Man and dinosaur coexisting

[eartheart]

A) none of those are dinosaurs.

B) Compsognathus, just as one example. Dinosaur, not even bigger than a chicken.

They are not "extinct" but these are "terrible lizards". Lizards never stop growing, i believe that if man has not conquered the fields and taken their food source that they would have grown to great size. they shrunk when man took over, living side by side. The bible which is a collection of ancient stories, speaks even of Peter being exiled into a land to hunt and kill large four footed beasts for meat. Acts

 

[lasthero]

They are not "extinct" but these are "terrible lizards". Lizards never stop growing, i believe that if man has not conquered the fields and taken their food source that they would have grown to great size. they shrunk when man took over, living side by side. The bible which is a collection of ancient stories, speaks even of Peter being exiled into a land to hunt and kill large four footed beasts for meat. Acts

That's nonsense. Lizards are not built like smaller dinosaurs. It wouldn't matter how big they grew. A giant iguana wouldn't look like a triceratops any more than a giant dog would look like an elephant.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That's nonsense. Lizards are not built like smaller dinosaurs. It wouldn't matter how big they grew. A giant iguana wouldn't look like a triceratops any more than a giant dog would look like an elephant.

Was it Kent Hovind or Ken Ham who said that a triceratops was basically a very old Jackson's Chameleon?

 

[brocke]

This is not going to be very in depth. (Father of two little boys)

The myth of evolution has been used to promote the belief that man and dinosaur lived millions of years apart. It's my opinion that the bible clearly teaches that we both lived together. (Job 40:15-24) and (Job 41:1-34). And the evidence we find today very strongly supports that the bible is correct as usual. It's important to remember that the first dinosaur fossil wasn't even discovered until the 1800's. And if that's the case then why does pretty much every culture in the world have legends of great dragons? I wanted to post about all the evidence that supports man and dinosaur coexisting. It's my view that man and dinosaur lived together before and after the great flood. But eventually died off because of climate change do to the great flood and being hunted by man.

Ancient evidence:
Remember what I said before, that the first dinosaur fossil wasn't discovered until the 1800's. So then why are there so many ancient carvings and art depicting what are clear images of dinosaurs hundreds to thousands of years before the first fossil discovery? Even some including man riding on the backs of dinosaurs.

I don't have the time to talk about each one of these pictures but I assure you every one of these is from before the first fossil was discovered.

Soft tissue:
Following the most rigorous tests and checking of data, many evolutionists now admit the existence of such dinosaur soft tissue and organic material in not just one or two specimens, but well over thirty. They now have to explain how extremely delicate structures could have been preserved over incredibly vast time periods.
It is not just dinosaur soft tissue, either, but the presence of detectable proteins such as collagen, hemoglobin, osteocalcin, actin, and tubulin that they must account for. These are complex molecules that continually tend to break down to simpler ones.

Would love to here people views. Again sorry this isn't nearly as in depth as I would have wished. Got two children under 5 and a wife at work.

Isaiah, I would begin to counter your "evidence" beginning with the use of Behemoth and Leviathan in Job 40 and 41. First there really is not enough usage of the two words in the scripture to conclude any of what animal they are referring to. To claim that two words that at best only mean a "large animal" to being dinosaurs is pure speculation that then makes a huge leap to evidence to support the speculation from ancient pottery. Second, it has been demonstrated that "behemoth" and "leviathan" are probably words derived from Egyptian words. Behemoth likely referring to "water ox" which could most probably be a hippopotamus. Leviathan being also Egyptian in its etymology probably is referring to the crocodile. The use of the term Behemoth, Leviathan, and even Unicorn in translations such as King James are problematic as the translators did not know what the words really meant and so just kept them. The translations have been kept throughout translations to maintain consistency more than really delving into the etymology and proper use of the words in the time that the writings occurred.

That the first dinosaur fossil was not even discovered until the 1800's proves nothing as to when dinosaurs existed and when the homo genius existed. It has been postulated that prior to the development of paleontology people did find fossils and made the assumptions they were dragons and other mythological creatures. But again that is speculation so there really isn't a prove of anything in that. Mostly I would counter your claim that dinosaurs and humans existed at the same time from the fossil record. We do not find human fossils and dinosaur fossils at the same strata level in the geological record. If they did exist at the same time then we would find them at the same strata mixed together.

