Dinosaurs...?

[Chanya]

Any takers on this red-hot topic within Christianity and creationism/evolution? They were real and they, like most other fossil animals, prove evolution. Don't they? Or does anyone actually believe dinosaurs weren't real? They walked the earth 65 million years ago. Care to explain that from a creationist point of view...?

Thanks,

Chanya

 

[Biblewriter]

I do not know of even one creationist that denies that dinosaurs were real.

But I know many that do not believe the allegations about how long ago these creatures lived here.

I have studies every dating system they use and every one of them that can be used on fossils involves at least one unprovable assumption.

 

[Chanya]

Do you have an example of what such an unprovable assumption would be?

And how long ago exactly are were the dinosaurs here then, if they were here recently (which I find ridicilous)? Did the co-exist with man or precede him? And if they preceded him, wouldn't that prove the Genesis account of creation wrong?

 

[Biblewriter]

Do you have an example of what such an unprovable assumption would be?

And how long ago exactly are were the dinosaurs here then, if they were here recently (which I find ridicilous)? Did the co-exist with man or precede him? And if they preceded him, wouldn't that prove the Genesis account of creation wrong?

My answer was delayed by a stint in the hospital. I had surgery last Monday.

As to unprovable assumptions, Carbon 14 dating is based on an assumption that we have always been receiving the same amount of Cosmic radiation from outer space that we are now receiving. This neglects the possibility that the earth might have passed through a long period without sunspots, or that out Solar system could have passed through a large cloud of interstellar dust. Either of these possibilities would have significantly reduced the amount of cosmic radiation being received on the earth.

Tree ring dating is absolute, providing the data is carefully enough analyzed. But tree ring dating begins to show significant variations to Carbon 14 dating in its older regions. And that only goes back a few thousand years!

But aside from that, there is significant evidence that humans and dinosaurs once cohabited the earth.

For an exceedingly clear photograph of a rock containing a human footprint intruded upon by a dinosaur footprint, and a discussion of analysis of that rock using Spiral CT scan technology, go to: YouTube - ‪Dinosaur and Human Footprints Authenticated‬‏

This was in Cretaceous strata.

In addition to this, check out the many fossil displays in the Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, TX. click on the Museun displays link at:
Creation Evidence Museum Online - General Information

Among other displays, this website includes a sample of Cretaceous rock with an embedded iron hammer!

On a trip in which I accompanied him, my brother found a fossilized board on a sandbar in the Mississippi river. Unfortunately he was careless with it and it broke apart and he discarded it. A friend of mine absolutely insisted having personally seen a fossilized board with circular saw marks in it. That friend is now dead. I know that neither of these anecdotes can be accepted as scientific evidence, because neither of them can be proved. But I personally know of these things. These are proof to me that the process of fossilization does not take the extremely long times that geologists tell us it takes.


If the fact that all this comes from creationists sources, check out "The Carboniferous Mystery," Scientific American, CLXII (January, 1940), 14. This is hardly a source prejudiced by Creationist ideology.

This article discussed human like footprints which occur over much of the United States in Carboniferous strata.

In true evolutionary style the author concluded"

" If man, or even his ape ancestor, or even that ape ancestor's erly mammalian ancestor, existed as far back as in the Carboniferous Period in any shape, then the whole science of geology is so completely wrong that all the geologists will resign their jobs and take up truck driving. Hence for the present at least, science rejects the attractive explanation that man made these prints in the mud of the Carboniferous period with his feet."

But that simple conclusion did not get rid of the footprints!

These are just a few examples of strong evidence that is willfully and systematically ignored by evolutionists.

 

[miamited]

Hi Chanya,

I've followed many of your posts. However, I'm going to just throw out some things for you to consider. Do with the knowledge as you will.

Dinosaurs did exist. Here's the real surprise, some scientists believe that they still do. One of the 'special' qualities God bestowed at creation upon reptiles is that they apparently never stop growing. Isn't He awesome! Just consider how wise you'd have to be to have given every creature all of the unique qualities that each one has.

Reptiles never stop growing! For as long as they live, breath and eat they will grow. If, we believe the Scriptural account of the creation, there was no death before sin entered the creation and even after sin entered the creation, life spans for people were still very, very long. It would certainly be logical that if sin is what has caused death and life spans of people were hundreds of years long, why wouldn't the life spans of other creatures also be long? After all, without death, then all the other creatures must also have been created to live forever.

