Dinosaurs Never Existed?

[Dharma Flower]

There is a trend I've seen on the internet that I think is very shortsighted, the denial that dinosaurs ever existed. What is the motivation for denying the past existence of dinosaurs?

There is evidence that humans existed before dinosaurs. Here is one example:

In December of 1862, the following brief but intriguing report appeared in a journal
called The Geologist. "In Macoupin county, Illinois, the bones of a man were recently
found on a coal-bed capped with two feet of slate rock, ninety feet below the surface of the earth. . . . The bones, when found, were covered with a crust or coating of hard glossy matter, as black as coal itself, but when scraped away left the bones white and natural." The coal in which the Macoupin County skeleton was found is at least 286 million years old and might be as much as 320 million years old.
Full text of "Michael Cremo Hidden History Of The Human Race"

There is evidence that humans existed at the same time as dinosaurs:

Dinosaur/Human Footprints
Dinosaur/Human Footprints | Forbidden History

Primitive Man's Knowledge of Dinosaurs
Primitive Man's Knowledge of Dinosaurs | Forbidden History

It seems that the more we learn about ancient humanity's relationship with dinosaurs, the more it calls the evolutionary timeline into question. What reason, then, would creationists have for denying that dinosaurs even existed in the first place?

 

[USincognito]

1. Dinosaurs exist to this day.

2. A hard of T-Rex walking down the streets of Billings, MT in 2016 would effect evolution less than a single T-Rex tooth in Triassic strata.

 

[USincognito]

Dinosaur/Human Footprints
Dinosaur/Human Footprints | Forbidden History

Oh my! Even Creationist organizations realize that the Paluxy prints aren't human.

 

[Tetra]

Who is claiming dinosaurs never existed?!?!?!

Oh wait... I'll take a guess... the same people who think the earth is still flat.

 

[Dharma Flower]

Who is claiming dinosaurs never existed?!?!?!

Oh wait... I'll take a guess... the same people who think the earth is still flat.

Yeah, you would be correct on that, as far as I've seen.

 

[Gene2memE]

There is evidence that humans existed at the same time as dinosaurs:

Dinosaur/Human Footprints
Dinosaur/Human Footprints | Forbidden History

Primitive Man's Knowledge of Dinosaurs
Primitive Man's Knowledge of Dinosaurs | Forbidden History

It seems that the more we learn about ancient humanity's relationship with dinosaurs, the more it calls the evolutionary timeline into question. What reason, then, would creationists have for denying that dinosaurs even existed in the first place?

There's better evidence of willful denial of reality to fit religious presuppositions though.

Besides, the Paluxy footprints would be better evidence of man spontaneously transitioning into a plantigrade dinosaur and then back again, all in the space of a dozen strides.

Seriously, do you apply research and critical skepticism to your sources, at all?

 

[Kiterius]

 

[Subduction Zone]

.....

Besides, the Paluxy footprints would be better evidence of man spontaneously transitioning into a plantigrade dinosaur and then back again, all in the space of a dozen strides.


......

So you are saying that Reptiloids are real.

Hmm, I guess that would explain Miley Cyrus:

 

[Dharma Flower]

Seriously, do you apply research and critical skepticism to your sources, at all?

Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson applied eight years of researching mainstream sources in writing Forbidden Archeology:

Writing in Geoarcheology,[9]:338 anthropologist Kenneth L. Feder said, "While decidedly antievolutionary in perspective, this work is not the ordinary variety of antievolutionism in form, content, or style. In distinction to the usual brand of such writing, the authors use original sources and the book is well written. Further, the overall tone of the work is far superior to that exhibited in ordinary creationist literature. Nonetheless, I suspect that creationism is at the root of the authors' argument, albeit of a sort not commonly seen before."
Forbidden Archeology - Wikipedia

If a modern human skeleton found was found in a 300 million-year-old layer of slate rock in Illinois, that would, by definition, call the evolutionary timeline into question, and show that humans lived prior to dinosaurs.

I would guess that, given the amount of dinosaur fossils actually found, that there were far fewer dinosaurs on this earth than we're being led to believe. There would be no reason, then, that humans couldn't have survived with dinosaurs living on this planet.

Humans and dinosaurs might have just lived in different geographic areas and only occasionally crossed paths.

