Dinosaurs

[Follower of Christ]

The word was 'penis'. It was the prudish nature of 17th century England that changed the word to tail when the KJV was 'manufactured'.

I thought this was as well known as the Reed sea somehow becoming the Red Sea.

H2180

䏴䏴䏴

za^na^b

zaw-nawb'

From H2179 (in the original sense of flapping); the tail (literally or figuratively): - tail.

 

[Follower of Christ]

Strange.... I didn't know that dinosaurs with teeth like Tyrannosaurus and Allosaurus, etc, ate grass. Also, I didn't know that they wielded swords. I also seem to recall quite a number a dinosaurs that were rather small.

Poetic, no?

 

[Follower of Christ]

There was no Great Flood. Scientists who were also Christians and many of whom were ministers showed that the Great Flood never happened by 1831.

Did those christians also deny that Jesus cast out demons as well ?

The straight answer is that Creation did not happen by a literal reading of Genesis 1. That is, God did not create that way.

VERY bold statement .........youre ABSOLUTE PROOF please ......

 

[lucaspa]

Did those christians also deny that Jesus cast out demons as well ?

No. Nice try at using an irrelevant criteria to try to discredit data you don't like.

But then, neither did I. I only said that is was possible that the "demons" were microbes or other causes and that, if they were, it made no difference. Only someone worshipping a literal Bible and not God could object to that post.

lucaspa: The straight answer is that Creation did not happen by a literal reading of Genesis 1. That is, God did not create that way.

VERY bold statement .........youre ABSOLUTE PROOF please ..

Not bold at all. Remember, we have told you that you can absolutely prove the negative statements. And these are negative statements.

1. A Great Flood never happened. Therefore the existence of the fossil record falsifies creationism.

2. The Linnean classification system, which is a nested heirarchy. Independent creations or objects cannot be classified in a nested heirarchy. That plants and animals can be classified that way is absolute proof that a literal Genesis is wrong.

3. Phylogenetic analysis. This is analysis of DNA sequences from plants and animals. If creationism is correct and there are separate "kinds" that are independent creations, then the DNA sequences have to be independent. BUT, phylogenetic analysis has conclusively shown that units of biology -- from DNA sequences thru higher taxa -- are not independent but related thru historical connections. Absolute proof creationism is not the way God created.

4. Intermediate fossils. A literal Genesis has independent "kinds" -- not connected. Therefore there can be no intermediates between one kind -- such as reptiles -- and another kind -- such as birds. But the fossil record has thousands of intermediates in the correct time sequence linking one kind to another. Absolute proof that creationism is wrong.

5 Observed speciation.

This only scratches the surface, but we can start here before we go into the other absolute proofs or more detail into these absolute proofs.

 

[Ishmael Borg]

The dinosaurs were a part of the old world that was here before. Only a small remenant of them survived. Crocodiles and turtles for example. Both do still get big if they live long enough. Crocodiles can get up to 25 feet in size and turtles can get up to three or four foot in size.

FYI:
Neither crocodiles, turtles, plesiosaurs, nor pterosaurs are, or were ever, dinosaurs.

 

[Arikay]

The straight answer is that creationism is false, the bible might be true (but not the literal translation), dinosuars lived before man.

Grr can someone please give me a straight answer!
I guess if dinosaurs were also wiped out in the Great Flood then the bones would still remain?
So they must have been alive at some point, and before Adam was made?
Yes?

 

[Gracchus]

The word was 'penis'. It was the prudish nature of 17th century England that changed the word to tail when the KJV was 'manufactured'.

I thought this was as well known as the Reed sea somehow becoming the Red Sea.

Actually, "penis" is the Latin word for "tail". The Roman word "mentula", was considered too obscene for public use. Any time that a euphemism becomes widely recognized, a new euphemism must be coined.

 

[JohnR7]

FYI:
Neither crocodiles, turtles, plesiosaurs, nor pterosaurs are, or were ever, dinosaurs.

Are you saying that a dinosaur is not a reptile?
Are you saying that crocodiles and turtles were not around back when there were dinosaurs?

