Age of the Dinosaurs

[KerrMetric]

You know I was thinking the same thing. They did not show any humans around with Dino's even thou there is ample evidence of it happening.

Oh dear.

They seem to think that if it has sharp teeth it must eat meat when in reality it only means they have sharp teeth.

Oh dear redux.

 

[cwebber]

There was no grass. Grasses did not exist at that time. That is what is called a fact.

No it is not called fact it is called speculation. It's like many of the Living Fossils we find today it was said to be fact that they went extinct 200million years ago. Yet we find them alive today virtually the same as they were a suppose 200million yrs ago.


It was said to be fact that stalagtites took millions of years to form yet we have them in uner monuments and old civil war forts.

It is said that for trees to petrify it takes thousands of years yet now we have a U.S. Patent for making petrified Wood.

You see it is based on Speculation not Fact.

Evidence for a crime is different. You cam astablish that you were in this area at a certian time. The problem with grass is we have not yet uncovered all fossils yet how much dirt has been turned over so far.


If you require someone to be literally present to ascertain fact then I suggest you write your senator/MP or whatever and campaign for the prisons to release 70% of inmates since their prison sentences were based upon evidence that was not eyewitness testimony. By your criteria we cannot be sure of their guilt and hence reasonable doubt.

Here's an example. If I find a body in my living room with the head blown off, brains splattered on the walls, pellets embedded in the brain tissue and remains, a recently fired shotgun laying near the body then I think it is safe to assume the shotgun was responsible. I don't need to have been in the room to figure that is a fact.

 

[KerrMetric]

No it is not called fact it is called speculation. It's like many of the Living Fossils we find today it was said to be fact that they went extinct 200million years ago. Yet we find them alive today virtually the same as they were a suppose 200million yrs ago.

You misunderstand what is meant by 'living fossil'. A common mistake by people on both sides. The coelocanths living today are not the same species as the fossil ones.

It was said to be fact that stalagtites took millions of years to form yet we have them in uner monuments and old civil war forts.

No we don't. They are not the same things.

It is said that for trees to petrify it takes thousands of years yet now we have a U.S. Patent for making petrified Wood.

Again they are not the same things. You are comparing things that look similar but are in fact totally different.

 

[notto]

It was said to be fact that stalagtites took millions of years to form yet we have them in uner monuments and old civil war forts.

And they have different chemical composition and came from different compounds than stalagtites in caves.

Somebodies selling a load of half truths. Don't buy it.

If what you say is true, then why can't we simply go into caves and watch stalagtites form? When did cave stalactites stop taking so long to form if they are comparable to those under processed limestone monuments and forts (where the stalagtites are formed from softer mortar between the stones, not the limestone itself). Why haven't those monuments simply washed away?

It is a comparison of apples and oranges and two distinctly different processes.

 

[cwebber]

And they have different chemical composition and came from different compounds than stalagtites in caves.

Somebodies selling a load of half truths. Don't buy it.

The Civil War Fort in AL is just a Cave that they set up a fort in so that blows out your example.

If what you say is true, then why can't we simply go into caves and watch stalagtites form? When did cave stalactites stop taking so long to form if they are comparable to those under processed limestone monuments and forts (where the stalagtites are formed from softer mortar between the stones, not the limestone itself). Why haven't those monuments simply washed away?

Actually it depends on the conditions and processes. Answers in Genesis will be growing them in their building. And I personally in a local Cave have seen growth of of stalagtites and stalagmites join in a 6ft ceiling in less than a year. But that just me talking from experince and not a book.


I believe they probally put sealant on them to keep the up. Just a Guess thou.

 

[KerrMetric]

The Civil War Fort in AL is just a Cave that they set up a fort in so that blows out your example.

No it does not. You are being lied to or you just don't want to accept the truth. They are not the same things. This is such nonsense.

Actually it depends on the conditions and processes. Answers in Genesis will be growing them in their building. And I personally in a local Cave have seen growth of of stalagtites and stalagmites join in a 6ft ceiling in less than a year. But that just me talking from experince and not a book.

I believe they probally put sealant on them to keep the up. Just a Guess thou.

You have not seen them grow naturally from limestone like that. Unless someone was pouring Hydrochloric acid from above or they are made of gypsum.

I think the tens of thousands of geologists who have studied these things over the last 100+ years might have noticed this.

 

[cwebber]

You have not seen them grow naturally from limestone like that. Unless someone was pouring Hydrochloric acid from above or they are made of gypsum.