As for your pictures of supposed dinosaurs in ancient art you only show them and do not mention where they are from. Taking art out of context can lead to very bad speculation and conclusions. So could you please reference what they are from? I would give an example from the "Ancient Alien Austronaut" conspiracy theorists. They claim that in Egyptian hieroglyphs we can find images of helicopters. Here is the image of the heiroglyph they refer to:

However they are taking the art depicted here our of context. First the image is not a picture of the original heiroglyph. It is an enhanced and edited image. Here is the actual image.

As can be seen the "Ancient Alien" theorists take the overlaping hierglyph at the nose of the so claimed helicopter and omits it. What is acutally happening is the Egyptians at times would plaster over a set of heirglyphs and write corrections or new heirpglyphs over them. At Abydos what has happend is some of the plaster has fallen away and you can see both heirglyphs at the same time. So there is not a picture of a helicopter or space ships and a submarine. One explanation of all this can be found here: http://members.tripod.com/~a_u_r_a/abydos.html. I know this guy is getting his information from a peer reviewed article that is on the web. But I can't find that url right now. I apologize as I don't like when people do not show references for information.

My point though is that many times we take ancient art forms out of context and as a result can come to wrong conclusions.

As for your first picture of what appears to me to be one of the Ica Stones of Peru. They are admitted hoaxes. Here is one article of many discussing how they were found and the admition of being a hoax. http://archyfantasies.com/2012/05/08/the-10-most-not-so-puzzling-ancient-artifacts-the-ica-stones/.

The second picture I believe is a carving from the Ta Prohm Temple in Cambodia. This one has a few problems for evidence of humans existing with dinosaurs. The so called stegosaur's plates depicted in the image are an artistic flourish shown on many other animals depicted at the temple - even on birds. They are probably most likely to be leafs or some type of plant representation. Also the image has been associated more with either a rinocerous as there is only one horn, or it could be a boar. Also the temple is known to have been built in the 12th century. Even Early Earth Creationist do not make the claim dinosaurs existed recently as the 1100's.

I am not familar with your other art images. But I strongly suspect they do not depict what you claim.

So in conclusion I think your so stated "opinon" is wrong and based on faulty evidence.

 

[Dr GS Hurd]

I dont understand how ancient man could fashion metals and create unmovable temples but never found these huge bones, if they did they did not record it. Perhaps because it was common or because it was hidden on purpose. 1800s? around the same time they discovered biblical ruins. I heard that the greeks went to war with dragons, and that chinese used to snort crushed dragon bones, anyway there are still dense areas of the world that are still uncharted territory, it would change the world to discover a new truth

I recommend:
Mayor, Adrienne
2000 The First Fossil Hunters: Paleontology in Greek and Roman Times. Princeton University Press

 

[joshua 1 9]

Yes, all fossils are transitional fossils. And no, horse evolution is not wrong.

Of course they do not admit they were wrong. DNA offers "new" information so the new diagram is more accurate then the old. Only problem is they still use the old "outdated" diagram in text books that clearly has been shown to be wrong. Not to mention Lamerick model for evolution. Sometimes they say it is right, sometimes they say it is wrong. They cannot even make up their mind one way or the other on him.

 

[eartheart]

Well consider the evolution theory of man evolving from primative ape, which today are close but no cigar hence why they are not named "man", and now according to millions of years of dead bones that have only been studied for a little over 100 years and now less than 50 are being linked to birds and not lizards at all, why do we not find primative birds alive yet apes we do? when did these bones escape the lizard like concept to the bird like and why not both? Pluto was kicked out of the "planet" family because they recently discovered many others too abundant for educational convience. The bible was written before the discovery of giants, and because it backs it up we are taught two oppositions growing up. Original science came forth long ago before secular science

 

[eartheart]

In the next 100 years most of what science agrees now will be over ruled by the ongoing dog chasing its tail. However, the bible changes not. Jesus spoke in parables and likewise was a parable himself as one man for all of mankinds inspiration, hence "i am the light", because without light is without form, and light is seen on top of water, light walking on water is likewise a parable of strong faith and belief or mind over matter. Loving the nature of God is absolute, loving the Heart is likewise part of the same body. God exist through man and man by God, alpha and omega, it was done at the very hint of life and mainstream science can never undue that nor can a church or religion. Atheist may claim that war is the condition of religion yet science creates the bombs.

 

[brocke]

....and now according to millions of years of dead bones that have only been studied for a little over 100 years and now less than 50 are being linked to birds and not lizards at all,...

Well actually birds had not evolved yet and the latest theory is that birds are evolved from dinosaurs.

