Dinosaurs, where?

[1watchman]

That about sums it up, Joshua. I would just call attention to the word: "and" in Genesis 1: 2 which connects it with Genesis 1:1, showing God's order that when He formed the earth it was a barren place until He developed it and planted seed, etc. I don't see how one can extrapolate that into a period of millions of years, unless it is just man's reasonings.

One should also realize that many of us are not rejecting science, as some charge, but the "Academy of Science" in the USA which is completely controlled by atheists, as a recent study found. As you said: one should take the time to visit icr.org and see what sound Ph.D scientists who are real Christians are showing (if one is an honest seeker).

So, as one has said: "a mind convinced against its WILL, is of the same opinion still".

 

[parsley]

I think of dinosaur reports as a much smoother transition than is usually described. Today we have ginkos and horsetails, snails and fish, similar to fossil imprints. Look at a tortoise, lizard, rhino, horseshoe crab, porcupine, armadillo, ...don't they all seem to have a long history of durability to them?

Every region of the world had legends of terrible lizards and serpents before 1841 when dinosaurs were given a single name. In fact, most regions had reports that fit the description of dragons:

CULTURAL NAMES FOR DRAGONS
China -Loong
Japan -Ryu
Philippines -Bakunawa
Siberia -Yilbega
French -dragon,dragun,dargon
Turkey -Ejderha
Greece -Drakon
Portugal -Coca
Romaina -Balamr
Slavic -Zmeg, Drak, Smok
Hungary -Sarkany
Britain/England -Wyvern, Dragon
Sardinia -cultone
Wales -Yddraig goch
Korea -Yong, Imoggi
Vietnam -Rong, Long
India -Neak
Persia -Azhdaha
Germany -Lindworm
Tartar -Zilant

(List from Dinosaurs in History)

There were early American reports of giant creatures in the rivers, and more recent sightings of plesiosaurs in lakes that were deep or had channels out to the ocean. A team of sonographers took readings and captured recordings of an unfamiliar Cetacean/blowhole pitch in Lake Champlain.

Plesiosauria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1900 on NY's Seneca Lake, a steamboatful of respected people saw an unfamiliar creature.

"A number of prominent citizens were on board that day, including the manager of the phone company, the police commissioner, and the president of the board of public works. One Professor George Elwood, from Ontario, was also there, and described the creature as serpent-like with a head "four feet long . . . armed with two rows of triangular white teeth. . . . The body was covered with a horny substance . . .much like the carapace of a terrapin. . . ."

The Geneva Gazette and Rochester Herald reported the incident openly.

A lot of reports have been submitted over the centuries, around the world.

If we look at extinction as individual animals dying off or reappearing, then these reports seem less mythical. They're just animals that have been reclusive.

 

[Starcrystal]

yes, dinosaurs were around at the beginning with humans. Most went extinct shortly after the flood due to the massive climate change, as dinosaurs enjoyed a more tropical environment with larger plants..this all changed after the flood because the water canopy was gone, it got cold, had an ice age, plants didnt grow as big, etc.

Also note that most of your 'living' fossils are creatures that live in water. The only animals completely wiped out in the flood outside the ark were land animals and birds, not fish and aquatic animals. That's why the Coelacanth fish thought to be extinct for millions of years was caught in the 1930s and several have been caught and sighted since. that's why we have sharks and crocodiles which are ancient creatures having changed little since they shared the world with dinosaurs, except for being a bit smaller in size only.
There are also the sightings of Mokele M'bembe in African jungles and swamps..a creature that is identified every time by natives as a type of sauropod dinosaur.

 

[food4thought]

I personally went from being uninformed to young earth creationist to completely confused to leaning toward evolution to leaning toward old earth creation to gap theory to...?

I've read quite a bit on the subject, and have come to a place where I try to keep an open mind to the science, whether it comes from an evolutionist or a creationist. There are lines of evidence that strongly support both ways of looking at things, but the totality of the evidence I am aware of doesn't fit any existing theory completely. Human knowledge is limited and, all too often, just plain wrong/flawed. I recommend an open mind with skepticism towards assumptions that place the information into a manmade theoretical context.

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[parsley]

I personally went from being uninformed to young earth creationist to completely confused to leaning toward evolution to leaning toward old earth creation to gap theory to...?

Within the span of the thread? ;-) Next step is extinction.

There are also the sightings of Mokele M'bembe in African jungles and swamps..a creature that is identified every time by natives as a type of sauropod dinosaur.

Yes, and they treat it as very common-place, compared to other locations where photos are treated as fakes.

the totality of the evidence I am aware of doesn't fit any existing theory completely.

Good way of putting it.

 

[TheyCallMeDavid]

Using the Bible as a timeline, at what point in time would we find dinosaurs? Science has revealed these creatures to be millions of years old. Were they around way before God created Adam/Eve?

I'm just confused. Thanks.

