Dinosaurs?

[Mac6yver]

Dinosaurs still walk on the land and swim in the seas!

LOL, I love it. Great stuff. I suppose if I actually believed there was a world wide flood within the past 6,000 years I would also be able to believe dinosaurs were still alive and roaming the Earth today. You guys crack me up. Maybe you should set out on a mission to capture one of these dinosaurs.

 

[Haethurn]

LOL, I love it. Great stuff. I suppose if I actually believed there was a world wide flood within the past 6,000 years I would also be able to believe dinosaurs were still alive and roaming the Earth today. You guys crack me up. Maybe you should set out on a mission to capture one of these dinosaurs.

Yes, the dinosaurs lived through the flood because they are very tall (God made them tall so that they would survive the flood, knowing that they were too big to go on Noah's ark).

God made the Giraffe's neck elongated so that they too could survive the Flood.

However the Flood destroyed most of the dinosaur's habitation, so now they live in secluded areas in the rainforests of South America and Africa, waiting to be discovered someday.

I doubt the T-Rex is still around, but certainly the raptors are around somewhere.

Someday, mark my words, they will find evidence of living dinosaurs and the EVILutionists will be laughed out of town. EVILution will be thrown out of the science classes and replaced with God's honest truth. Bibles will be brought back in schools and soon people will forget all of that EVILution trash.

 

[pantsman52]

please be kidding please be kidding please be kidding..........

Yes, the dinosaurs lived through the flood because they are very tall (God made them tall so that they would survive the flood, knowing that they were too big to go on Noah's ark).

........................................................................................................if dinasour necks were long enough to stay above a WORLD FLOOD, it must have not been very deep. And how did the dinasours survived for 40 days without eating anything, sleeping, and generally trying to breath while waves crashed into them and such?

God made the Giraffe's neck elongated so that they too could survive the Flood.

So the flood was about the height of a tree?

However the Flood destroyed most of the dinosaur's habitation, so now they live in secluded areas in the rainforests of South America and Africa, waiting to be discovered someday.

Yes, and bigfoot lives in my backyard

I doubt the T-Rex is still around, but certainly the raptors are around somewhere.

yes certainly

Someday, mark my words, they will find evidence of living dinosaurs and the EVILutionists will be laughed out of town. EVILution will be thrown out of the science classes and replaced with God's honest truth. Bibles will be brought back in schools and soon people will forget all of that EVILution trash.

Dinasours being found alive destroys evolution how?

 

[adam149]

Eyewitness accounts without evidence don't mean much. Even the photographs of things like Nessie are highly speculative (especially given the propensity for hoaxes).

Depends upon the individual's preconceptions of the topic I suppose. I doubt you would believe that Loch Ness exists until it was caught, killed, gutted, and examined by "authorities."

Those passages are subject to interpretation.

Not really. To find the meaning of a passage, one must return to the native language. That then is the intention of the author. People can still complain about it if they wish, but those opinions are recognized as not the clear intention of the author.

For example, "He moveth his tail like a cedar" does not necessarily mean his tail is like the trunk of a cedar. It could refer to the movement of cedar branches or the tip of the tree, for example (ever seen a cedar move in the wind?).

Well, could it?

The hebrew for "cedar" is erez, is used 73 times in Scripture and 63 of those times, it was translated "cedar" and 6 times as "cedar tree." Its meaning is "1) cedar, 1a) ceder tree, 1b) cedar timber, cedar wood."

There is no reference to branches or tips, there is an overwhelming directness that, in fact, the Bible means what it says, and it says cedar tree, timber, or wood, all of which refer to the entirity of the tree itself, not of parts.

(There's also another idea that the part about the "tail" refers to an entirely different part of the creature's anatomy).

Nice try.

The hebrew word for "tail" is zanab and occurs 11 times in Scripture and in all eleven instances means tail. It's meaning is "tail, or end." It does not refer to...anything else.

Again, is there physical evidence to support these assertions?

If by "physical evidence" you mean are there any dinosaurs found in Tertiary formations, then no, but then I have not researched that area yet. By the same token, the Geologic Column is wrong anyway, so the "Tertiary" formations aren't a measurement of age at all.