...why do we not find primative birds alive yet apes we do? when did these bones escape the lizard like concept to the bird like and why not both?...

I think your logic is flawed in this statement. Reason: The apes we see alive are not primitive they are modern. In other words the apes we see alive now are the modern evolution of apes. So we do not see primitive, or ancestors of apes as they have already become extinct. Also the modern ape is not ancestor of homo sapiens but a cousin on the evolutionary tree. (Side note: primitive is spelled with three "i"s not an "a".)

Pluto was kicked out of the "planet" family because they recently discovered many others too abundant for educational convience.

That statement is just flat out wrong. They didn't "kick" Pluto out of the planet family. What happened was an astronomerin 2003 discovered an object orbiting the sun beyond Pluto and that was bigger than Pluto - Eris. This began a discussion among astronomers as to what defines a "planet". The organization that names space objects decided to create some new categories among them being dwarf planets and plutoids. This was done as we are discovering more objects beyond Pluto and it called for a redefining of objects based on their size and how far they were from space. After making these distinctions Pluto no longer was in the category of planets. It now belonged in the category of dwarf planets and plutoids. http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/k-4/stories/nasa-knows/what-is-pluto-k4.html

The bible was written before the discovery of giants, and because it backs it up we are taught two oppositions growing up. Original science came forth long ago before secular science

Um what discover of giants? Are you referring to the internet hoax that the National Geographic Society had discovered giant human bones. That's all a hoax. Nephilim in Genesis is the Hebrew word for "fallen ones". It has nothing to do with giants.

I do declare I spend more time debunking fallacious claims by my fellow Christians then I do with Atheists.

 

[Armoured]

Yes some of the stones were are fakes. But you can't throw the baby out with the bath water. Just because there are some fakes doesn't mean the whole collection is fake. The stories of alleged forgery fail to deal with the the vast number of stones that have been collected. The quarry that the alleged hoaxers was far to small to have yielded the massive amount of rocks necessary. Such an enormous quantity of stones would have required an excavation site the size of an open pit mine. Also when the forged stones were submitted to microscopic analysis they were easily distinguished from the authentic stones.

If they are "genuine", and actually suggest an ancient advanced civilisation with modern day technological capability, how come they're only found in one place on the planet?

 

[joshua 1 9]

They are not "extinct" but these are "terrible lizards". Lizards never stop growing, i believe that if man has not conquered the fields and taken their food source that they would have grown to great size. they shrunk when man took over, living side by side. The bible which is a collection of ancient stories, speaks even of Peter being exiled into a land to hunt and kill large four footed beasts for meat. Acts

Crocodiles and turtles continue to grow and they tend to live a long life. Eventually the crocs get to big and they have to go in and kill them. Because they just get to be to big to manage. You can go on a boat tour of the swamps in Florida and see them out in the wild. Also I saw turtles in zoos in Florida that they claimed were hundreds of years old.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Yes some of the stones were are fakes. But you can't throw the baby out with the bath water. Just because there are some fakes doesn't mean the whole collection is fake. The stories of alleged forgery fail to deal with the the vast number of stones that have been collected. The quarry that the alleged hoaxers was far to small to have yielded the massive amount of rocks necessary. Such an enormous quantity of stones would have required an excavation site the size of an open pit mine. Also when the forged stones were submitted to microscopic analysis they were easily distinguished from the authentic stones.

I can get you a good deal on a VINTAGE Mayan Aztec Inca Jasper STONE Carved Warrior Bust Head Latin American. Make me an offer I can not refuse Or perhaps you would be interested in a Vintage Mid Century Italian Art Pottery Ancient Greek Bronze Patina Vase Raymor. Let me know what relics from antiquity your looking for maybe I can find it for you [Poe ]

 

[Subduction Zone]

Have you ever heard of the Ghost Ranch in Arizona? There are museums in Utah where they found dinosaurs and there are places that they have in Wyoming where they find dinosaur bones. All from Pangaea. I can give you a silly photo if you think it is silly. Otherwise just run a google search on all the dinosaur museums in the Rocky mountain area of the country. These are the first dinosaurs to develop teeth where they began to devour one another. So for a creationism this is a very significant beginning of being carnivorous. If there were carnivores before this, they were different. They did not attack and devour each other to destroy themselves within their own species.

