Lets see......... Maybe the dinosaurs got so bored that they built a rocket, and started their on civilization in a different galaxy. smile

wasn't that a cartoon some years back? Dinosaucers or something like it...

Reminded me a lot of Go-Bot style story telling.

Don't recall.

1: In several ancient cultures (i.e Babalonian) a great flood is described. So did ALL these cultures make it up? Or is it a conpiracy?

2: Carbon Dating doesnt actually work! Changes in climate, temperature eg, can change what comes up. Its been discovered that a mammoth was once carbon dated, 1 leg said it was 4000 years old, another leg said it was 50 years old!

3: The Earth is a giant magnet with a magnetic field, and like all other magnets, the field is weakened over time. The magnetic pull causes the Earth to spin, so (according to a science journel) the Earth spins 4%slower evry 150 years. So, 150 million years ago, a 1km wind would've been about 4,000,000% faster! Woops, there goes the slimes coming out of the ocean.

This section is on Apes=Humans? (Since the Death of the Dinosaurs is often tied with the false evolution theory)

4: (This is a bit different) Something on Humans evolving from Apes. If we come from Apes, why is it we use pig parts for repacment organs? Why not go hunt a gorilla?

5: If Humans evoled from apes, why dont we see any "half-way through" creatues? Like Homo-erectus?

Back to Dinosaurs

@ The Evil Thing: a few sites for you http://www.dinosauradventureland.com/
http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=37
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creatio ... osaurs.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs200 ... on_ark.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4419.asp
http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?cat=11
www.drdino.com

Sorry, I'd make these links but I dunno how

1. A great flood could have happened on many parts of the globe during a warm part of the earth's history, when the polar ice caps melted causing many areas to flood. It most certainly did NOT cover the entire surface, however.

2. Carbon dating doesn't work? Well, if that doesn't work, i think COUNTING THE RINGS ON A TREE DOES.

3. Um, the rate of earth spinning does NOT affect windspeed at that great a factor. And you have completely forgotten about the MOON. The moon also has an effect on our wind speed, its own gravitational pull having an influence on us. Earth DID spin much faster in our early history, but once we got the moon it slowed us down to a leisurely 24 hours, AND KEPT US THAT WAY So in fact what you said is completely false. But the earth's magnetic field does do that, and we will be experiencing a flip soon (compasses will begin to point SOUTH instead of north).

4. What kind of a question is that? we use whatever happens to work. Did we evolve from pigs? No. Did god make us in the image of pigs? No. So that statement helps niether argument. In fact, that is probably the same "fluke of nature" that would make chimpazees have 98% of their genes be the same as ours.

5. We do. What do you think all those remains we've found have been?

As for those sites, they are all crazy whacked out christian fundamentalists that have no idea what they are doing.

Edited by - Blackhole on 12/19/2005 8:25:37 PM

Robbio - to be frank I am upset about the fundamentalist rubbish you post here even without reading what others have said.
OK, this is rude. So it's against the rules. I know it, because I have read them.

YOU have NOT (we all know that you like capital letters ).

---

Sorry, I'd make these links but I dunno how

---

If you had read the rules (link on top of every page) you knew how to make links. Besides you knew that TLR does not accept religious discussions. You insist on changing a topic about scientific questions in a topic about absolute truth found in the Bible (with a little help from -- eehrm yes -- science). Holy sh*t.

-----------
PS: Flaming ? Offending ?
Yes. No.
The method is called dialectics. Think about that.

---

1: In several ancient cultures (i.e Babalonian) a great flood is described. So did ALL these cultures make it up? Or is it a conpiracy?

---

No-one's denying there was a flood. We only challenge the notion that some god created it and/or that it covered the entire Earth's surface.

---

2: Carbon Dating doesnt actually work! Changes in climate, temperature eg, can change what comes up. Its been discovered that a mammoth was once carbon dated, 1 leg said it was 4000 years old, another leg said it was 50 years old!

---

Yes, yes, thank you. You've provided several examples of how you claim C-14 dating doesn't work. I'm going to ask two things of you. First, that you provide the reputable scientific sources from which you get these examples, not "www.evolution-is-a-vicious-lie.com". Second, please show us that you know how carbon dating actually (or theoretically in your case) works.