Nothing is millions of years old. Especially Dino's . Dino's have been found with hemoglobin still in their tissues so that rules out millions . Further, Dino's are simply BIG LIZARDS and back in very ancient times, they grew to enormous lengths because reptiles never stop growing as a fact. Lizards were huge as were other animals such as DragonFlies ; Dragonfly fossils have been found with 4' wingspans . If you want to know where they fit in with the Bibles timeline, it would most likely be from the start of Creation for the first thousand years or longer. We are talking thousands of years and not the proverbial 'millions' of years which is to accommodate large ages for the Earth and Universe .

A good site for this would be : www.answersingenesis.org

 

[Starcrystal]

I personally went from being uninformed to young earth creationist to completely confused to leaning toward evolution to leaning toward old earth creation to gap theory to...?

... the totality of the evidence I am aware of doesn't fit any existing theory completely. Human knowledge is limited and, all too often, just plain wrong/flawed. I recommend an open mind with skepticism towards assumptions that place the information into a manmade theoretical context.

That's because looking at it from purely scientific evidence and theory is going to be left lacking. God is the Creator and no matter how things were created there simply isn't going to be any mere human understanding of it all.
You can also throw in with all the theories & evidence that all the ancients believed in visitation from the heavens or skies. Angels or Extraterrestrials, or beings from another dimension manifested on earth. Even cave paintings have this recorded, as do all ancient cultures. It's in the Bible with the story of the Watchers (sons of God) bearing children by the daughters of men...

I have often brought up the existence of the raptor (Dromaeosauridae) family of dinosaurs..suddenly springs up out of nowhere in the fossil record along with larger carnivores...the raptors average size is about the size of a human with some being smaller and some being larger, up to 20' in length.
the interesting thing about this dinosaur is its brain size is massive compared to all other dinosaurs...

They are highly intelligent, and they just appeared in the alleged evolutionary chain out of nowhere? Supposedly from the mid Jurrasic to late Cretaceous which puts them right alongside large carnivores like Allosaurus and T-rex..

A Raptors brain size is 5.8% of its body weight Humans brain size is 7.4%. Which is the Raptor more closely related to... all other dinosaurs whose brain size was 1 to 2% of its body weight, or humans??
There is evidence that some raptors had feathers, so they probably were not even reptilian, but warm blooded...yet they lived along with the non feathered larger dinosaurs...again...they are just there all of a sudden.

Kind of blows holes in traditional evolution...or else some smaller dinosaur was just born with a huge brain, feathers, and specialized claws and feet, and went from there

 

[golgotha61]

The question is not a matter of how many people we can find who are "scientists" who subscribe to one view or the other; the question is whether or not the scientists in question are arriving to their views scientifically.

When I looked at the list presented above I first clicked on Dr. James Alan, a geneticist. What I took note of was that Dr. Alan's change from embracing evolutionary theory to young earth creationism was not a result of scientific inquiry and the scientific method, but instead a result of rejecting those very things in favor of a particular dogma. Alan's "double conversion" was first to Christianity, and then a rejection of science and the scientific method.

That does not provide evidence of a scientist who accepts YEC, that provides evidence of a scientist who has rejected the science.

Now there very well may be credible scientists who reject evolutionary theory--I'll permit that as possible. But when "credible scientists" are offered and one reads about their why for rejecting evolutionary theory in favor of YEC, and the reason has not to do with any actual science but is with an emphatic rejection of science--such as in Dr. Alan's case--that doesn't bode well for an argument in favor of credible scientists being on both sides of the debate.

Consistently I have found that that "creation science" involves the same basic quackery that one also finds in other pseudoscientic fields, that is, there is at the core a rejection of valid scientific inquiry and the scientific method. Science is not the place for matters of faith, what is scientific is not what we hold to be true by faith, but rather what can be explained through the scientific method involving observation, hypothesis, experimentation, etc.

I don’t necessarily prescribe to YEC, however, I find it unfounded to make the statement that “creation science involves the same basic quackery that one also finds in other pseudoscientic fields.” In particular, I have in mind Professor Dean Kenyon who co-authored Biochemical Predestination along with Gary Steinman. I think one would be hard pressed to define Kenyon as not a “real scientist” nor would one be able to accuse him of abandoning the scientific process of investigation. Kenyon gives an account of his transformation:

[FONT=&quot]Then in 1976, a student gave me a book by A.E. Wilder-Smith, The Creation of Life: A Cybernetic Approach to Evolution. Many pages of that book deal with arguments against Biochemical Predestination, and I found myself hard-pressed to come up with a counter-rebuttal. Eventually, several other books and articles by neo-creationists came to my attention. I read some of Henry Morris' books, in particular, The Genesis Flood. I'm not a geologist, and I don't agree with everything in that book, but what stood out was that here was a scientific statement giving a very different view of earth history. Though the book doesn't deal with the subject of the origin of life per se, it had the effect of suggesting that it is possible to have a rational alternative explanation of the past [/FONT](Kenyon 7).