Your error was that you equated the extinction of dinosaurs with the break up of Pangaea. Pangaea started to break up about 200 million years ago, and the extinction of the dinosaurs was roughly 65 million years ago. Yes, there were many dinosaurs when Pangaea existed, there were also many dinosaurs long after it broke up.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Your error was that you equated the extinction of dinosaurs with the break up of Pangaea. Pangaea started to break up about 200 million years ago, and the extinction of the dinosaurs was roughly 65 million years ago. Yes, there were many dinosaurs when Pangaea existed, there were also many dinosaurs long after it broke up.

The extinction of dinosaurs took place in three phases. The final and last was 65 million years ago. The first was around 200 million years ago. This is actually the evidence that convinced science of the validity of the Continental drift theory. When I was in school the theory had not been proven yet.

 

[eartheart]

I also declare it a relief to be justified by both science and spirit and although x ray science is of real time observation, what existed before humans will always rely on the fact that i dont like particular source dating if my human level is sub mentally challenged in understanding what the huge difference in time can expose in such a short human life, especially when schools omit previous facts in science. I do hope that whatever remains the same in science is understandable by future generations of scholars and that any useless academia be retired. If not I pray that google does not take over the teachers.

 

[Hoghead1]

Let me ask you a question, Isaiah 55: Do you believe the world is round and that it revolves around the sun? If you do, you are flat out contradicting what is clearly stated in Scripture. Why should evolution be considered any different? Scripture proved eons ago that it is not an accurate geophysical witness. If you hold the world is round, etc., and many Christians for centuries have, then you are automatically going against Scripture, as I just said. Nobody in the past had any problem here; they just accepted that Scripture is not an accurate geophysical witness. And who says it should be, that that was its intended purpose by God and the scribes? Another important point here is that the Genesis account in itself presents major problems. In point of fact, as a plain reading will show, it provides two contradictory chronologies. In Gen. 1 first animals, then man and woman together. In Gen. 2, first man, then animals, then woman. Many attempts have been made to explain away this contradiction, forcing the two accounts into one, but every one has failed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The extinction of dinosaurs took place in three phases. The final and last was 65 million years ago. The first was around 200 million years ago. This is actually the evidence that convinced science of the validity of the Continental drift theory. When I was in school the theory had not been proven yet.

There may have been a die off at when Pangaea broke up, but it was nowhere near the extinction event that killed them. They also had plenty of time to recover after that. And i know of no extinction event being the final confirmation of plate tectonics. I thought it was the magnetic mapping of the ocean floor that confirmed it.

Do you have an links that support your claims? It always helps if you can support claims by siting reliable sources. Of course if you knew that you probably would not have mentioned the Ica Stones. Those have been known to be a fraud for quite some time now:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_stones

 

[farout]

He used known fakes (Ica Stones) to make his case. How is that a good post?

Pardon? I was posting to him. I was not interested in an attack.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Of course they do not admit they were wrong. DNA offers "new" information so the new diagram is more accurate then the old. Only problem is they still use the old "outdated" diagram in text books that clearly has been shown to be wrong. Not to mention Lamerick model for evolution. Sometimes they say it is right, sometimes they say it is wrong. They cannot even make up their mind one way or the other on him.

Okay, this whole thing with the evolution of the horse supposedly being wrong is really confusing me since I cannot find anything online that actually shows it being wrong.

 

[JacksBratt]

Are you trying to say that those are all dinosaurs?

Also, the blue whale is perhaps the largest animal to ever live. It is larger than any fossil species ever found. How do you explain that?

Best way to tell the difference between a dino and a lizard is the angle at which the femur leaves the pelvis.

Lizards are on the left.

What is your definition of a dinosaur? Anything that died off prehistorically, and anything that survived is not a dinosaur?

All these "giant lizards" and other large animals that are found in the fossil record would be just another animal with a modern name, had they survived. They were simply too large to survive after the sudden change in barometric pressure and O2 content.

The tortoise's, alligators, rhino's, whatever, survived due to their body size compared to lung capacity.

As for the Blue whale and your question "how do you explain that"? I believe you will agree that the pressure above the water level is quite different than below. Therefore any ocean creature lives in a different pressure. If you look at Boyles gas law of pressure, under pressure the of O2 is equivalently higher. If you are a scuba diver and breath from a scuba cylinder filled with air at atmospheric pressure and dive to deeper depths you run the risk of O2 poisoning if you go very deep. The % O2 will be equivalently higher as the pressure increases. This is why they use air mixers for deep dives.

The same factor is what kept the ocean dwellers alive. The change in pressure above the sea level was quite drastic, however it was a very small change, in fact insignificant to the blue whale. Thus they survived.
That's how I explain it.