---

4: (This is a bit different) Something on Humans evolving from Apes. If we come from Apes, why is it we use pig parts for repacment organs? Why not go hunt a gorilla?

5: If Humans evoled from apes, why dont we see any "half-way through" creatues? Like Homo-erectus?

---

I understand you may find it distasteful but at least take the time and bother to learn something about evolution before you attack it. That entire section smacks of absolute scientific ignorance.

I'll address point four first: because gorillas are endangered and hunting them is illegal. We don't use pig parts for replacement organs if we can help it, the body often rejects them too much for the transplant to be viable. You will notice however, that we often test experimental drugs on apes rather than pigs. Why? Because our bodies are very similar... oops.

Point five: "Huh?!" Is all I can say to that. What are you talking about?

---

The Evil Thing: a few sites for you http://www.dinosauradventureland.com/
http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=37
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creatio ... osaurs.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs200 ... on_ark.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4419.asp
http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?cat=11
www.drdino.com

---

Ooh, what fun. Three are from "Answering Genesis". Just what the doctor ordered.

www.dinosauradventureland.com:- I clicked a link at the bottom of the page. The title for the new page was "Creation Science Evangelism". I asked for science not poorly disguised religion.
http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=37:-
I'll humour you on this one and answer it.

---

This description, which perfectly fits an Apatosaurus, is a paraphrased description taken from one of the oldest books of the Bible, Job 40:15-24.

---

What? No it doesn't fit an apatosaurus. At least, not the apatosauri that I found on google and wikipedia.
Job 40
Wikipedia entry for Behemoth

http://www.answersingenesis.org
"Upholding the authority of the bible from the very first verse"?
First link
Ok, the first article looks like any old cobblers you could find on a conspiracy theorist's page.

---

Despite the hype, Jurassic Park is fiction. Scientists have not yet found dinosaur DNA in any amber-preserved insects. But if they did, even evolutionists admit that the DNA, a notoriously unstable molecule, would be too degraded to carry a complete dinosaur genetic blueprint.

---

... well duh!

Second link
Erm.. if it's ok with you I'm going to leave the first two points because they've already been answered one way or another in previous posts and links.

---

When you realize that horses, zebras, and donkeys are probably descended from the horse-like ‘kind’, Noah did not have to carry two sets of each such animal. Also, dogs, wolves, and coyotes are probably from a single canine ‘kind’, so hundreds of different dogs were not needed.

---

Aha! What this article is doing by paring down these animals into single 'kinds' is implying evolution on such an enormous scale that any biologist who suggested it would be laughed out of the community.

---

According to Genesis 6:15, the Ark measured 300 x 50 x 30 cubits, which is about 460 x 75 x 44 feet, with a volume of about 1.52 million cubic feet. Researchers have shown that this is the equivalent volume of 522 standard railroad stock cars (US), each of which can hold 240 sheep. By the way, only 11% of all land animals are larger than a sheep.

Without getting into all the math, the 16,000-plus animals would have occupied much less than half the space in the Ark (even allowing them some moving-around space).

---

Ok, this is an engineer discussing why the ark doesn't hold water (pun intentional). But in direct address to the above:

---

Problem 4: Even after he pares down the list (he posits 15,754 'kinds') he
has a problem. In order for there to be physically enough space inside Ye
Arke, Woody uses the _median_ to work out the size of cages. He says that if
you have hippos, elephants, rats, and dogs, you can use the _median_ size
animal and build cages for 'em, and they'll all fit. The median size,
according to Woody, that of a sheep. Using that, he can shoehorn enough cages
into Ye Arke to hold his 15,754 kinds... but only just. And the cages would
be sized so that an animal in it would be able to stand up, but not move
about... which means it gets no exercise, and its muscles will atrophy. And
it won't live to see the end of the voyage. Unfortunately, Woody can't think
of any other way to fit 'em all in.

---

Third link

---

Why are human fossils not found with trilobites, for example? If humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time, why aren’t their fossils found together? How could the Flood produce the order in the fossil record?