So, it's very possible that the large dinosaurs were various kinds of reptiles who had just grown for hundreds of years. There is also a Scriptural reference to a creature that God asked Job about that certainly seems to fit the modern day description of a dinosaur.

"Can you pull in the leviathan with a fishhook or tie down his tongue with a rope? Can you put a cord through his nose or pierce his jaw with a hook? Will he keep begging you for mercy? Will he speak to you with gentle words? Will he make an agreement with you for you to take him as your slave for life? Can you make a pet of him like a bird or put him on a leash for your girls? Will traders barter for him? Will they divide him up among the merchants? Can you fill his hide with harpoons or his head with fishing spears? If you lay a hand on him, you will remember the struggle and never do it again! Any hope of subduing him is false; the mere sight of him is overpowering. No one is fierce enough to rouse him. Who then is able to stand against me? Who has a claim against me that I must pay? Everything under heaven belongs to me. "I will not fail to speak of his limbs, his strength and his graceful form. Who can strip off his outer coat? Who would approach him with a bridle? Who dares open the doors of his mouth, ringed about with his fearsome teeth? His back has rows of shields tightly sealed together; each is so close to the next that no air can pass between. They are joined fast to one another; they cling together and cannot be parted. His snorting throws out flashes of light; his eyes are like the rays of dawn. Firebrands stream from his mouth; sparks of fire shoot out. Smoke pours from his nostrils as from a boiling pot over a fire of reeds. His breath sets coals ablaze, and flames dart from his mouth. Strength resides in his neck; dismay goes before him. The folds of his flesh are tightly joined; they are firm and immovable. His chest is hard as rock, hard as a lower millstone. When he rises up, the mighty are terrified; they retreat before his thrashing. The sword that reaches him has no effect, nor does the spear or the dart or the javelin. Iron he treats like straw and bronze like rotten wood. Arrows do not make him flee; slingstones are like chaff to him. A club seems to him but a piece of straw; he laughs at the rattling of the lance. His undersides are jagged potsherds, leaving a trail in the mud like a threshing sledge. He makes the depths churn like a boiling caldron and stirs up the sea like a pot of ointment. Behind him he leaves a glistening wake; one would think the deep had white hair. Nothing on earth is his equal-- a creature without fear. He looks down on all that are haughty; he is king over all that are proud."

Notice the descriptives that God uses to explain about these creatures He has made, to Job. The first creature is obviously a large sea creature. He speaks of putting many harpoons in him and fishing spears. And it would seem clear that God expected Job to know this creature because He asks if Job could turn this huge creature into a pet for his children.

Now, maybe you are one who considers this account of Job to be some fairy tale, but even those who consider such a thing, make the claim that the fairy tales are there for a purpose. What would the purpose be of a fairy tale that makes these claims. What do you think God is intending for us to understand from this particular passage of this fairy tale?

The LORD said to Job: "Will the one who contends with the Almighty correct him? Let him who accuses God answer him!" Then Job answered the LORD: "I am unworthy--how can I reply to you? I put my hand over my mouth. I spoke once, but I have no answer-- twice, but I will say no more." Then the LORD spoke to Job out of the storm: "Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me. "Would you discredit my justice? Would you condemn me to justify yourself ? Do you have an arm like God's, and can your voice thunder like his? Then adorn yourself with glory and splendor, and clothe yourself in honor and majesty. Unleash the fury of your wrath, look at every proud man and bring him low, look at every proud man and humble him, crush the wicked where they stand. Bury them all in the dust together; shroud their faces in the grave. Then I myself will admit to you that your own right hand can save you. "Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox. What strength he has in his loins, what power in the muscles of his belly! His tail sways like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are close-knit. His bones are tubes of bronze, his limbs like rods of iron. He ranks first among the works of God, yet his Maker can approach him with his sword. The hills bring him their produce, and all the wild animals play nearby. Under the lotus plants he lies, hidden among the reeds in the marsh. The lotuses conceal him in their shadow; the poplars by the stream surround him. When the river rages, he is not alarmed; he is secure, though the Jordan should surge against his mouth. Can anyone capture him by the eyes, or trap him and pierce his nose?

