Job 41:1-10
Hippo, croc
Yes, you're right. But we also don't have proof that they do not exist!
You don't prove negatives.
Upvote
0
Job 41:1-10
Yes, you're right. But we also don't have proof that they do not exist!
shernren said:What reasons do YECs have to believe that dinosaurs exist? After all,
1. dinosaurs are not mentioned in Scripture
Dinosaurs probably would have been slightly more noticeable to those ancient Hebrews.chesslord243 said:the Bible never said anything about amoebas existing, but they do exist. besides, we have bones of dinosaurs!!!
Sorry, no dinosaur there.xpiotosaves said:Job 41:1-10
xpiotosaves, meet the Flying Spaghetti Monster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_spaghetti_monsterYes, you're right. But we also don't have proof that they do not exist!
I'm trying to prove dinosaurs exist and you're trying to prove to me that evolution exists. I guess you really showed me upsteen said:Sorry, no dinosaur there.
xpiotosaves, meet the Flying Spaghetti Monster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_spaghetti_monster
And the Invisible, Pink Unicorn" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
Mallon said:Dinosaurs probably would have been slightly more noticeable to those ancient Hebrews.
And 2 unicorns -- don't forget they're in Revelation!xpiotosaves said:The bible doesn't mention many animals. What is it supposed to say?
"And God said to Noah 'Gather 2 pandas, 2 kangaroos, 2 sloth, 14 lambs, 2 Edmontosaurus'"
I didn't know rhinos had two horns since clearly the unicorn mention in the KJV did. Also in the KJV the lefted "leviathan" untranslated since it's not so obvious exactly what it was. Then some believe behemoth could be an elephant. For all we know it could have been a dinosaur.Mallon said:And 2 unicorns -- don't forget they're in Revelation!
Unless we interpret "unicorn" as "rhinoceros", and "leviathan" and "behemoth" as "crocodile" and "hippopotamus", which would likely make more common sense.
So do rhinoceros:Smidlee said:I didn't know rhinos had two horns since clearly the unicorn mention in the KJV did.
Not that I give a hoot for the KJV, anyway. But we've thoroughly analyzed the behemoth/leviathan issue before (even recently) in these threads. I think the argument for either one of these creatures being prehistoric dinosaurian beasts is weak at best.Also in the KJV the lefted "leviathan" untranslated since it's not so obvious exactly what it was. Then some believe behemoth could be an elephant. For all we know it could have been a dinosaur.
It's better not to be too dogmatic when it not necessary.
It very well may be. One thing we can agree on, however, is that if the passage you cited was making reference to a real animal, it was not some flying horse with a horn coming out of its head. It was in reference to some extant animal that would have been known to the New Testament community. If we believe this to be true, then we can certainly come to see the description of Leviathan and Behemoth in a new light, knowing that the authors of the Bible had a tendency for the dramatic in their descriptions of God's creatures.Smidlee said:I forgot rhinos had the smaller horn above the huge one. My mistake. Some had suggust a unicorn was a wild ox.
Well, go for it. Start showing proof instead of just making unsubstantiated claims.xpiotosaves said:I'm trying to prove dinosaurs exist
I couldn't care less. I merely object when you make false claims about Science.and you're trying to prove to me that evolution exists.
Well, you were shown to have no evidence, only speculation that you want us to perceive as facts. Not my fault that you don't know what evidence actually is.I guess you really showed me up
So all you have are "just because I say so" postulations and pictures from Paluxy:johnd said:There are several good Christian resources about what we call today "dino-saurs." ...
What makes you say that? Can you give one single instance when, say, a paper refuting macroevolution was rejected from a journal for any reason besides poor science?johnd said:Most of them by rights ought to be in renowned science journals the world over, but political correctness dictates that any who oppose macro-evolution are to be silenced, excluded, hidden away...
Did unicorns and fairies exist, too? They're widely cited creatures as well.The concept of dragons is in both the Bible and other ancient documents and history giving credence to the fact that dragons (which today we call dinosaurs) did exist.
Do you find it easier to make a convincing argument by calling your opponents "prejudiced"?Modern "scholars" whose personal prejudices are against the accuracy and historicity of the Bible have tried to say the Bible was referring to elephants and alligators by these names.
See previous threads in this forum that give plausible, alternative interpretations to these passages.But the Bible describes behemoth as having a tail like a cedar tree, and leviathan has a mouth that can swallow a river.
Even if "Lucy" were a fraud (which she is not -- your argument is based on faulty second-hand knowledge of the find), would the other dozens of associated specimens mean nothing to you?Piltdown man, Nebraska Family, even "Lucy" was shown to be a composite of fossils from different strata and different dates.