Tennessee is loaded with Limestone and full of Caves. The Cave is located in East Tennessee in the middle of a patch of Woods no near any industral area. The cave is a partial Dirt Cave. There was also a Fox Den in the cave at one time. You may not want to believe it but I am speaking from my own experience.

You see not only to I believe it but I have witnessed it. To think these things take thousands of years to for is simple ignoring reality.

I think the tens of thousands of geologists who have studied these things over the last 100+ years might have noticed this.

They have? If you see something that contradicts what you are taught and it is right there in front of you. How could you deny it. Unless you are just willing to over look the Truth.

We know the following:

The process of making Coal can take 18months

Oil can be made in 6 hours by man much less than that at the bottom of the Pacific.

We can make Petrified Trees in less than a Year.

We have Dinosuars engraved on a Tomb of a 14th century Bishop which looks just like longneck Dino's.

We have sightings up to the 17th century of someone killing a Dragon that was 6ft in lenth and mounting it on His fireplace.

Many sightings of many things

All I am saying is keep an open mind to the possiblity that Dino's could have been around with Man.

 

[KerrMetric]

Will you stop it! The petrified wood you are talking about is NOT the same thing as natural petrified wood. They look similar perhaps but they are not the same substance.

And I don't appreciate the implication of tens of thousands of people lying. If such was truly observed it would be headline level news in science publications.

No one states coal takes 300 million years to form, just that it is resident in 300 million year old strata.

And you have not seen natural calcium carbonate stalactites form in that time. You have either seen something of a different chemical composition or a very unusual circumstance involving a very acidic moisture source (not water.) Most stalactites are in an environment where they cannot form quickly.

 

[justified]

Kerr,

are you an anthropologist? what do you know about the recently-discovered (relatively speaking) skull in central africa?

 

[cwebber]

And you have not seen natural calcium carbonate stalactites form in that time. You have either seen something of a different chemical composition or a very unusual circumstance involving a very acidic moisture source (not water.) Most stalactites are in an environment where they cannot form quickly.

That is my point you do not know the processes you can not observe them you can only assume they have remained the same yet we can see that they have not.

 

[random_guy]

That is my point you do not know the processes you can not observe them you can only assume they have remained the same yet we can see that they have not.

We use Netwon's Law of Cooling to help determine when someone has died. This makes several assumptions, including that several parameters are constant. By your logic, does this mean that forensic science is useless because we can't see whether or not it actually holds for a specific dead body? By the same analogy, we use the Law of Exponential Decay to determine the age of an object through radioactive dating. This also makes several assumptions, including that the k parameter remains constant. Why do you accept forensic science, but not geology or physics, or do you also not accept forensic science?

 

[cwebber]

We use Netwon's Law of Cooling to help determine when someone has died. This makes several assumptions, including that several parameters are constant. By your logic, does this mean that forensic science is useless because we can't see whether or not it actually holds for a specific dead body?

Good point but bad example. My wife's G-Grandmother died early in the night this was about ten years ago. Her husband found her dead at 7:00am in the morning he had been up since 6:00am she normally was up before him. Her body was still warm even thou she had died in the middle of the night. By the time the body got to the coroner they estimate that she had only been dead for two hours by using your rule of temp I guess. After more study they revised the first estimate and concluded she had been dead for six hours. What thru off the first estimate? turns out she slept with a heat blanket and her body was on the heat blanket until the Amulance showed up to get the body.

My point is the coroner did not no all of the processes that the body had went thru he assumed it was on a regular bed. He did not put into account the heat pad. We do not know all of the processes the Earth has been thru a Global Flood would increase pressures and heat in the Earth in a short amount of time and cause many more changes in shorter amounts of time. To form coal you need heat, time and pressure the if you have more pressure you increase heat which will decrease the time needed.

By the same analogy, we use the Law of Exponential Decay to determine the age of an object through radioactive dating. This also makes several assumptions, including that the k parameter remains constant. ?

The Law of Exponential Decay is not constant there are other processes that slow speed up the rates. Here is a website we a new discovery concerning these dating methods.

Why do you accept forensic science, but not geology or physics, or do you also not accept forensic science

I accept Observational Science as Fact but not Assumptions as Fact.
http://www.icr.org/

 

[random_guy]

Good point but bad example. My wife's G-Grandmother died early in the night this was about ten years ago. Her husband found her dead at 7:00am in the morning he had been up since 6:00am she normally was up before him. Her body was still warm even thou she had died in the middle of the night. By the time the body got to the coroner they estimate that she had only been dead for two hours by using your rule of temp I guess. After more study they revised the first estimate and concluded she had been dead for six hours. What thru off the first estimate? turns out she slept with a heat blanket and her body was on the heat blanket until the Amulance showed up to get the body.