Here God speaks to Job of a creature that He calls behemoth. Look at the descriptives used here. He is huge, but feeds on grass. His tail sways like a Cedar and the sinews of his thighs are close-knit. His bones are like tubes of bronze and his limbs like rods of iron. He ranks first among the works of God, yet his Maker can approach him with his sword. Again, it would seem clear that God expected Job to know this creature. And look what He tells Job about creating them both. "Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you..." God seems to think that Job and this behemoth lived at the same time. (BTW I included the first few verses before the description of the behemoth because I'd like you to read over what God says to Job about saving himself; about condemning God to justify himself. God flat out challenges Job, if he can do any of the mighty things that God can do, then God himself will admit that Job can save himself.)

Now, many claim that this is probably some form of an elephant or mastedon, but curiously, neither of these creatures have or had tails that would be described as a sweeping cedar that sways. As a matter of fact, there really isn't any creature existing on the earth today that fits this odd descriptive, except for alligators and crocodiles and they don't fit the bone structure descriptives. Their bones aren't particularly large and certainly don't seem to be seen as 'tubes of bronze' and their other limbs are quite puny. No, there is really only one creature that we have knowledge of that fits all the descriptives given here.

Now, people will say, 'but there's no way that dinosaurs could have lived with man!' Why, the earth is a pretty big place and in the days of these accounts it wasn't covered with people, buildings, roads, etc. Dinosaurs and large sea creatures could have lived quite well among man and there been very few collisions between them.

continued

 

[miamited]

No, friend, the whole of the evolutionary theory of dinosaurs hangs on one 'fact'. Dating methods that we use. How we date the sedimentary soil and how we date bone and other objects that we find surrounding these fossils when we find them. My contention is that our dating methods are flawed. Most all of them begin with several unkowns that are explained as known. For example, and I use this one because it is the easiest to explain: Carbon dating, which measures the amount of carbon remaining in an object must 'assume' what the beginning amount of carbon was on the earth and in the atmosphere as having always been constant. It must also 'assume' that the rate of decay has always been a steady constant. All dating methods have some built in 'assumptions'.

Further, there are some 'tests' that do give us very young ages. For example: Volcanoes and earthquakes are believed to be caused by pressures that build up within the earth's core. The earth's core is said to be very hot. Just as when we boil water the molecular structure expands and if you have a lid on the pot it will begin to lift up because of the pressure of the expanding water molecules. Similarly, the earth's crust is a sort of 'lid' on the pot. There is evidence that 'if' this pressure has been building at a constant rate, then if we allow for the million/billion year history of the earth, it would have completely blown apart by this time. Again, and I readily admit, that these methods also have some built in 'assumptions', but the point is that depending on the assumptions we are willing to trust, 'science' can prove either position of earth age.

I find that God's word says that His righteous ones shall live by faith and I have been convicted in my spirit by, I believe by God's Spirit, that part of this faith includes that I will just take God at His word. If He said He did it in six days, which is repeated several times in the Scriptures, then I'm going with that. If He says that He created Adam and Eve of the dust of the earth, then I'm going with that. If He says that He created Adam on this sixth day of creation and then counts out for me the very years of the generations that I can acquire a fairly accurate date for the creation, then I'm going with that. Remembering and reminding myself always that another of God's caveats is that He will make foolish the wisdom of the wise of this age. Also remembering and reminding myself God's definition of 'miracle'.

The creation is a miracle of God and as we look through the things that the Scriptures account for us as miracles that came from God, one of the clear descriptives is that it cannot be accounted for by any wisdom or power of man.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Papias]

Biblewriter wrote:

This was in Cretaceous strata.

In addition to this, check out the many fossil displays in the Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, TX. click on the Museun displays link at:
Creation Evidence Museum Online - General Information

Among other displays, this website includes a sample of Cretaceous rock with an embedded iron hammer!

Biblewriter shows us that he has fallen for well debunked hoaxes.


It's really quite pointless to dispute the 4.55 billion year age of the earth. Not only are the various methods done carefully with only well known and reasonable assumptions, but more importantly, they are multiply confirmed by other dating methods.


If methods are wrong, they'll give wrong answers. It seems odd to suggest that they'll happen to all give the same "wrong" answer, when thousands of tests are done on hundreds of samples - yet, over these samples, the dozens of different methods (some radioactive, some not) agree with each other.

This is all explained more on this thread: http://www.christianforums.com/t7426528/#post53775303 Post #10

The question the old earth deniers need to answer is:

"why do the various dating methods (including C14, K-Ar, varves, dendrochronology, ice cores, obsidian, protein racecimization, speleotherms, superposition, geologic event dating, geomagnetic polarity, Pb/U, association, Rb/St, and others), agree with each other when more than one can be used on the same sample?"