 

[Gracchus]

Are you saying that a dinosaur is not a reptile?
Are you saying that crocodiles and turtles were not around back when there were dinosaurs?

Well, some dinosaurs were probably warm-blooded. And it would seem that Class Reptilia is a catch-all classification in which are placed a diverse assortment of species that don't conveniently fit anywhere else. Were they to be reclassified today, Testudinata, Crocodilia, and Dinosauria would probably be placed in separate classes. Aves (birds) might be placed in the Dinosauria.

Crocodiles and turtles are not dinosaurs, although they did co-exist with the dinosaurs.

Edited to add: Oops! Reclassification is in progress even as I type.

Subclass Dinosauria

Infraclass Theropodia

Order Ceratosauria - primitive meat-eating dinosaurs.

Order Coelurosauria - small, hollow-boned dinosaurs.

Order Ornithomimosauria - toothless dinosaurs.

Order Deinonychosauria - "terrible-clawed" dinosaurs.

Order Carnosauria - large meat-eating dinosaurs.

Infraclass Aves - birds.

Infraclass Sauropodomorpha

Order Prosauropoda - Anchisaurus, Thecodontosaurus

Order Sauropoda - Brachiosaurus, Diplodocus, Apatosaurus

Infraclass Ornithischia

Order Ornithopoda - Iguanodon, Maiasaurus, Parasaurolophus

Order Stegosauria - Scelidosaurus, Stegosaurus

Order Ankylosauria - Nodosaurus, Ankylosaurus

Order Pachycephalosauria - Pachycephalosaurus, Stegoceras

Order Ceratopsia - Psittacosaurus, Protoceratops, Triceratops

http://town.morrison.co.us/dinosaur/taxonomy/dinotax.html 06/04/04

 

[funyun]

Oh dinosaurs were still alive when man first came to be. Of course the only extant Dinosaurs by then were birds, since all the others, like Tyrannosaurus, Triceratops and so on died some 60 odd million years earlier. hope this clears things up for you.

Ok, I have a question. My biology teacher kept referring to birds as dinosaurs all throughout this year, and it seems u r saying this too. How r they dinosaurs? I understand that some dinosaur species evolved into primitive birds, and from there we get modern birds, but how does a modern bird = a dinosaur. That's like calling a mammal a reptile.

 

[Follower of Christ]

1. A Great Flood never happened. Therefore the existence of the fossil record falsifies creationism.

All Ive seen is your folks interpretation of evidence....sorry If I disagree

2. The Linnean classification system, which is a nested heirarchy. Independent creations or objects cannot be classified in a nested heirarchy. That plants and animals can be classified that way is absolute proof that a literal Genesis is wrong.

Im sorry, Im trying to understand where youre coming from on this one....

Could you break this one down into dumb hillbilly terms so Im sure I see why it is youre showing this could possibly be ABSOLUTE PROOF ?

3. Phylogenetic analysis. This is analysis of DNA sequences from plants and animals. If creationism is correct and there are separate "kinds" that are independent creations, then the DNA sequences have to be independent. BUT, phylogenetic analysis has conclusively shown that units of biology -- from DNA sequences thru higher taxa -- are not independent but related thru historical connections. Absolute proof creationism is not the way God created.

They DO ?!?
Man, Im really failing to see your logic here.
Common Creator, common design........I dont see the problem here...

4. Intermediate fossils. A literal Genesis has independent "kinds" -- not connected. Therefore there can be no intermediates between one kind -- such as reptiles -- and another kind -- such as birds. But the fossil record has thousands of intermediates in the correct time sequence linking one kind to another. Absolute proof that creationism is wrong.

PLEASE....... you INTERPRET as such proof......
It is NOT....

5 Observed speciation.

Falling away from said kinds due to mutation since the curse Id call it

This only scratches the surface, but we can start here before we go into the other absolute proofs or more detail into these absolute proofs

You HAVE no absolute proof and we ALL know it
Evolution ''THEORY'' could be dismissed as old news in the moring and WE BOTH know it.......