 

[Dharma Flower]

View attachment 187550

I don't believe that Jesus lived at the same time as dinosaurs, though I won't rule it out. According to the law of karma, there is a specific reason why dinosaurs became extinct:

Michael Cremo: I do not accept the Darwinian theory of evolution. But I accept the evolution of the conscious self through different kinds of bodies. These bodies are vehicles for conscious selves. According to one's level of consciousness, one obtains a certain kind of body. Today, because there are no conscious selves that require a dinosaur body, we do not observe such bodies in the world around us. But the universe is a big place, and such bodies could be present elsewhere.
Michael Cremo on Forbidden Archeology, Our Billion-Year-Old Human History and the Spiritual Satisfaction of the Vedas | The Daily Bell

Both Hinduism and Buddhism teach that you may have been a dinosaur in a past life.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Humans didn't exist in the same time period as the dinosaurs.

 

[Gene2memE]

Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson applied eight years of researching mainstream sources in writing Forbidden Archeology:

Proceeds to give Wikipedia quote which has nothing to do with the reliability or veracity of C&T's work. The writers may well use original sources, but that's the bare minimum for a work of that type. I guess getting over the first hurdle is progress. Yay for them? I guess?

If a modern human skeleton found was found in a 300 million-year-old layer of slate rock in Illinois, that would, by definition, call the evolutionary timeline into question, and show that humans lived prior to dinosaurs.

Operative word in that sentence: IF

Then you've got the little issue of the amount of evidence that humans would have left behind if they'd been around for 100 times longer than the evidence points to.

Afterall, our hominini antecessors left lots of evidence behind over the past 6 million years. There are better than 12,000 whole or partial skeletons of human evolutionary forebears and close relatives. Yet, there are no suspiciously upright, large cranium bipeds popping up out of sequence in the record.

I would guess that, given the amount of dinosaur fossils actually found, that there were far fewer dinosaurs on this earth than we're being led to believe.

Guessing doesn't win you any prizes, unless you're at the county fair.

You realise there are better than 500 genra and more than 1200 described non-avian dinosaur species, at present. Along with another 600-900 fossils that could potentially be additional species.

The estimates are that there are a total of 1500-2400 genra of dinosaur, in total, and somewhere between 2000 and 4000 species of non-avian dinosaur in total.

At current rates, we're discovering and describing 12 to 15 new dinosaur species every year, and the rate has only accelerated (in the 70s and 80s, it was about 6 to 8 new species per year).

Estimates range from us having discovered maybe 15% of all potential species, up to about 30%.

There would be no reason, then, that humans couldn't have survived with dinosaurs living on this planet.

Sure, I agree. We survived Pleistocene megafauna after all. Only, there's plenty of evidence showing our co-existence with these animals, and none for humans 300 million years ago.

Humans and dinosaurs might have just lived in different geographic areas and only occasionally crossed paths.

We cross paths with animals that are dinosaurs all the time - they're known as birds.

Sure though. The dinosaurs just kept to their sides of Pangea and Gondwanaland and we stuck to ours. A classic gentleman's agreement.

Our maybe our "higher" super evolved ancestors kept them in some kind of amusement park.

 

[Dharma Flower]

Sure, I agree. We survived Pleistocene megafauna after all. Only, there's plenty of evidence showing our co-existence with these animals, and none for humans 300 million years ago.

In December of 1862, the following brief but intriguing report appeared in a journal called The Geologist: "In Macoupin county, Illinois, the bones of a man were recently found on a coal-bed capped with two feet of slate rock, ninety feet below the surface of the earth...The bones, when found, were covered with a crust or coating of hard glossy matter, as black as coal itself, but when scraped away left the bones white and natural." The coal in which the Macoupin County skeleton was found is at least 286 million years old and might be as much as 320 million years old. (138)
Human Past Index

One can Google the above report from 1862 for oneself, since it's available online.
The Geologist

So yes, there is at least some evidence that humans existed before dinosaurs.

 

[Loudmouth]

There is a trend I've seen on the internet that I think is very shortsighted, the denial that dinosaurs ever existed. What is the motivation for denying the past existence of dinosaurs?

The same as the motivation to deny that hominid transitional fossils exist, or that genetic evidence for shared ancestry between humans and apes exist.

There is evidence that humans existed before dinosaurs. Here is one example:

There is evidence that humans existed at the same time as dinosaurs:

Dinosaur/Human Footprints
Dinosaur/Human Footprints | Forbidden History

Those are completely bogus.

Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track" controversy

When you have to support your argument with known frauds, what does that say?

 

[Loudmouth]

One can Google the above report from 1862 for oneself, since it's available online.
The Geologist

So yes, there is at least some evidence that humans existed before dinosaurs.