Not all scientists are athiests. Many people who subscribe to evolution, such as myself, fully believe in the Lord Almighty.These people who have risen to prominence refuse to believe there is a Supreme Being beyond the point of absurdity to the point of fraud.
This is, like, the fourth ark they've found so far. Which one are we supposed to believe? As the story goes, never cry wolf.There was a recent discovery in the mountains of Iran that may well turn out to be the remains of Noah's ark. www.baseinstitute.org But because of the curtain of darkness imposed on anything biblical, it got very little press. http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2133311&page=1
Can you qualify that? I bet you can't! No single creationist has been able to so far.The ark itself is believed to have been the size of a World War II aircraft carrier and that the number of species today are variations on base types or kinds that were on the ark and have since micro-evolved within that type or kind.
Stawman. No credible scientists makes that claim.None became feline for example.
What do you make of that image? Are you familiar with the research on eroded theropod trackways?Further the Institute For Creation Reserach is another treasure trove of young earth / biblically based / truth on the subject of dinosaurs and man.
Do you have any empircal science to back that up? Your arguments mean nothing unless they are rooted in science.johnd said:And besides being hunted down by man or their opponent dino-predators, changes in the earth's atmosphere (post-flood) hindered their life span.
Wrong. Dinosaurs are not just big lizards. Here is a generic lizard skull:Biblical science theorizes that these reptiles were simply of immense age. A 900 year old lizard would be a dinosaur.
But you haven't cited any "facts" yet. You've just made a bunch of bald assertions without supporting any of them with evidence.It is a fascinating study of facts that coincide with the biblical narrative and an interesting expose' of just how dishonest people can be to try to keep the light of biblical truth from the masses.
Sorry, I haven't read through much of the previous discussion, but has johnd dealt with the food/waste problem yet?johnd said:By the way, it is believed that dinosaurs did ride aboard Noah's ark. The full grown ones would not be rounded up, but the smaller immature ones would have been... average size of a sheep.
...changes in the earth's atmosphere? Do you have, oh, I don't know...evidence for this? Because - and I'm just saying this to warn you - it sounds like utter nonsense.And besides being hunted down by man or their opponent dino-predators, changes in the earth's atmosphere (post-flood) hindered their life span. Biblical science theorizes that these reptiles were simply of immense age. A 900 year old lizard would be a dinosaur. And post flood nothing lived so long.
Or a pile of rubbish that doesn't have the barest of evidence to support it. In my rather substantial experience with this debate, dishonesty lies very heavily on the side of creationists. On the rare occasion that actual scientists lie, other scientists expose that lie, just as they're supposed to.It is a fascinating study of facts that coincide with the biblical narrative and an interesting expose' of just how dishonest people can be to try to keep the light of biblical truth from the masses.
Many of which have already been conclusively proven false.Mallon said:You've just made a bunch of bald assertions without supporting any of them with evidence.
Sure it is "believed." But a belief is not evidence of anything but personal conviction. So what?johnd said:By the way, it is believed that dinosaurs did ride aboard Noah's ark. The full grown ones would not be rounded up, but the smaller immature ones would have been... average size of a sheep.
Please provide evidence of any dinosaur EVER having been hunted by man.And besides being hunted down by man
Hmm, so there should be evidence of them as well. No?or their opponent dino-predators,
How so? What are these changes you are talking about? What factor is it dinosaurs needed that other life doesn't, and which is no longer present?changes in the earth's atmosphere (post-flood) hindered their life span.
Really? there is such a thing? And it is subject to the Scientific Method? I would love to see documentation for this.Biblical science
And what scientific evidence do you have as foundation for this "theory"?theorizes that these reptiles were simply of immense age.
Nope/ This is a false claim.A 900 year old lizard would be a dinosaur.
Well, we have trees that are almost 6000 years old. On the other hand, we have no evidence of any animal life living 900 years at any time in the past either. So your claim is nonsense on many levels.And post flood nothing lived so long.
What facts are you talking about? When will you present these "facts"?It is a fascinating study of facts
AH, "coincide" eh? So these "facts" that you have forgotten to present are merely coinciding with the Bible. That's as good as the number of pirates being inversely related to global warming (See the Flying Spaghetti Monster)that coincide with the biblical narrative
Ah, so the "light" whatever it is, somehow is being stopped for reaching the masses because in these days, there are no communication possible to these "masses"? That sounds downright paranoid.and an interesting expose' of just how dishonest people can be to try to keep the light of biblical truth from the masses.