The Dreaded Dinosaurs Debate

[RipleyCountyChristian]

Ripley wrote:



But all that so called "evidence" is simply man's interpretation. Those supposed bones, tracks, eggs, nests, poop, and burrows can be each interpreted to be something other than a dinosaur, and all evidence must be interpreted. The plain reading of the text of the Bible gives no support to that "dinosaur" idea.

Are you following the words of God or the words of men? Where will that lead you? Do you think you can stomach wanton baby killing, gay flirting, and other heinous sins?


Papias

well yes, it is man's interpretation...but yet...we do know that it is some kind of creature that no longer exists because we can compare it to any modern animal....

The Bible doesn't say anything about oxygen or gravity either, but I am sure you believe in them.

 

[Papias]

Hi Ripley-

Sorry, I agree with you that dinosaurs exist.

I was joking, making a parody of the YECs. I did remember Poe's law (which is "any parody of young earth creationists, no matter how silly, can be mistaken for an actual young earth creationist, because there arguments really are that laughable"), and tried to avoid it by making that last sentence really silly, but alas, it didn't work.

Oh well. Have a fun(ny) day!

-Papias

 

[RipleyCountyChristian]

yeah I thought you might be joking, but I wasn't sure

 

[Calminian]

*sigh*

So we're back to seeing why so many people seem to think Christians are gullible, ignorant fools. With people claiming that Ankor Wat somehow supports a literal reading of Genesis, it's hard to argue against.

Papias

Sure looks like a Stegosaurus to me. What other creature could this possibly be? Even though you cherry picked an image in a completely different stance, the image is uncanny. And it's not like the image you chose was an actual photograph. It's all speculation how they looked. Sounds to me, Pipias, like you're in a bit of denial.

A lot of denial on Behemoth as well. I wish I could find this old article on an atheist website. But they had the integrity to admit that no known animal apart from a dinosaur fits the biblical description. They still didn't believe it was a dinosaur, but were at least honest that at this time, it was the best fit.

 

[Papias]

Cal wrote:

Sure looks like a Stegosaurus to me. What other creature could this possibly be?

Have you seen drawings of the griffin, sphinx and cerberus? What other creatures could those possibly be? News flash: Humans have drawn fanciful creatures for millenia.

Looking at this one, it's closest to something like a rhinoceros with a backwards horn. The only superficial resemblence to a stego would be by mistaking the decorative tabs for back plates. That these are decorative tabs is obvious from noticing that they are also on the outside of the ring he's in. You did notice that, right? That single clearly decorative feature is the only thing that remotely resembles a stegosaur.

The differences with a stegosaurus are many. Anky has no tail spikes, has a decorative tab on his tail, has equal sized legs like a mammal, has a large head like a mammal, has a head horn, and so on. All of these are very different from a stegosaur. You've noticed that stegosaurs have rear legs around twice or more the size of their front ones, right? They have small, pointed heads, with no horn, they have tail spikes, they have large tails, not little tails like anky, a neck, etc.

Even though you cherry picked an image in a completely different stance, the image is uncanny.

How is that a "completely different stance"? They are both standing on all fours. A "completely different stance" would be rising up on the huge back legs, or laying down, or such. If you think that image is "uncanny", then I've got some swampland in florida to sell you.


I didn't think I'd have my earlier post so graciously confirmed, where I wrote:

*sigh*

So we're back to seeing why so many people seem to think Christians are gullible, ignorant fools. With people claiming that Ankor Wat somehow supports a literal reading of Genesis, it's hard to argue against.

If I hadn't seen many of your other posts, I'd call Poe.

Papias

 

[Willtor]

Yeah, I think the only reason it looks remotely like a stegosaurus to me (apart from the tabs, which, as pointed out, are all over the image -- not just on/behind the animal) is that stegosauruses in dinosaur books when I was growing up had a regular length to all of their legs. But a casual look at any stegosaurus skeleton will show that it isn't so. Not by a long shot. Really, the image looks nothing like a stegosaurus apart from the dubious association of tabs with plates.

 

[Calminian]

Have you seen drawings of the griffin, sphinx and cerberus? What other creatures could those possibly be? News flash: Humans have drawn fanciful creatures for millenia.

Looking at this one, it's closest to something like a rhinoceros

A rhino? You think that's a rhino??

Wow! You've let emotion take over and lost all credibility. Something about this subject matter does that to people.

But to each his own. You're free to believe that's a rhino if you wish.

 

[Mallon]

A rhino? You think that's a rhino??

Wow! You've let emotion take over and lost all credibility. Something about this subject matter does that to people.

But to each his own. You're free to believe that's a rhino if you wish.

Rhinos do have horns on their faces. Stegosaurus didn't.

If anything, I've think we've just shown how fantastical this animal is -- it looks like nothing we know of.

 

[Willtor]

A rhino? You think that's a rhino??

Wow! You've let emotion take over and lost all credibility. Something about this subject matter does that to people.

But to each his own. You're free to believe that's a rhino if you wish.

Well, be fair. It isn't a stegosaurus, either. I think we're all trying to fit it into categories, and it doesn't really do any of them. I mean, it looks kind of like a hippo, to me. But there are no hippos in the Americas (AFAIK).

 

[Calminian]

Well, be fair. It isn't a stegosaurus, either. I think we're all trying to fit it into categories, and it doesn't really do any of them. I mean, it looks kind of like a hippo, to me. But there are no hippos in the Americas (AFAIK).

I think you guys have lost your minds. When I saw this picture, before even seeing the word "stegosaurus" on the post, I thought immediately, Stegosaurus. In fact, I was then wondering if it may be a fraud, like you have with other things of this type. But the rhino thing is just blowing my mind. I'm curious how long til you guys start backpeddling.