Did you actually read it? All it says is that the bones were found under coal. It didn't give an age for the coal bed or the human bones. The article seems to indicate that the bones weren't even permineralized which would indicate that the fossil is probably young.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Did you actually read it? All it says is that the bones were found under coal. It didn't give an age for the coal bed or the human bones. The article seems to indicate that the bones weren't even permineralized which would indicate that the fossil is probably young.

To me it seems to say that it was on top of a bed of coal and that bed of coal was capped by slate. If the man was on top of it that would only give an upper limit for age. It would be the material that was over it that was not mentioned that would give a lower limit for its age. It could be only a few years old and recently buried as written.

 

[Gene2memE]

One can Google the above report from 1862 for oneself, since it's available online.
The Geologist

So yes, there is at least some evidence that humans existed before dinosaurs.

Lets look at the quality of that evidence:

It's second hand report of a media article from a local newspaper - La Salle Presse - inside a popular geology monthly periodical. A total of two sentences and six lines of text represent the total length of information.

There is no assessment of the validity of the claim. No first hand accounts. The discoverers are anonymous and there is no physical evidence presented. There is no record, anywhere, of the bones being properly studied or dated - despite the 1860s being one of the heyday periods for paleontology - and no skeleton remains appear to have been kept for study.

C&L go on to claim that the coal is from the Pennsylvanian period of the Carboniferous, making it 286-320Mya. That's fine. But, Macoupin County's coal is formed from sea and lowland deposits:

During the Pennsylvania Period, Illinois and most of the Midwest were part of a tropical region that was covered by shallow seas and swampy, forested river deltas and river floodplains. The region was a part of the Earth's crust that was sinking very slowly in such a way that areas within it were repeatedly and alternately covered by shall shell sands that accumulated on the sea bottoms became mudstone and limestone beds. The muds, sands, and thick peat beds that accumulated in the deltas and floodplains became mudstone, sandstone, and coal seams. Sets of marine beds alternate with sets of lowland beds.​

But, does the skeleton show typical traits of bone fossilised in a lowland or marine or semi-aquatic environment?

No.

What the article states is that the skeleton was covered with a hard, glossy black coating, that when scraped away revealed white bones.

Not a typical fossil at all.

What it is typical of is objects that are caught up in coal and/or sediment & coal slurry and rapidly reburied. The slurry then rehardens as the water drains away and concretes around the object.

Viola, instant (give or take five years) "300 million year old human skeleton".

Given the prevalence of coal mines in the Macoupin County area at the time, this scenario seems vastly more plausible than an intact and unfossilized skeleton in a coal layer.

I did all this 15 years ago. Started out thinking I'd found a great, secret truth - until I actually started checking some of the claims myself.

Tell me, why do you think almost none of these finds have been subject to radiometric dating? Why are almost all of C&L's fossil remains from periods prior to 1950?

 

[Strathos]

So you are saying that Reptiloids are real.

Hmm, I guess that would explain Miley Cyrus:

Just don't call them Silurians. They hate that.

 

[Dharma Flower]

Tell me, why do you think almost none of these finds have been subject to radiometric dating? Why are almost all of C&L's fossil remains from periods prior to 1950?

While the bulk of Forbidden Archeology focused on discoveries made before 1950, many of the discoveries that scientists use today to support human evolution are still from that time period. Furthermore, Cremo and Thompson did present more recent discoveries as well, and this is the condensed version of their work:
The Hidden History of the Human Race free download - Krishna Path

I am sorry if that example from 1862 is unreliable. One might have to evaluate all the evidences Cremo and Thompson provide, and then decide for oneself if the overall picture they present is compelling.

One of the examples given in the book is that when specimens of H. erectus were found in China, there were also found skeletal remains of modern humans in rock layers that could have placed modern humans as living contemporaneously as H. erectus, depending on whether one decided that those human fossils came from the upper end or the lower end of that particular geological era.

The reason why those remains of modern humans were judged to have been embedded at a later time than H. erectus is because they were morphologically dated, meaning that the archeologists who discovered them insisted that they must have lived later than H. erectus simply because that's what the evolutionary timeline would predict.

Based on the actual place of where the modern human remains were found, in comparison to where the H. erectus remains were found, one could conclude that they lived in the same time period, depending on whether one assumed that they lived in the upper or lower end of that geological era, a conclusion which would depend on the interpreter. I am sorry if I am not explaining this very well, but there's a chapter on it in the link I shared above.

 

[Shemjaza]

H. erectus and H. sapiens living in the same era is hardly controversial.