Papias

 

[Biblewriter]

Biblewriter wrote:



Biblewriter shows us that he has fallen for well debunked hoaxes.


It's really quite pointless to dispute the 4.55 billion year age of the earth. Not only are the various methods done carefully with only well known and reasonable assumptions, but more importantly, they are multiply confirmed by other dating methods.


If methods are wrong, they'll give wrong answers. It seems odd to suggest that they'll happen to all give the same "wrong" answer, when thousands of tests are done on hundreds of samples - yet, over these samples, the dozens of different methods (some radioactive, some not) agree with each other.

This is all explained more on this thread: http://www.christianforums.com/t7426528/#post53775303 Post #10

The question the old earth deniers need to answer is:

"why do the various dating methods (including C14, K-Ar, varves, dendrochronology, ice cores, obsidian, protein racecimization, speleotherms, superposition, geologic event dating, geomagnetic polarity, Pb/U, association, Rb/St, and others), agree with each other when more than one can be used on the same sample?"

Papias

I said nothing about the age of the earth. I am an old earth creationist. I only spoke of the unreliability of the dating methods used. But the evidence I did give is overwhelming evidence that men and dinosaurs once cohabited this earth. You claim this evidence has been debunked. I answer that the video that I posted successfully debunks this alleged debunking.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Hello Chanya.

-----------------

If, we believe the Scriptural account of the creation, there was no death before sin entered the creation and even after sin entered the creation, life spans for people were still very, very long. It would certainly be logical that if sin is what has caused death and life spans of people were hundreds of years long, why wouldn't the life spans of other creatures also be long? After all, without death, then all the other creatures must also have been created to live forever.

Except none of this is mentioned in the Bible.

If the fact that all this comes from creationists sources, check out "The Carboniferous Mystery," Scientific American, CLXII (January, 1940), 14. This is hardly a source prejudiced by Creationist ideology.

This article discussed human like footprints which occur over much of the United States in Carboniferous strata.

These don't look like real footprints at all. There is no actual indent where the heel and toes would have pushed down, the toes are much too elongated and in the wrong place (the picture on the left shows the toes running halfway down the foot) and - most damningly - these "footprints" were found among American Indian carvings. Hardly evidence.

 

[KerrMetric]

As to unprovable assumptions, Carbon 14 dating is based on an assumption that we have always been receiving the same amount of Cosmic radiation from outer space that we are now receiving.

You know what? When people make stupid statements like yours they should just keep quiet. It makes us Christians look like fools to others.

I am a physicist, I don't make stupid statements about carpentry or bricklaying because I know bugger all about them. Likewise, people who know bugger all about physics should keep quiet about C14 dating or other such topics.

 

[LinuxUser]

Get Answers - Answers in Genesis

and

Dinosaurs and the Bible - Answers in Genesis

 

[LinuxUser]

double post
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/1999/11/05/dinosaurs-and-the-bible

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

(From Answersingenesis.com)
Goodness, where to begin ...

No scientist was there to see the dinosaurs live through this supposed dinosaur age. In fact, there is no proof whatsoever that the world and its fossil layers are millions of years old. No scientist observed dinosaurs die. Scientists only find the bones in the here and now, and because many of them are evolutionists, they try to fit the story of the dinosaurs into their view.
Other scientists, called creation scientists, have a different idea about when dinosaurs lived. They believe they can solve any of the supposed dinosaur mysteries and show how the evidence fits wonderfully with their ideas about the past, beliefs that come from the Bible.

So dinosaurs and people co-existed ... yet nobody ever saw a dinosaur die ... this makes scientists are wrong and 'creation scientists' right, somehow ...

Evolutionists declare that no man ever lived alongside dinosaurs. The Bible, however, makes it plain that dinosaurs and people must have lived together. Actually, as we will soon see, there is a lot of evidence for this.

As a Christian I feel rather bad for saying this but - a quote from the Bible is not 'evidence'. Or rather, their personal interpretation is not evidence.

The Bible teaches (in Genesis 1:29–30) that the original animals (and the first humans) were commanded to be vegetarian. There were no meat eaters in the original creation. Furthermore, there was no death. It was an unblemished world, with Adam and Eve and animals (including dinosaurs) living in perfect harmony, eating only plants.

The above passage does not suggest everyone was vegetarian before the Fall, nor is death caused by human sin.

