists attempt to debate this point, they almost always focus on one celled organisms. Even here, they lose. But when we look at higher organisms all we see are downhill trends. We see fish losing eyes, beetles losing wings and people losing the ability to store and move oxygen properly (sickle cell). But we don't see new organs being added.
Thus, evolution is unobserved anywhere in the universe! When Darwin was concocting his inhertance of aquired characteristis myth, Mendal was doing real science, showing that organism inheritance is predictable and stable.
by Maciej Giertych
As a forester, I study populations of trees and breed more productive ones. I have done much reviewing of forest genetic literature and writing of monographic volumes on various forest tree species for the Institute of Dendrology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, where I work. I often contribute chapters on genetics. I know of no biological data relevant to tree genetics that would require evolutionary explanations. I could easily pursue my career without ever mentioning evolution.
EVIDENCE LACKING
However, being also an academic teacher in population genetics, I found it necessary to play down the evolutionary explanations given in textbooks, for the simple reason that I find no evidence to support them. In fact, it was my teaching of population genetics, coupled with the discovery that my children are being taught evolution in secondary school on the claim that population genetics provides evidence for it, that made me enter the debate publicly.
I had been taught that palaeontology gives the bulk of the evidence for evolution. To my surprise, I found that evidence is lacking not only in genetics but also in palaeontology, as well as in sedimentology, in dating techniques, and in fact in all sciences. However, here I shall restrict myself to a review of the arguments for evolution drawn from my field, genetics.
Perhaps the most evident misinformation in textbooks is the suggestion that microevolution is a small-scale example of macroevolution.
MICROEVOLUTION
The example used to support this is usually the story about the grey or black moths (Biston betularia) living on the bark of trees, the population adapting in colour to the colour of the bark — darker in industrial, polluted environments, and lighter in cleaner ones.
The misinformation lies in concealing the fact that select, adapted populations are genetically poorer (fewer alleles1) than the unselected natural populations from which they arose. We find the same in forest trees. In polluted environments, the surviving trees have fewer alleles than in non-polluted ones. Microevolution, formation of races, is a fact. Populations adapt to specific environments with the more successful alleles increasing in numbers and others declining in frequencies or disappearing altogether. Change can also occur due to accidental loss of alleles (genetic drift) in small isolated populations. Both amount to decline in genetic information. Macroevolution requires its increase.
BREEDING
The same is true of breeding. Breeders eliminate unwanted genes making domesticated forms genetically poorer. These are usually helpless in nature and perish when left without human help. If not, this is due to quick inter-breeding with wild forms that replenish the gene pool.
Most of the successes in breeding come from guided recombination. The breeder pools certain rare genes into one individual or population to achieve the desired combination of traits. Nothing new is produced.
POSITIVE MUTATIONS?
A useful mutation (e.g. an orange without seeds) is not the equivalent of a positive mutation. I felt uneasy lecturing about positive mutations when I could not give an example. There are very many examples of negative and neutral mutations, but none I know of which I could present as a documented example of a positive one.
Genetic literature on the subject often confuses mutations with alleles, or even mutations with recombinations. The finding of an allele that is useful for some purpose is not the equivalent of demonstrating a positive mutation — similarly when the find concerns a useful recombinant of alleles existing in the gene pool.
Variants of alleles in a gene pool are a fact of life. How they came to be is another matter. Some, usually neutral or excessively deleterious, arise from mutations. Some are introgressants from other species. Still others are within the population since its origin — however that came about.
Professor Maciej Giertych, M.A.(Oxford), Ph.D.(Toronto), D.Sc.(Poznan), is head of the Genetics Department of the Polish Academy of Sciences at the Institute of Dendrology in Kornik, Poland. He is on the editorial board of two international periodicals: Silvae Genetics, published in Germany, and Annales ses sciences forestieres published in France. He is a member of the Polish Academy of Sciences Committee on Forest Sciences, and on the Forestry Council in the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources and Forestry. He is the author of about 150 scientific papers in Polish and international periodicals.
Photo: The Photo Library, by W&D McIntyre
Much evolutionary publicity is attached to forms that develop resistance to man-made chemicals. Usually they are variants that normally exist in nature but were selected out by the chemical reagent.