As for mention in history, etc..., they're there for all to find. Just search under dragon.

And yet, with all of this "evidence" there is not a single example of a recently deceased or even recently fossilized specimin of dinosaur to be found. Why no dinosaur fossils in Pliocene or Paleolithic sediment layers? Or, in the geologic layers containing dinosaurs, why no modern mammals?

1) You're asking me to give you a scientific reason for why something didn't get buried in a certain place by natural forces? Rather high expectations, I must say.

2) The strata layers are a mess. On paper that nice, crisp-looking, neat column of layers is quite pretty. In reality, they are organized like somebody came along and put all the strata in a big lunchbox and shook it around for a few days, then dumped it back out again. Fossils are found out of their layers all the time, often drastically out of their layer (like jumping from Pliocene to Cretaceous). There is no organization whatsoever.

Replies to others:

But from what I have read, Adam, it says that its tail SWINGS like a cedar- not that it is the length and diameter of one.

The verse in question is Job 40:17, "he hangs his tail like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are knit together."

The hebrew of the word "hangs" (often translated as swings or moves, etc.) is chaphets (khaw-fates). Since this appears to be a major point, more detail than normal shall be given about this word.

It is used in Scripture 75 times:
39 times it is translated as "delight"
14 times as "please" (as in 'to please' not a request as in 'please?')
9 times as "desire"
3 times as "will"
3 times as "pleasure"
2 times as "favour"
2 times as "like"
1 time as "moveth"
1 time as "would"
1 time as "at all"

It's meaning is:
"1) to delight in, take pleasure in, desire, be pleased with
2) to move, bend down
2a) (Qal) to bend down"

Based upon this examination of the word, we can look at the verse with a new insight.

"He delights in his tail like a cedar..."

This clears up a few problems because first of all it shouldn't be translated as SWINGS or MOVES, since the primary meaning of the word is "to delight, to take pleasure in," etc, and in no way does the word at all mean swings or moves.

And more to the point, unless a tail has the size (roughly) of a cedar tree, one cannot swing it like a cedar. After all, one cannot swing a dagger like a viking broadsword, can one?

1) From what I understand, Tail is slang, and does not actually mean a tail.

Not entirely sure what you mean by this, but in english, tail is often used as a slang word for "getting laid" for example, or "being followed," but the hebrew is quite clear that tail means tail.

2) Maybe you can start a new thread and show us exactly how geology is screwed up, and then show us how the flood gives us the geology we have today, including the geological column.

I'd love to. I shall begin gathering my information.

 

[Chi_Cygni]

Adam149 you are a comedian.

Geological strata are often not a mess.

 

[Haethurn]

please be kidding please be kidding please be kidding..........

I am not kidding.

Your skepticism reveals you to be a person of little faith. How do you think the dinosaurs got food? God provided for them. And no, the Flood was not the height of a tree. A few giraffes and dinosaurs went into the mountains, which allowed them to keep their head just barely above the water and survive that way.

God possessed the good dinosaurs with the Holy Ghost so that they knew where to go to live. Probably there was a high tree on the mountain, and the T-Rex lived off of the fruits and leaves it produced.

I retract my earlier comments about the raptors. I cannot see how they could survive because they do not have very long necks. Also, they are hostile creatures and Noah probably did not keep them on his Ark.

There were, of course, bad dinosaurs. God did not possess them with the Holy Ghost so when the Flood came they ran around until the ground got muddy, then they were swallowed up by the mud and fossilized.

 

[pantsman52]

You have to be kidding me dude

 

[Chi_Cygni]

Haethurn,

your profile says you are 16 - so why are you positing information like you are 5.

'bad dinosuars' 'T rex the fruit eater' lol lol

I hope you are trolling and not really believing what you are posting.

 

[Haethurn]

You have to be kidding me dude

Do you believe I would tell you a lie?

 

[pantsman52]

Do you believe I would tell you a lie?

your above posts would confirm that yes, you would

 

[Timo]

I have a question for adam (well, several questions); the word 'tail' occurs 11 times in scripture - how many times does the word 'trunk' appear? Is it impossible for two things have the same word to describe them? I read on another thread (sorry, can't remember which one as there seem to be rather a lot of these creationalist/evolutionist debates) that the original Hebrew 'morning' in Genisis 1 can also mean 'the start of a new age'. Is it not possible that the Hebrew's used the same word to describe the tail of an animal as they used to describe an elephants trunk?