When we see the bones of dinosaurs, we can be reminded that death was not a part of the original creation. Death is actually an intruder, entering when the first man disobeyed God.

This is nonsense. So long as there has been life there has been death, and death is not evil.

-----------------------

This is both really funny and really sad. I feel sorry for anyone you thinks Christianity actually teaches this bilge:

 

[Biblewriter]

Hello Chanya.

-----------------


Except none of this is mentioned in the Bible.

These don't look like real footprints at all. There is no actual indent where the heel and toes would have pushed down, the toes are much too elongated and in the wrong place (the picture on the left shows the toes running halfway down the foot) and - most damningly - these "footprints" were found among American Indian carvings. Hardly evidence.

I have no idea where you got the information in your last statement. But it most certainly did not come from the article I quoted.

 

[Biblewriter]

You know what? When people make stupid statements like yours they should just keep quiet. It makes us Christians look like fools to others.

I am a physicist, I don't make stupid statements about carpentry or bricklaying because I know bugger all about them. Likewise, people who know bugger all about physics should keep quiet about C14 dating or other such topics.

I was precisely correct in stating that the underlying assumption of Carbon 14 dating is that the earth has always been receiving the same amount of cosmic radiation from outer space that it is now receiving. The basic assumption is that the fraction of atmospheric carbon that is the Carbon 14 isotope is constant. But that basic assumption has an underlying assumption that is not necessarily correct.

Carbon exists in the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide, which is breathed out by all living things and is necessary because plants use it to make sugar by photosynthesis. Normal carbon is Carbon 12. But a very small fraction of the carbon atoms in the atmosphere are Carbon 14, an isotope of Carbon which behaves chemically exactly like the normal Carbon 12 atoms. So the Carbon 14 becomes part of a carbon dioxide molecule in the atmosphere and is eventually consumed in the manufacture of sugar by plants in the process of photosynthesis. As this photosynthesis is the first step in all food chains, the Carbon 14 eventually becomes part of all living things.

On the assumption that the fraction of all atmospheric carbon that is Carbon 14 is a constant, scientists estimate the age of something that was once alive by testing how much Carbon 14 is in the sample. This is because Carbon 14 is a radioactive isotope that has a half life of approximately 5730 years. That is, after 5730 years, plus or minus 40 years, half of the Carbon 14 in something that was once alive will naturally decompose into Nitrogen 14. But this is also true of the Carbon 14 that is still in the atmosphere. In 5730 years, half of the Carbon 14 presently in the atmosphere will decompose into Nitrogen 14. This would make the fraction of Carbon 14 in the atmosphere a variable unless something were continually producing Carbon 14 atoms. The mechanism that does this is cosmic radiation, which the earth continually receives from outer space. The cosmic radiation converts Nitrogen 14 atoms into Carbon 14 atoms. Since the amount of cosmic radiation the earth is currently receiving has been constant for some time now, the fraction of atmospheric carbon atoms that are the Carbon 14 isotope is constant. But this has not necessarily always been the case.

If the amount of cosmic radiation received by the earth was significantly different thousands of years ago, then the fraction of atmospheric carbon that would be the Carbon 14 isotope would have been significantly different. One change that could possibly have caused this is that our solar system may have passed through a cloud of interstellar dust some thousands of years ago. This would have significantly reduced the amount of cosmic radiation that the earth received. Since most of this cosmic radiation received by the earth comes from the sun, and a great deal of that comes from sunspots, a long period of low sunspot activity some thousands of years ago could have similarly reduced the amount of cosmic radiation received by the earth. Either of these scenarios would have made all carbon 14 dates on objects from that period produce dates much older than the object actually was.

We know that there was a different Carbon 14 fraction in the atmosphere some time ago because Carbon 14 dating begins to differ significantly from tree ring dating on wood that is more than about three thousand years old.

 

[miamited]

Hi Papias,

You wrote: Biblewriter shows us that he has fallen for well debunked hoaxes.

Please don't just single out Biblewriter, please include me in that number.

Thank you and God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

I have no idea where you got the information in your last statement. But it most certainly did not come from the article I quoted.

Granted I didn't find the actual Scientific American article itself, but the pictures come from here. The photographs are from the original 1940 article, written by Albert G. Ingalls, and even has the same quote: "If man, or even his ape ancestor's early mammalian ancestor, existed as far back as the Carboniferous Period ..."