---

I laughed when I read this. It seems that the creationists have now started building even more false assumptions upon their own false assumptions. Scientists have never said human fossils were found with trilobites? In fact, that's impossible because they are in completely different time frames. It's the creationists who assume that humans and trilobites lived together, because it's te only thing that fits with their cosy view of a 4000 (or whatever) year old Earth.

***Beyond that, I'm fed up of trying to justify what the entire world believes to an openly religious site. If you want me to comment then provide scientific sources . This is probably the fifth time I've asked you. In fact, just to hammer the point home, I'm going to write it in block capitals at the bottom of this post in case you've got bored and stopped reading up to here.

http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?cat=11
Enough said.



*** PLEASE PROVIDE SCIENTIFIC SOURCES ONLY, ROBBIO2000, THANK YOU (N.B. see penultimate paragraph, marked ***)

EDIT: That entire post took me two and a half hours to research, construct and write.

EDIT 2: zazie, calm down That is the sort of thing that triggers a flame war.

EDIT 3: Stumbled across this during my marathon info hunt

Edited by - The Evil Thing on 12/20/2005 4:36:13 AM

Edited by - The Evil Thing on 12/20/2005 4:40:59 AM

Edited by - The Evil Thing on 12/20/2005 4:52:16 AM

This is more an issue that will not be resolved in our lifetimes. Those of us on the bible side of the coin, will never except the "science" side as being true, and those on the science side of the coin will never except the religous view. You will never see the heads and tails sides meeting each other. So, it leads to a "Agree to disagree" conclusion. Best if both sides mellow a little....hmm?

Maybe, FD, but we evolutionists are only jumpy because they have the entire basis for their subject dragged into court every other year. Maybe if everyone started treated the Theory of gravity in the same way, physicists would be just as defensive.

EDIT: Ugh, damm spelign

Edited by - The Evil Thing on 12/20/2005 4:55:10 AM

First, I would like to point out that having a strong religious belief does not mean that scientific theories must be rejected. So I wish to emphasize that just because someone is religious, it doesn't mean that such a person doesn't believe in evolution, for example. I think both sides of this discussion need to be careful to not paint everyone with a broad brush and assume that if a person believes in evolution he / she is not religious (including christian) nor assume that a person who is religious doesn't believe in evolution.

I think this is a very important point to make.

@Robbie:

You have ignored the fact that I pointed out to you that the oldest living tree today is 4800 and therefore is 300 years older than the alleged date of the great flood as described in the Bible of 4500 years, according to you.
This is fact, Robbie. You can go to California and touch the tree. It exists, it is older than the flood according to your own accounting.

Edited by - Indy11 on 12/20/2005 6:25:18 AM

Robbio, I'm going offering a proverbial olive branch.

You may find this somewhat more to your tastes than the purely scientific offerings. If you don't have the energy to read my previous posts, at least take the time to read this.

OK! OK!

Yeeeesh, I didnt mean to spark a Religion vs Science arguement. I just wanted to point out 1 more fact I read in a Christian Science Magazine (which is now no longer continued)

In WW2, 1944, a bomber was passing over Greenland, and it suffered an engine failure. It went down into the snow, and got burried. In 1987, a team was sent to find the Bomber, they found it. They dug a shaft down to it.

Now Ice forms rings over time, so if you dug a channel, it would supposedly tel you how old the Ice is, they counted the rings down the shaft. (1 ring means 1 year) After 43 years, there were 628 rings!

And some trees have been found to create more than 1 ring a year in some areas (like Tropics)

You realise we're going to need some kind of link to back that up? Besides, ice rings do not always correspond to a single year. Rings can form every season and sometimes every month depending on the climate at the time.

---

And some trees have been found to create more than 1 ring a year in some areas (like Tropics)

---

Yes, and that is the reason why counting rings is not the scientific standard for measuring the age of a tree. The age of the tree was most likely determined using radiocarbon dating. Are you suggesting that this method is flawed too? A method that has been proven correct as far as humanly possible time and time again?

I am glad I'm not the only one who has been offended by the rubbish you posted above. Please, check your facts before making these sweeping statements. And that means on Google, not just religious science websites.

I just thought of something. Maybe the dinosuar evolved into a chicken. They do have similar qualities when you look at the facts. hmmmmmmmm.