We also BOTH know the reason I approach the PROOF thing like I do is just for that reason........you HAVE NO ABSOLUTE PROOF

GET REAL....... if you HAD PROOF it would make the headlines of every paper on this planet

 

[Ishmael Borg]

I'm glad you asked, and didn't respond on the basis of your initial interpretation.

Are you saying that a dinosaur is not a reptile?

No, I am not saying that. I'm saying that a crocodile is not a dinosaur. For example: snakes are reptiles, but they are not dinosaurs. Dinosaurs are reptiles, but they aren't snakes.

Are you saying that crocodiles and turtles were not around back when there were dinosaurs?

No, I am not saying that. Even non-avian dinosaurs existed contemporaneously with crocs and turtles. There were also fish that were around back when there were dinosaurs, yet, they were not dinosaurs.

 

[JohnR7]

dinosaurs existed contemporaneously with crocs and turtles.

Maybe dinosaurs could not swim, so they did not make it through the flood.

 

[Ishmael Borg]

Maybe dinosaurs could not swim, so they did not make it through the flood.

*sarcasm alert OFF*

Weren't they on the ark according to many (maybe not you)?

 

[Arikay]

Follower:
Do you get tired of repeating fallacies or are they on a rotating macro script?
I have an idea, until you give us absolute proof you are a human, your computer exists, you are actually typing your posts and you aren't just an illusion, we will ignore your calls for absolute proof, K?

 

[Follower of Christ]

Follower:
Do you get tired of repeating fallacies or are they on a rotating macro script?
I have an idea, until you give us absolute proof you are a human, your computer exists, you are actually typing your posts and you aren't just an illusion, we will ignore your calls for absolute proof, K?

Do you ever get tired of teaching something as FACT when indeed it is not.....

Of course the observed details are factual enough.......its your interpretation thats lacking.......

 

[Arikay]

I have never taught the theory of evolution as fact, so no, inactivity doesn't make me tired.

Time for a trip to that good game show Money Foot and Mouth. Maybe you can start a new thread (since isn't this one about dinosaurs?) and show us 1) how our interpretation is lacking and 2) how to reinterpret these observed details to fit creationism.

Do you ever get tired of teaching something as FACT when indeed it is not.....

Of course the observed details are factual enough.......its your interpretation thats lacking.......

 

[Follower of Christ]

I have never taught the theory of evolution as fact, so no, inactivity doesn't make me tired.

Time for a trip to that good game show Money Foot and Mouth. Maybe you can start a new thread (since isn't this one about dinosaurs?) and show us 1) how our interpretation is lacking and 2) how to reinterpret these observed details to fit creationism.

(FOC hops on over to AIGs site )

 

[Arikay]

Go ahead, as long as you make your own thread and don't mind us laughing if you use already ripped to shreads AiG arguments (Remember there is a very specific reason why they have a statement of faith that requires them to throw out evidence that doesn't fit with creationism. )

Ill be waiting for your thread.

(FOC hops on over to AIGs site )

 

[Aggie]

I'm sorry I missed out on this thread until now. I guess I need to come here more often.

Anyway,

Ok, I have a question. My biology teacher kept referring to birds as dinosaurs all throughout this year, and it seems u r saying this too. How r they dinosaurs? I understand that some dinosaur species evolved into primitive birds, and from there we get modern birds, but how does a modern bird = a dinosaur. That's like calling a mammal a reptile.

There are two ways to define dinosaurs. One of them is a descendent of the common ancestor of all dinosaurs, which is a definition that birds fit since they're descended from dinosaurs. But birds fit the other definition of dinosaurs also: all of the physical traits that unite dinosaurs and set them apart from other groups of animals are also present in birds.

I explained what some of these traits are at http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=2556389#post2556389 .

And just to clear up some of the other confusion about what a dinosaur is: this set of traits is not present in crocodiles, pterosaurs, plesiosaurs, mosasaurs, or any type of lizard. There are also no transitional fossils between dinosaurs and these animals, apart from fossils of the group of reptiles from which dinosaurs, pterosaurs, and crocodiles are descended. So on the basis of both anatomy and cladistics, no animals alive today except birds deserve to be called dinosaurs.