Alright...let me start of by providing to you my main point with this thread. Humans and dinosaurs did live together on this earth...plain and simple. I've come to this conclusion through much research and personal reflection.[!?] I have come to except that modern science is not simply wrong about this fact...but actively covering it up and feeding the lie to protect their holy grail..aka...evolution. I'm going to go through and give you a few examples of some cases where ancient peoples had excellent evidence of "prehistoric" creatures in their lives...as well as some evidence to show how modern science is trying to cover up this fact.
26 comments
Yes, humans and dinosaurs did live together on this earth... separated by some 60 million years.
And mention of a "behemoth" in the bible is not evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted.
"I've come to this conclusion through much research and personal reflection.."
...none of which I am going to share with you here today, because, like, sharing research? Now that's just crazy talk.
@Brendan Rizzo
Actually, he DOES try to support his position with, uh, "proof."
He copypasted a carving of something that could be Sauropods. Maybe. And he said that dragon myths were actually true stories describing relict dinosaurs. And of course he mentions the reconstituted T-Rex callogenous proteins at the center of the thickest thigh fossil. Except he makes the claim that they found actual CELLS.
Which, of course, is BULLSHIT. The cells only left imprints in the nonorganic stone of the fossil, the DNA degraded millions of years ago, and a node of fossilized callogenous protiens that had to be reconstituted with a chemical bath=/= SOFT TISSUE.
But even though he's wrong on so many levels, at least he didn't just make a blind assertion of his Flintstones claim, right?
/sarcasm
'Avian dinosaurs' exist right now, they are called birds.
P.S Your 'personal reflection' is meaningless to science and everyone else on the planet.
Their stupidity continues on with gems like
Why is it any easier to accept the results of tests that are obviously inaccurate? What gives evolutionary scientists any more credibility that creationist scientists?"
@ChakatBlackstar
That's... I actually never thought of it that way.
But if Dinosaurs would disprove Evilution, then what about SHARKS? Or the Nautilus, Sea Star, and the Coelacanth! Or fuckin' BUGS, for that matter! All coexisted with dinosaurs or predated them by hundreds of millions of years, yet still are alive in more or less the same form today!
Well, that fucks over that particular argument...
@ J. James:
The argumentum ad dinosauria (yes, I know it's Greek, sue me) doesn't quite work that way. The idea (and I use the word loosely) is that 'Science says Dinosaurs died 65mya, well, if human folks lived alongside them they didn't live 65mya but only 6kya, so that proves the Bible (read: Bishop Ussher) is right about the age of the Earth, so there!'.
I didn't say it was a good argument. Interestingly, Ed C*nrad uses an exactly opposite argument, i.e. that humans and dinosaurs co-existing is proof that humans lived 65mya, which proves ... something or other.
I find that interesting..through personal reflection I have come to the conclusion that Nyk537 should be thrown in jail.
That truthy feeling in your gut can obviously never be wrong..can it?
My gut says you need to be jailed. Im sure you will agree, seeing as we are fellow personal reflectors.
@J. James
And of course he mentions the reconstituted T-Rex callogenous proteins at the center of the thickest thigh fossil. Except he makes the claim that they found actual CELLS.
Thanks for clueing me in as to where the creationists keep coming up with that "soft tissue found inside dinosaur bones" claim.
@Joe Mama
The process itself(not the bastardized bullshit creationists claim it to be) is actually pretty fascinating. The bone around the node fossilizes and serves as like an amber casing for the petrified node of proteins, which can later be slowly reconstituted from stone in a chemical bath, but it only works with the thickest of bones.
The creationists, however, completely butcher it and say that mummified marrow jerky(for the lack of a better term) was found in these fossilized bones.
Even if there were evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted, that wouldn't destroy evolution.
It'd force a pretty thorough reevaluation of our understanding of prehistory, but evolution as a concept would be A-OK.
@Bollox
Ah. That is actually even funnier. The fossil record doesn't exactly mix ammonites and people.
Oh, how creationists LOATHE the neat little evolutionary columns fossils so conviniently form.
Little do they know that it's really a Illuminati conspiracy and we atheists have been completely fabricating that "evidence" for over 200 years! Muahahahahaha!!
Scientists, unlike fundies, don't have a personal stake in what the truth is, and therefore have no reason to cover things up. They believe in evolution for no reason other than the evidence for it.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