 

[Mallon]

I think you guys have lost your minds. When I saw this picture, before even seeing the word "stegosaurus" on the post, I thought immediately, Stegosaurus.

Here's a Stegosaurus skeleton:

Do you see a tall horn on its head?

 

[Willtor]

I think you guys have lost your minds. When I saw this picture, before even seeing the word "stegosaurus" on the post, I thought immediately, Stegosaurus. In fact, I was then wondering if it may be a fraud, like you have with other things of this type. But the rhino thing is just blowing my mind. I'm curious how long til you guys start backpeddling.

Without the use of smilies, I'm having a hard time knowing whether you're being serious or whether you're yanking our collective chain?

 

[Calminian]

Without the use of smilies, I'm having a hard time knowing whether you're being serious or whether you're yanking our collective chain?

I'm dead serious. Anyone who claims to look at that rock carving and see a rhino is either lying to themselves and just lying. Sorry, I know this hurts. Consider it tough love.

 

[matthewgar]

I think you guys have lost your minds. When I saw this picture, before even seeing the word "stegosaurus" on the post, I thought immediately, Stegosaurus. In fact, I was then wondering if it may be a fraud, like you have with other things of this type. But the rhino thing is just blowing my mind. I'm curious how long til you guys start backpeddling.

How is it a stegasaurus? If you look closely the plates are unrelated to the animal, or is it just a conicidence that the plates look exactly like the decorative things on the outside of it? Or are people ignoring this point because it doesn't mesh with their need for it to be stegasaurus?

 

[Willtor]

I'm dead serious. Anyone who claims to look at that rock carving and see a rhino is either lying to themselves and just lying. Sorry, I know this hurts. Consider it tough love.

Doesn't hurt me. I don't know what it is. As I said, it looks like a hippo to me, but I don't think it is. Maybe insisting on rhino _is_ lying to oneself, but certainly less so than stegosaurus. You don't really believe that's a carving of a stegosaurus, do you?

 

[Willtor]

Calminian, why is it so critical to you that this be a stegosaurus? Because, honestly, it doesn't matter to me. It doesn't matter to evolution (which I assume this is all about). Why does it matter to you? Have you looked at the other pictures of stegosauruses and their skeletons and compared them with the carving?

 

[shernren]

A rhino? You think that's a rhino??

Wow! You've let emotion take over and lost all credibility. Something about this subject matter does that to people.

But to each his own. You're free to believe that's a rhino if you wish.

Indeed, something about this subject matter makes people lose all credibility by letting their emotions take over. You can tell, because people who are being unemotional about the subject give rational explanations for the beliefs and positions they hold, while people who are being emotional about the subject call people they disagree with crazy liars without ever actually addressing the points they make.

I mean, I can see how the extreme emotions generated by the stone carvings of an obscure animal can drive someone to say things like:

I think you guys have lost your minds.

or

I'm dead serious. Anyone who claims to look at that rock carving and see a rhino is either lying to themselves and just lying. Sorry, I know this hurts. Consider it tough love.

while more rational people give reasons for what they think, like:

Rhinos do have horns on their faces. Stegosaurus didn't.

Here's a Stegosaurus skeleton:

Do you see a tall horn on its head?

But don't let me try to convince you that you are being emotional, Calminian. After all, how could the moral universe ever survive without the uncanny ability of the YECs, those who are "a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth," to tell when TEs are being emotional and insane?

 

[Calminian]

Calminian, why is it so critical to you that this be a stegosaurus?

I never said it was critical this was a Stegosaurus. I was merely marveling at how you guys jumped at the Rhino alternative. From the beginning I said I would be very open to other explanations for this carving. It may be hoax as some other drawings have proven to be. It could be some other mythological creature, though I don't know of any like that. But I'm very open.

It was just very telling how all you guys jumped on the Rhino bandwagon so quickly without a second thought. You have to be just a little embarrassed.

You do seem to be back-peddling a bit now, saying you don't care. That's a good start. You'd be better off to just laugh off your temporary insanity and admit that you emotionally gravitated toward any anti-YEC explanation available. That would restore credibility. All of is have our moments.

 

[matthewgar]

Well here is a thought as I mentioned before, lets say for a second that yes it was based upon a stegasauroid, *not stegasaurus*.

The plates are about right and their positions, but there are obvious problems, lack of tail spikes, and wrong head along with horns there. What it looks to me like is take a stegasauroid with the end of the tail missing, no head, just the bones of the body, maybe one of the tail spikes found nearby or a couple of them, no animal they would have known have spikes on it's tail, but might think it had some on the head, given the size of the body they found they would have likly thought it have a bigger head, so they gave it a bigger head with a the spikes. And here we have the bones of a great beast they found and turned into a god or such.

To me the plates being outside the mural point to being decorative rather then part of the animal, but there are other explanations other then straight, "[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] THEY SAW A DINY!!!." the picture to me fits more finding partial bones of the animal and like many other cultures have before saw it as a god, or powerful creature or such.

 

[Calminian]

Shrenren, I almost feel bad for you because you're trying so hard at sarcasm—something I have deep respect for. It's not that you don't have your moments, but your stuff always falls flat for some reason. This pains me as an avid fan of sarcasm. I don't write this to discourage you, but rather encourage you to keep trying. There's some resource I'd like to share that may be helpful.

The Official Dictionary of Sarcasm

How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic

I'd also encourage you to check for local classes on the subject. Keep working at it. I promise to acknowledge you when you nail your first irony.