If this is the same article (and if I'm wrong you could send us the link) it's pretty obvious these are not footprints at all, hence they're not evidence humans and dinosaurs lived alongside each other.

 

[Biblewriter]

Granted I didn't find the actual Scientific American article itself, but the pictures come from here. The photographs are from the original 1940 article, written by Albert G. Ingalls, and even has the same quote: "If man, or even his ape ancestor's early mammalian ancestor, existed as far back as the Carboniferous Period ..."

If this is the same article (and if I'm wrong you could send us the link) it's pretty obvious these are not footprints at all, hence they're not evidence humans and dinosaurs lived alongside each other.

I cannot give you a link because I did not find this on a web page, but in the 1940 magazine itself. But you are forgetting that the article clearly states that human-like footprints occur in many places in the United states. And thank you for admitting that you manufactured the evidence you referred to in claiming:

"and - most damningly - these "footprints" were found among American Indian carvings."

I admit that the photographs in the article do not look very human. That is understandable in an article denying their evidence. But if you don't like those photographs, try this one:

http://ianjuby.org/delk/delk_friable.jpg

or this:

Creation Evidence Museum Online - The London Artifact

or these:

Creation Evidence Museum Online - Meister Sandal Track

http://184.154.224.5/~creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27

http://184.154.224.5/~creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30

http://184.154.224.5/~creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26

or try to explain how the Cambodians made this in 1186:

http://184.154.224.5/~creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=25

 

[EphesiaNZ]

If this is the same article (and if I'm wrong you could send us the link) it's pretty obvious these are not footprints at all, hence they're not evidence humans and dinosaurs lived alongside each other.

Doe's the Godzilla movies prove humans and dinosaurs walked on the Earth at the same time?

 

[Greg1234]

(From Answersingenesis.com)
Goodness, where to begin ...


So dinosaurs and people co-existed ...yet nobody ever saw a dinosaur die ...

Here, you've changed scientists to people and set up a universal (all people rather than those who can actually testify today).

this makes scientists are wrong and 'creation scientists' right, somehow ...

There are a number of things refuting Darwinism including the point you've isolated, bloated, universalized, misrepresented and attacked. They are all scientists (including those who are excommunicated and chastised) by the way. Just not a member of your denomination of science. The fact that man and dinosaur coexisted mainly comes through an analysis of data. It will be highlighted as it helps creationists understand the history of creation overall, it is an example of trite Darwinian suppression, unnecessary speculation, and it is [more] evidence against Darwinism

As a Christian I feel rather bad for saying this but - a quote from the Bible is not 'evidence'. Or rather, their personal interpretation is not evidence.

The above passage does not suggest everyone was vegetarian before the Fall, nor is death caused by human sin.

No the bible does not teach that all were vegetarians. But it does teach that death entered as a result of sin. In Rev 22:14 you find that only those whose "robes are clean" can have access to the tree of life. That Adam had access to the tree of life shows that his "robes" were in fact already clean.

This is nonsense. So long as there has been life there has been death, and death is not evil.

God will never die. In the first chapter we have the spiritual creation of life. There's no death there either. In the beginning of Genesis 2 you have man created from his spiritual basis and here he is immortal. This is due to him retaining core spiritual attributes while created in flesh. A "transitional" rendered as "spiritualized flesh" (see the Nazarene). Then you have sin and mortality with long time spans. These long spans are again, due to being on the fringe of immortality. Then you have a gradual drop in average life spans as depicted. Some refer to this as the evolution and devolution of life (no not Darwinism)

The overall stasis of life we witness is on par with Creation. Then came Darwin with his doctrine saying that somewhere we can't see bacteria turn into bacteriologists. Note that this is no different from materialists' prior assertion that somewhere we cant see life is being built randomly. This supposedly "refutes" creationism and creationists are asked to give up their faith and uphold materialistic faith.

-----------------------

This is both really funny and really sad. I feel sorry for anyone you thinks Christianity actually teaches this bilge:

This is actually a correct depiction of the sequence of events (though it will be rendered as bilge to materialists and Christian Darwinists). As a Christian, I would be dishearted to think that anyone thinks Christianity teaches the materialist's creation story,

YouTube - ‪Evolution of Humans Animated 4 billion years in 8 minutes Carl Sagan FileCabi net‬‏

Somebody should have told Mr Sagan that mutations for adaptation are not random and it is as unlimited as a car's mechanisms to switch on/off its lights. In fact, he should have done one like this on cars.