Works Cited​

​

Kenyon, Dean, and Nancy Pearcey. "Up From Materialism: An



Interview with Dean Kenyon." Bible-Science Newsletter, 27(9), 6-9.


September 1989. Print.

 

[parsley]

Science has revealed these creatures to be millions of years old.

Science this year.

Look through the history of science -- it is a continually morphing discipline, even by its own definition.

Science continually tests and revises its own theories, and intentionally builds new information on top of old.

"Good science" -- the practice of it -- involves continual scrutiny of past beliefs. What appears to be dated properly one year, may be revised the next.

 

[alexiscurious]

Nothing is millions of years old. Especially Dino's . Dino's have been found with hemoglobin still in their tissues so that rules out millions . Further, Dino's are simply BIG LIZARDS and back in very ancient times, they grew to enormous lengths because reptiles never stop growing as a fact. Lizards were huge as were other animals such as DragonFlies ; Dragonfly fossils have been found with 4' wingspans . If you want to know where they fit in with the Bibles timeline, it would most likely be from the start of Creation for the first thousand years or longer. We are talking thousands of years and not the proverbial 'millions' of years which is to accommodate large ages for the Earth and Universe .

A good site for this would be : www.answersingenesis.org

So dinosaurs are thousands of years old?

Ok thanks.

 

[alexiscurious]

That about sums it up, Joshua. I would just call attention to the word: "and" in Genesis 1: 2 which connects it with Genesis 1:1, showing God's order that when He formed the earth it was a barren place until He developed it and planted seed, etc. I don't see how one can extrapolate that into a period of millions of years, unless it is just man's reasonings.

One should also realize that many of us are not rejecting science, as some charge, but the "Academy of Science" in the USA which is completely controlled by atheists, as a recent study found. As you said: one should take the time to visit icr.org and see what sound Ph.D scientists who are real Christians are showing (if one is an honest seeker).

So, as one has said: "a mind convinced against its WILL, is of the same opinion still".

So you believe dinosaurs are thousands of years old as well?

 

[Rattus58]

Real scientists who are real Christians and who do real science--such as Francis Collins, John Polkinghorne, Robert Bakker, and Alister McGrath--are available to see how they don't find any trouble or conflict between science and religious faith.

Francis Collins is the former head of the Human Genome Project.
John Polkinghorne is a well established physicist.
Robert Bakker is one of the most important paleontologists of the 20th century.

No longer living, we should also mention Theodosius Dobzhansky and Georges Lemaitre; Dobzhansky is considered the father of modern evolutionary synthesis and Lemaitre like Polkinghorne worked as a physicist, and is also credited as one who (following Hubble) helped establish the modern theory of rapid expansion of the universe, aka the "Big Bang".

These men are not only practicing Christians--and in the case of McGrath and Polkinghorne priests and respected theologians--they are credible scientists who do credible science.

Something that can't be said for the numerous "creation scientists" many of whom lack any sort of formal education or scientific credentials and whose work has never gone through the necessary peer review process that is required for real, actual science.

Real scientists accept evolution. That includes the Christian ones. And they are real Christians, they believe in "one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen" and "in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God" and "He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, buried and dead" "and on t he third day rose from the dead, ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father from whence He shall come again to judge the quick and the dead". They believe this, and they are also actual scientists who do actual science.

Because actual science and normative, orthodox Christianity are not mutually exclusive.

The only ones who see a conflict are the ones who want there to be one.

-CryptoLutheran

And why not, evolution is the showcase for Intelligent Design.

 

[ebia]

And why not, evolution is the showcase for Intelligent Design.

Most of the scientists listed would reject ID.

 

[Rattus58]

Most of the scientists listed would reject ID.

that's understandable, it threatens their Mantra. I take you back to a simple cell and DNA for example.... I've countless articles on how amino acids got together and how the learned to absorb nutrition from the rock or whatever... as an anaerobic collection of molecules or whatnot... and eventually grew a membrane.... and how does that happen without an intelligent design... but you could tell me? This thing here is a machine... of course randomly designed according to science.... and DNA... a blueprint so to speak...



There has to be some serious curiosity by science... wherever it leads, don't you think?

Aloha...

 

[Rattus58]

Nothing is millions of years old. Especially Dino's . Dino's have been found with hemoglobin still in their tissues so that rules out millions . Further, Dino's are simply BIG LIZARDS and back in very ancient times, they grew to enormous lengths because reptiles never stop growing as a fact. Lizards were huge as were other animals such as DragonFlies ; Dragonfly fossils have been found with 4' wingspans . If you want to know where they fit in with the Bibles timeline, it would most likely be from the start of Creation for the first thousand years or longer. We are talking thousands of years and not the proverbial 'millions' of years which is to accommodate large ages for the Earth and Universe .

A good site for this would be : www.answersingenesis.org

Dinosaurs and Lizards are in fact reptiles, but they are not the same.