My point is the coroner did not no all of the processes that the body had went thru he assumed it was on a regular bed. He did not put into account the heat pad. We do not know all of the processes the Earth has been thru a Global Flood would increase pressures and heat in the Earth in a short amount of time and cause many more changes in shorter amounts of time. To form coal you need heat, time and pressure the if you have more pressure you increase heat which will decrease the time needed.

But the point was we can examine these factors. A temperature of a dead body is not enough to correctly get how long ago someone died. A temperature is T. We still need things like the constants. Constants are derived from things such as insulation factors (blanket, house, outside temp) and indoor temp, etc.

We also take the same kinds of things into account when we do radioactive dating. What's the composition of the material? Has this material been contaminated? Etc... We've been pretty accurate with time of death predictions, and we've been pretty accurate with carbon dating (results match independent dating techniques), but it doesn't mean all results are 100% accurate. However, does it mean it's useless then? Should we through out all time of death predictions because of one error?

The Law of Exponential Decay is not constant there are other processes that slow speed up the rates. Here is a website we a new discovery concerning these dating methods.

I accept Observational Science as Fact but not Assumptions as Fact.
http://www.icr.org/

If k does change, how does that affect the error of the estimates? Suppose k changes slowly, it might increase the age of an object by 10-50k years, but that's insignificant compared to a 50 mill age prediction.

More importantly, if this was discovered, why hasn't been published yet? A changing k would be published in scientific journals. Of course, none of this even addresses the fact that you have science completely wrong. Models are nothing more than descriptions of reality, they are not facts. All models comes with assumptions built in. However, if you reject models since it has assumptions, we would still be dieing at the age of 25 and living an agrarian lifestyle.

 

[Justme]

Hi Darth,

On the first day God put in motion the process that would create the heaven(sky?) and earth. The tool he uses to create everything there is, is evolution. He could have done it with wand waving, abra kadabras or finger snapping, but science has showed us that in fact, he chose to use evolution.

That is why the Hawaian Islands are still in the process of being created today. There is a new island being formed as we speak.

Mankind and animals was the same thing. One day God decides to create all this so He puts in motion the evolutionary process to create these things. That is how dinosaurs, sabre tooths and Cromagnans came and went. That process is also still in active force today. If that isn't the case someone can tell me where the HIV virus was in Moses day? The bird flu germ and many other animals just weren't here 1000 years ago.

As well take a look at that dandelion weed in your back yard. Forty years ago that wasn't resistant to 24D, today it is. That is evolution or adaption for survival.

What really ticks me off from creationists is they continuously say we evolved from apes and then go around with all these theories to 'prove' we didn't evolve from apes. Apes are still here for God's sake how does anybody think they evolved into anything. The first thing that all this shows is these people don't have a clue what evolution is. Sickening really.

Justme

 

[Jig]

Nope,

I think they were talking about hippos and crocodiles. Two creatures we know live in the lands where the versus were penned.

The hippo is known to have a very large 'tail' and 'stones' if you know what I mean.

I guess you didnt read the whole chapter....hippos and crocs fit some but NOT all the discriptions.

 

[shernren]

Because there was no grass to eat yet. Grass did not appear until after dinosaurs became extinct.

That's interesting. cwebber is right, most documentaries feature scenes of dinosaurs in forested grassland habitats (i.e. grass plains with occasional trees, something like modern African savannah).

To cwebber: you're right about the translation of "lotus", but I was thinking of lotus plants which are anchored aquatic plants and can't live in too deep water. For an animal to be sheltered by modern lotus plants it has to be completely submerged. It's something I can imagine a hippo doing, but not, say, a Brontosaurus.

The reason I said they don't eat grass is because logically, what's the point of an animal growing so big if it still eats grass? If it survived on just grass it would have to eat an enormous amount of it to support its life processes. And while we do occasionally get fossilised stomach contents, the main bulk of what we know about dinosaurs' diet comes from coproliths, or fossilised dinosaur dung.

The mountains in Job 40 are the same mountains in Genesis 7-8 - yes, the ones the Flood submerged. Were those mountains foothills?

Please substantiate all your tabloid-sounding statements (you know, the dinos and people coexisting ones) with links we can read ourselves, please.

To Jig: Dinosaurs don't fit all the descriptions either. So it's more plausible to assume that they were hippos and crocs, which God playfully embellished than dinosaurs which Job had never seen anyway. The leviathan in particular doesn't sound like something you see and then live to tell the story, especially if it's a dinosaur or a prehistoric aquatic reptile.