In one instance, it was demonstrated that a single nucleotide substitution in the genome was responsible for resistance to a weed-specific herbicide. The herbicide is 'custom-made' for attachment and deactivation of a vital protein specific for the weed plant. A single change in the genetic code for this protein, in the sector used for defining the herbicide attachment, deprives the herbicide of attachability and therefore of its herbicidal properties. Such a change has no selective value except in the context of the man-made herbicide. Even if originating from mutation (it could be a rare neutral allele always present in the population but springing into prominence because of the use of the herbicide) this would be no more than a neutral mutation; not depriving the protein of its function but neither creating a new function for it. So where is the evolution?
UNIVERSALITY OF THE GENETIC SYSTEM
Similarities are often used as arguments for evolution. But lack of similarities is never accepted as an argument against it. The similarity of the shape of my hand and that of a frog is an argument for common ancestry. The difference between mine and that of a horse or a bat is not. And yet the latter are supposed to be closer relatives of mine.
The same logic is used when claiming that the universality of the genetic system (DNA-RNA-protein) proves common ancestry. There are many biochemical systems that are not universal. They are specific for some groups of organisms and absent in others. These are never accepted as arguments against evolution.
MOLECULAR GENETICS
Many hoped that molecular genetics would confirm evolution. It did not. It confirms taxonomic2 distances between organisms, but not the postulated phylogenetic3 sequences.* It confirmed Linnaeus,4 not Darwin.
Molecular genetics presented new problems. Genomes [all the genes in an organism] have multiple copies of genes or of noncoding sequences, very homogeneous within a species but heterogeneous between species. Such 'repeats' could not have been formed by random mutations acting on a common genome of a postulated ancestor. Some unexplained 'molecular drive' is postulated to account for these copies. It is simpler to assume there was no common ancestral genome.**
What do we see in the short time interval available to our cognition? An increase in the number of useful alleles or a decrease? An increase in the number of species or a decrease? An increase in information in nature or loss of it? Is nature moving from chaos to ever-increasing organization, or from an organized state towards ever-increasing chaos? Evolution is not a conclusion drawn from observations. It is an ideology to which observations are applied when convenient and ignored when not.
Having entered the battle against evolution I found myself confronted not so much by scientists as by philosophers. In an atmosphere of rejecting all communist propaganda my views received considerable publicity and popular interest in Poland. Strangely enough, Marxist and Catholic philosophers joined forces to combat my activity. In fact, Catholic clergymen, even some bishops, are most prominent in defending evolution. I found it necessary to study the theological and philosophical objections to the writings of such people as Fr Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.
The confrontation with the philosophers is the difficult part. My forestry training did not prepare me for this. Now I battle both in scientific circles and within the Church. But my activity is bringing results.
The teachers of evolution are beginning to speak in less convincing words. The offensive in support of evolution is so intensive and so well financed that it appears evolutionists are very worried.
They should be.
Refrences and Footnotes
An allele is one of two or more alternative forms of a gene, which determine the same characteristic but produce a different effect (e.g. the eye-colour gene can have a 'brown' or 'blue' allele).
Taxon: category in classification, e.g. species, phylum.
Phylogeny: the supposed evolutionary history or family tree of a species or other group.
Linnaeus classified plants and animals in the eighteenth century, establishing the modern study of taxonomy.
*Evolutionary history. — Ed.
**That is, the basic types of organisms did not arise by evolution from a common ancestor. — Ed. ancestor. — Ed.
reply to this
-
-
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Mon, December 29, 2008 - 6:49 PM"This is a silly argument considering they were all raised as christians and knew no other way."
the same could be said for most atheists Dragon. It is nonsense to argue that these men didn't consider the veracity of their beliefs. Newton wrote a book on the evidences for the inspiration of Scripture, he was no cultural Christian, but a devout one, who was well acquainted with the folly of atheism.
"Your argument can be applied to any religion that produced scientists or great men(or women) of learning. The fact that Aristotle was a multigod worshiping pagan did not stop the church from declaring much of his philosophy as absolute truth."