If it is describing a sauropod, then I would have thought it's neck was a fairly noticeable feature that you might mention in its description - combined with the fact that its tail is nothing like a cedar. The tail is fairly horizontal, the tree is vertical.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

They certainly weren't a hippo or an elephant.

Those animals fit the description in the text better than dinosaurs considering the animal described is a mammal and dinosaurs aren't mammals but hippos are. Even more reasonable would be that it describes a mythological creature.

That's your best argument? They can't be because we "know" they lived millions of years ago? Think outside the box.

Why is actual empirical evidence unacceptable? Of course actual, empirical evidence should be our best argument. We find no fossil evidence of dinosaurs living in the Cenozoic. There is a very distinct separation of time between the disappearance of dinosaurs and the appearance of humans. There is no evidence that humans and dinosaurs existed contemporaneously. We have established that this time separation is >60 Ma. So what's wrong with actual, empirical evidence? Just that it doesn't support your position?

Except for thousands of eyewitness accounts, mention in the bible, mention in historical documents, mention all through history, actual paintings of such in caves, and various other kinds of evidence. Dragons, anyone? You know, the great, terrible lizards of legend.

There are accounts for all types of mythological creatures from elves to Big Foot to the Loch Ness Monster to dragons. None of them are grounded in empirical evidence. Even some have been demonstrated to not exist like the Loch Ness Monster considering the body of water has been examined by echo sounding revealing no large creatures that have been claimed to exist. Furthermore, you haven't actually demonstrated beyond wishful thinking that the mammalian creature depicted in the Bible represents dinosaurs. Even so, there is no corroborating evidence for that claim.

First of all, the Tertiary Period is a large portion of the Cenozoic Era. The Tertiary Period is a total of 62 million years in length and incorporates the Paleocene, Eocene, Oliogocene, Miocene, and Pliocene epochs and ends at the 2 million years ago mark. Humans would only have appeared (in their most primitive state) for only the last one million years of the Tertiary Period. A sixty-two million year variable is NOT recent times, by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is a million.

I don't understand what your point is here except to rifle off the Tertiary epochs (which you probably copied from a website) to try to appear like you know what you're talking about. There is a vast ~60 million year gap in the geologic record between humans and dinosaurs so you're not really doing your argument any favors. This is also recent relative to the rest of the geologic timescale.

Civillization and historical documentation didn't start until 5 thousand years ago, and it is after this that the recordings and mention of dragons occur.

Civilization and writing began at least 6,000 years ago. Furthermore, we know dragons are mythological figures.

Second of all, this is only a problem for the evolutionist who believes in the geologic column and uniformitarianism.

There is no problem at all especially considering you haven't actually identified why it is a problem except to effectively say 'it just is.'

It's really a problem for flood geologists/creationists because we should see fossils of dinosaurs and humans together rather than separated by tens of millions of years worth of sedimentary deposition.

The Flood easily explains why the geology is so screwed up all over the place, and why there are fossil graveyards, etc..

Geology falsifies the flood...not to mention the fact that there is not enough water on earth for it to occur in the first place (much less a source for all the sediments claimed to have been deposited at the time).

This thread is a compilation of the various geologic topics discussed on the forum that disprove the literal flood story:

http://www.christianforums.com/t41209

Go there or start your own thread and your geological concerns will be addressed.

 

[revolutio]

After all, one cannot swing a dagger like a viking broadsword, can one?

Vikings never had broadswords. The word broadsword began being mistakenly applied by some collectors in the 19th century to what were normally short swords. The first known reference to a "broadsword" is in the 17th century. It just described what most people would call a normal sword since it was drastically broader that the thin rapiers that were prolific around that time.

Yeah I am just being a pedant.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

If by "physical evidence" you mean are there any dinosaurs found in Tertiary formations, then no, but then I have not researched that area yet.

Case closed. You have no argument. Empirical evidence disproves your claims and you have not brought any to the table to support it.