 

[Jig]

To Jig: Dinosaurs don't fit all the descriptions either. So it's more plausible to assume that they were hippos and crocs, which God playfully embellished than dinosaurs which Job had never seen anyway.

I'm using the word 'dinosaur' loosely. Plus, how would you know if it doesn't fit a dinosaurs discription? Have you seen a dinosaur in real life? We can not gather enough evidence from fossils. Why would God need to embellish His own creation? Was God trying to convince Job His creation was greater then what He actually created? This makes little sense. God was talking literal about His creation...it even says "(Job 40:19) He ranks first among the works of God,"

The leviathan in particular doesn't sound like something you see and then live to tell the story, especially if it's a dinosaur or a prehistoric aquatic reptile.

God's telling the story of the leviathan....and that was God's point.
Look at one of His questions....
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?

No. The leviathan was an literal creature of great power. Could this be just a croc? It says: Nothing on earth is his equal—

I guess the croc is ruler than.

 

[Tonks]

Good point but bad example. My wife's G-Grandmother died early in the night this was about ten years ago. Her husband found her dead at 7:00am in the morning he had been up since 6:00am she normally was up before him. Her body was still warm even thou she had died in the middle of the night. By the time the body got to the coroner they estimate that she had only been dead for two hours by using your rule of temp I guess. After more study they revised the first estimate and concluded she had been dead for six hours. What thru off the first estimate? turns out she slept with a heat blanket and her body was on the heat blanket until the Amulance showed up to get the body.

/

The body cools at approx. 2 degrees the first hour then 1 degree ever hour thereafter. It is approximate though. Many times the time of death is an approximate range. There are, of course, a variety of environmental factors that can change this. However, they do nothing to discount the fact that under observable conditions the temp / time relationship is pretty much constant.

 

[shernren]

I'm using the word 'dinosaur' loosely. Plus, how would you know if it doesn't fit a dinosaurs discription? Have you seen a dinosaur in real life? We can not gather enough evidence from fossils. Why would God need to embellish His own creation? Was God trying to convince Job His creation was greater then what He actually created? This makes little sense. God was talking literal about His creation...it even says "(Job 40:19) He ranks first among the works of God,"

Well, here's an exercise for you.

1. Break into a museum at night and grab a prominent complete dinosaur fossil skeleton.
2. Dodge the guards and escape unnoticed.
3. Try your level best to rearrange the pelvic girdle and legs so that its legs are bent away from the body and then down, like a crocodile:

--=--
| |

instead of the way they normally portray dinosaurs standing:

=
| |
| |

and see if it doesn't look stupendously idiotic.

Granted, there's a lot that we can't tell from bones alone, but posture is not one of them, especially when dealing with complete skeletons.

God's telling the story of the leviathan....and that was God's point.
Look at one of His questions....
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?

No. The leviathan was an literal creature of great power. Could this be just a croc? It says: Nothing on earth is his equal—

I guess the croc is ruler than.

No, God is the ruler and man His chief steward, whether or not the Leviathan was a dinosaur or a crocodile. Remember that this was written for a pre-technological culture. Even today crocodile can face a few humans at a time and still have a chance to come away full-stomached. What must it have been like to meet a crocodile before there were guns, tranquilizers or steel wire?

Besides, what's the point of God describing to Job something he hasn't seen or heard of before? Even almost all mainstream YEC organizations will tell you that dinosaurs died off long before Job was mentioned.

 

[Jig]

Well, here's an exercise for you.

1. Break into a museum at night and grab a prominent complete dinosaur fossil skeleton.
2. Dodge the guards and escape unnoticed.
3. Try your level best to rearrange the pelvic girdle and legs so that its legs are bent away from the body and then down, like a crocodile:

--=--
| |

instead of the way they normally portray dinosaurs standing:

=
| |
| |

and see if it doesn't look stupendously idiotic.

Granted, there's a lot that we can't tell from bones alone, but posture is not one of them, especially when dealing with complete skeletons.



No, God is the ruler and man His chief steward, whether or not the Leviathan was a dinosaur or a crocodile. Remember that this was written for a pre-technological culture. Even today crocodile can face a few humans at a time and still have a chance to come away full-stomached. What must it have been like to meet a crocodile before there were guns, tranquilizers or steel wire?

Besides, what's the point of God describing to Job something he hasn't seen or heard of before? Even almost all mainstream YEC organizations will tell you that dinosaurs died off long before Job was mentioned.

Thanks for making fun of what I believe.

Anyway...I think Job DID know what these dinosaurs were. How do you explain how man got the idea of dragons and such creatures before any fossils were found? Humans at one point lived with donosaurs and the stories of them got passed now.