What were dinosaurs really like?

[Calminian]

I'll be the first to admit, I've always held a fantasy-view of dinosaurs. I was there on opening night for all 3 Jurassic Parks, absolutely entranced by the images on screen. Therefore it's become somewhat a bitter pill to learn they may not have been quite as dynamic as portrayed on film.

Was watching a secular documentary the other day, which downgraded the running speed of the T-Rex from 35 MPH to a very humble 10-15 MPH. That means I perhaps could have out run this creature without any need of a jeep! And according to creationist Carl Wieland, they may have avoided running altogether as it may have been quite dangerous for them. A beast of that size tripping and falling would have often been fatal. (See his articles, Dinosaurs—were they masters of the world? and The bigger they are … ) The documentary also touched on the brain-cavity of the T-Rex which was apparently quite small compared to previous estimates. If these particular experts are correct, T-Rex was slow and dumb. I'm crushed. (though I'm still holding out hope that T-Rex was at least a little more agile than these "experts" believe.)

But from a biblical/historical perspective I suppose this also makes sense and fits well with the evidence. Dinosaurs didn't last very long after the flood, and given two particular facts, I can see why. 1) Dinos were slow and dumb. 2) God ordained hunting immediately after the flood.

If I were an early pagan postdiluvian man looking for fame and notoriety, slaying a dragon would seem a good idea. It would be much safer than going after a huge agile intelligent animal like a bear. Plus they look a heck of a lot scarier than bears, and I could just gild the lily a bit on the details of the hunt and thoroughly impressed all those standing around looking at the caucus.

This may also explain why legends often portray dragons the way they do—extremely intelligent, and physically invincible. They fly, have magical powers, are utterly ruthless, and yet are quite witty. Could these attributes have risen from the exaggerated stories of early postdiluvian dragons slayers who took out some relatively vulnerable (yet large) theropods? Seems plausible to me.

Thoughts?

First Dragon Scene from The Hobbit

Last Dragon Scene from The Hobbit

 

[SkyWriting]

I'll be the first to admit, I've always held a fantasy-view of dinosaurs. I was there on opening night for all 3 Jurassic Parks, absolutely entranced by the images on screen. Therefore it's become somewhat a bitter pill to learn they may not have been quite as dynamic as portrayed on film.

It was discussed at length that Velociraptors were more like the size of chickens than as portrayed in the movie.
Scientists LOVE to exaggerate as much as they can get away with to make an impression for funding.

 

[Coelo]

What people call Dinosaurs were around for almost 200 million years. For the creationist they were the first carnivorous. At the time of Pangaea there was one land mass they called a super continent. The conditions were very hot and humid and there was a lot more water in the atmosphere. So their skin like the crocodile today was very tough to handle the humid conditions. They have names like reptiles, lizards and amphibians. Then the earth became cold and even we entered into an ice age. The atmosphere could no longer hold all the humidity and it fall to the earth and then froze. Pangaea broke up and continental drift or plate tectonics began. The last big extinction was around 64 million years ago. This was the beginning of the modern era we live in now when mammals began to dominate.

 

[Lantern Keirebu]

I actually think the dinosaurs (and all creatures) looked very different in the beginning. I believe the fossils we have of them, are actually their evolved forms, and not necessarily how they originally looked when God created them. Remember in the beginning we are told that all life would live off of a vegetarian diet. I believe once death entered the world, the animals began fighting and eating each other. So, their bodies began to adapt to this new diet and intake. Now I'm not saying for instance that dinosaurs didn't have sharp teeth in the beginning, but fundamentally I believe their make up was different from what we see of them in the fossil record. (The same for all the animals as well) I don't even believe Adam and Eve looked exactly like us in the beginning.

 

[Calminian]

I actually think the dinosaurs (and all creatures) looked very different in the beginning. I believe the fossils we have of them, are actually their evolved forms, and not necessarily how they originally looked when God created them. Remember in the beginning we are told that all life would live off of a vegetarian diet. I believe once death entered the world, the animals began fighting and eating each other. So, their bodies began to adapt to this new diet and intake. Now I'm not saying for instance that dinosaurs didn't have sharp teeth in the beginning, but fundamentally I believe their make up was different from what we see of them in the fossil record. (The same for all the animals as well) I don't even believe Adam and Eve looked exactly like us in the beginning.

Yeah I think you're right on the money on this. The prelapsarian animals were likely much different than modern animals and even ancient animals we find in the fossil record. I would surmise also Adam and Eve must have been quite the human specimens. We know from the Genesis record the snake underwent significant physiological changes at the time of the Curse, as did Eve as did the ground as did the plants. Implicitly other animals did also. According to Josephus and his sources, other animals had the gift of speech in addition to the snake before the curse. Josephus also reported that God made the snake venomous at the time of the Curse and took away its legs. If his historical sources were accurate I would surmise that many animals were altered by God to prepare them for the world they now lived in. And since there was no death

I would also surmise that the animals that descended from those on the Ark were significantly different from their ancestors that lived soon after the fall. I'm sure animals began to change within their kinds just like they do today into several different species. If only two were choses to go on the ark, then a significant bottlenecking of that kind would have occurred. Just as humans significantly devolved after the flood, so must have the various animals kinds.

 

[Calminian]

What people call Dinosaurs were around for almost 200 million years. For the creationist they were the first carnivorous. At the time of Pangaea there was one land mass they called a super continent. The conditions were very hot and humid and there was a lot more water in the atmosphere. So their skin like the crocodile today was very tough to handle the humid conditions. They have names like reptiles, lizards and amphibians. Then the earth became cold and even we entered into an ice age. The atmosphere could no longer hold all the humidity and it fall to the earth and then froze. Pangaea broke up and continental drift or plate tectonics began. The last big extinction was around 64 million years ago. This was the beginning of the modern era we live in now when mammals began to dominate.

For the creationists, they were the first carnivores? Where did you here that from? All land carnivorous creatures were created the same day.

But there are some correlations between the creation and naturalistic views. Both believe there was likely a singular land mass originally. Both believe the climate was very different in ancient times, they just define ancient differently. Creationists believe the antediluvian world had a much different climate, more humidity just as you describe. They also believe the Pangea separated, only they believe it happened during the great flood very quickly. In fact, this may have been the mechanism God used to create the flood. They also believe the ice age started soon after the flood. So there are correlations, the only difference is the amount of time needed.

I would surmise that dinosaurs after the flood were perhaps inferior to those that live prior. And the bottlenecking of the gene pool would have had a similar affect on them as it did on humans. Since they died off so fast, I would also suspect they were not the invincible creatures depicted in Jurassic Park. My guess is they were slow and not too bright, and fairly easy to kill by human hunters. And they would have been great trophies for bragging rights, considering how scary they looked.