By the same token, the Geologic Column is wrong anyway, so the "Tertiary" formations aren't a measurement of age at all.

Unsubstantiated assertion. There is no reason to believe that there are any significant problems with modern stratigraphy and sedimentology.

2) The strata layers are a mess. On paper that nice, crisp-looking, neat column of layers is quite pretty. In reality, they are organized like somebody came along and put all the strata in a big lunchbox and shook it around for a few days, then dumped it back out again.

One can either suppose you are lying or have not done much with repsect to studying geology. You're going to have to document this. Furthermore, the sediments are separated into distinct strata--one should not expect this from your position. One should also not expect to find desert deposits interbedded with marine deposits.

Fossils are found out of their layers all the time, often drastically out of their layer (like jumping from Pliocene to Cretaceous). There is no organization whatsoever.

You're going to have to document this as well. You're bluffing. You don't have any information to back this up.

There is no evidence that fossils are out of place or that strata are as well except certain scenarios that appear to be so to the untrained layman (e.g., thrust sheets). Our absolute dating methods have only verified our relative dating methods.

I'd love to. I shall begin gathering my information.

If "gathering [your] information" means copying and pasting from creationist websites, don't bother.

 

[Arikay]

Not to mention many viking swords were much widder than what was common in europe, even before rapiers.
Most famous sword terms "broad sword" "long sword" "short sword" etc. are a bit too broad to be good clasifacations of a sword, since you have to define what broad or long or short really is.

but anyway, back to dinos.

Vikings never had broadswords. The word broadsword began being mistakenly applied by some collectors in the 19th century to what were normally short swords. The first known reference to a "broadsword" is in the 17th century. It just described what most people would call a normal sword since it was drastically broader that the thin rapiers that were prolific around that time.

Yeah I am just being a pedant.

 

[Word of Peace]

Yes, the dinosaurs lived through the flood because they are very tall (God made them tall so that they would survive the flood, knowing that they were too big to go on Noah's ark).
God made the Giraffe's neck elongated so that they too could survive the Flood.

Uhhmmm... that just doesn't make sense. The Flood was much too big and too violent for animals to survive. And why couldn't Noah have taken dino eggs or young dinos on the ark? Lizards grow all their lives, and most likely wouldn't have grown too big to fit on the ark during the time they were on it, especially since dinos start out so small to begin with (because it's impossible for eggs to be bigger than a certain size).

However the Flood destroyed most of the dinosaur's habitation, so now they live in secluded areas in the rainforests of South America and Africa, waiting to be discovered someday.

Actually, there likely were many dinos in the tropical parts of the world, but they were hunted down in all but the most secluded places.

Someday, mark my words, they will find evidence of living dinosaurs and the EVILutionists will be laughed out of town. EVILution will be thrown out of the science classes and replaced with God's honest truth. Bibles will be brought back in schools and soon people will forget all of that EVILution trash.

Nah, they'll just amend their theory once again.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

Uh...Haethurn is an obvious troll. That post you just replied to should have made it obvious that he is kidding and is simply exaggerating the claims of creationists to make them look even more ridiculous (not like dinosaurs and humans living together isn't ridiculous enough...). Just ignore the troll and hopefully he'll go away.

 

[Mac6yver]

Do you believe I would tell you a lie?

Either you are lying, or someone has been lying to you.

 

[Bushido216]

Probably an atheist giving Christians a bad name.

 

[Arikay]

"Actually, there likely were many dinos in the tropical parts of the world, but they were hunted down in all but the most secluded places."

If you were being serious, evidence please? (im assuming hunted down means humans). What secluded places are they still left in?


"Nah, they'll just amend their theory once again."

You do understand how science works right? That theories are changed or thrown out when new evidence comes about.

Actually, the discovery of a dinosaur living today wouldn't do much to the theory of evolution, as others have mentioned. Matter of fact, we have quite a few animals that did survive the disaster that killed the majority of dinosaurs. For example, I believe Alligators lived during the time of the dinosaurs and they live during present day. these Alligators aren't a problem to evolution.

However, all the current evidence says that the dinosaurs are no longer around.

[snip]