Many people have contributed to science, but no religion can boast the beginning of the systematized modern science movement other than Christianity. Nearly every branch of science was founded by a bible believing Christian. I maintain that this is no coincidence but due to the fact Christianity encourages exploration. Unlike other religions such as hinduism, which hold that reality is really a delusion, Christianity teaches an orderly comprehensible creation made by a logical orderly Creator. This is consistant with science with assumes causality. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 12:50 PMtbi -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 12:56 PMare you doing better now?:-) -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 1:21 PMtbi -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 1:38 PMIt is likely dealing with little kids:-) -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Tue, December 30, 2008 - 3:04 PMThey allow Dan near little kiddies?
Pray they do not let him teach Sunday School. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 9:19 PMa series of bumps along the back of one.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 1:47 PM<<the same could be said for most atheists Dragon. It is nonsense to argue that these men didn't consider the veracity of their beliefs.
Then by your standards Zeus and many other Pagan God's must of been real. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 2:07 PM"Must have been real," not "must of been real."
(Sorry, Jeff. :) ) -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 2:09 PM(I just posted about this four hours ago. It was fresh on my mind. :)
tribes.tribe.net/allnighte...8a03c3a5a4 ) -
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 4:39 PMI told you these women need to get laid. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 4:43 PMPreaching to the choir. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 5:34 PMPirate and Enrika, women (nor men) should NOT get laid . -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Made Out with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 5:59 PMit's forbidden
-
Unsu...
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 6:37 PMI think we should have you unsubscribed.
You have accused endlessly. You sputter hate and needless Christian directives at everyone endlessly. You are a nuisance. You're also insane. You are a puppet of Christian hate. I'm bored of seeing your posts. In effect, you want only to be a valve of modern day false Christianity, trying to pull its stank-hate on everyone, in some weak attempt to get them to bow to you. You are evil. You have gone way beyond the bounds of propriety, ever since being so interested in some flattery or verbal dalliance between Loki and Pinky. You talk endlessly about sex, and your need (Christian need) to control others' bodies. You are a delaying tactic. You are here to stop dialogue, to consistently insist that everyone stop their sex (these pagans), while Christians continue. You are illogical, insane, in need of a psychiatrist.
Let's contact TOU. Nearly any few posts by Jason strung together to see his MO would be enough to warrant him being unsubscribed. -
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, October 7, 2009 - 2:43 PMThis debate was extinct on arrival. Nearly all the points Dan has made are based on Dans inability to understand science,evolution and how scientific method works. He throws in some myths and misunderstandings that go to show he doesn't understand the subject matter enough to debate it.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Are the footprints actually human ?
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 3:55 PMDAN POSTED : Human Footprints with Dinosaur Tracks?
Consider also that in 1983, researchers reported in the science and engineering news section of The Moscow News that they had discovered what appeared to be a human footprint in 150-million-year-old Jurassic rock, next to a giant, three-toed dinosaur footprint. The article stated:
This spring, an expedition from the Institute of Geology of the Turkmen SSR Academy of Sciences found over 1,500 tracks left by dinosaurs in the mountains in the southeast of the Republic [Turkmen Republic—BH/BT]. Impressions resembling in shape a human footprint were discovered next to the tracks of prehistoric animals (see “Tracking Dinosaurs,” 1983, 24:10).
RESPONSE: I wonder if that calim will go the way of the phony Paluxy river footprints which creationists calimed were the footprints of a bipedal dinosaur , that turned about after apparent closer inspections of the proportionsa of the toemarks and other structural features to have been actually foorprints of a bipedal dinosaur running along side the footprints of other dinosaurs , and apparently not footprints of other human tracks at all ?
-
Re: Dinosaurs Coexisted with Man - The Evidence
Wed, October 7, 2009 - 9:43 PM<Yet an honest reader will be surprised that such overwhelming evidence exists and wonder why this information has been withheld from them by public education, media, textbooks, teachers and professors. The bible teaches that man and dinosaurs were created on day 6, >
The bible doesn't say anything about dinosaurs.
<along with all other land dwelling mammals. It also describes a great flood which swept over the world and the world that then was, perished>
It also describes a world that was created in the begining and then became dark and void, before being rejuvenated in six
Yoms, which are periods of time not necessarily days. We don't much bibically speaking of the period of time between the begining and when the world became dark and void, but based on Fossil evidence there were millions of years, dinosaurs and a serious celestial impact meteor or commet.