Dan: Sorry, man, but it's you who is misreading it. Look for the actual underlying premise that goes with his claims about the dinosaurs' biology.
The guy is claiming that fossilized dinosaurs' cancers (which, frankly, I hadn't heard about, but won't dispute for the moment) and fossilized evidence of dinosaurs eating each other supports the idea of humans and dinosaurs living side by side, because he starts from the premise that the Fall of Man caused sin and death to enter the world. The chronology he promotes is:
1. Humans and dinosaurs live side by side in perfect health and vegetarian harmony.
2. Humans sin.
3. Death enters the world.
4. As a result, some dinosaurs start having to eat other creatures, including other dinosaurs, and some of them die of other problems, such as cancer.
THAT is his premise, an absolutely unquestionable one (to him), so he cannot fathom the notion that this evidence could be interpreted in some other fashion -- say, simply as evidence that certain dinosaurs got cancer and that some of them ate meat.
Of course, neither of these observations has the slightest bearing on chronology relative to humans, either before or after. But there are millions of other pieces of evidence to deal with that, and he probably thinks they're bogus for no other reason than because his premise cannot permit them to be true.
I'll go along with the "So Close And Yet So Far" Award nominations for this one.
~David D.G.
