Dinosaurs, more recent than we thought?

[starbug1]

I thought I'd share this site I stumbled on.

 

 

An aura of mystery surrounds the dinosaurs. Where did they come from? Did they evolve? Did they really live millions of years ago? What happened to them? Are there any living today? Has any human being ever seen a live dinosaur?...

 

As you add up all of the dates' date=' and accepting that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to Earth almost 2000 years ago, we come to the conclusion that the creation of the Earth and animals (including the dinosaurs) occurred only thousands of years ago (perhaps only 6000!), not millions of years. Thus, if the Bible is right (and it is!), dinosaurs must have lived within the past thousands of years.[/quote']

 

this made me laugh.

 

And so did this.

 

If dinosaurs evolved from amphibians, there should be, for example, fossil evidence of animals that are part dinosaur and part something else. However, there is no proof of this anywhere. In fact, if you go into any museum you will see fossils of dinosaurs that are 100% dinosaur, not something in between. There are no 25%, 50%, 75%, or even 99% dinosaurs—they are all 100% dinosaur!

 

 

but lets get serious, how did the dinosaurs get here?

 

Some people think that dinosaurs were too big, or there were too many of them, to go on this Ark. However, there were not very many different kinds of dinosaurs. There are certainly hundreds of dinosaur names, but many of these were given to just a bit of bone or skeletons of the same dinosaur found in other countries. It is also reasonable to assume that different sizes, varieties, and sexes of the same kind of dinosaur have ended up with different names. For example, look at the many different varieties and sizes of dogs, but they are all the same kind-the dog kind! In reality, there may have been fewer than 50 kinds of dinosaurs.

 

So dinosaurs—all the different kinds—must have lived alongside of people after the Flood.

 

...hmm

 

When reading evolutionist literature, you will be astonished at the range of ideas concerning their supposed extinction. The following is just a small list of theories:

 

Dinosaurs starved to death; they died from overeating; they were poisoned; they became blind from cataracts and could not reproduce; mammals ate their eggs. Other causes include-volcanic dust, poisonous gases, comets, sunspots, meteorites, mass suicide, constipation, parasites, shrinking brain (and greater stupidity), slipped discs, changes in the composition of air, etc.

 

It is obvious that evolutionists don’t know what happened and are grasping at straws

 

interesting take, seeing as how that's more examples than the creationists have. Evolutionists don't know what happened, though, in fact, the evolutionists think they do just as much as the creationists 'think they do.'

 

enjoy

 

 

 

home page http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/gospel.asp

[ydoaPs]

answersingenesis.....enough said

[starbug1]

it's mad, isn't it?

[herpguy]

umm...wow...that was a lame attempt.

 

 

One thing that proves the whole theory wrong; the fossil records date back to about 65 million years ago, not 6,000.

[starbug1]

yeah, but try explaining that to a member of answersingenesis.com or any staunch creationist for that matter. They try to throw in blatantly false facts with a bit of digusting dry humor and expect you to believe them!

 

How did he so eloquently put it?

 

If dinosaurs evolved from amphibians, there should be, for example, fossil evidence of animals that are part dinosaur and part something else.

 

...and

 

Thus, the dinosaur fossils which were formed as a result of this Flood were probably formed about 4,500 years ago, not millions of years ago.

 

He says "thus" like its a declamatory statement set in stone like one of the ten commandments, "Hear ME! I have the answer explained in just one short paragraph!"

 

I can hardly understand why no one believes him.

[Ophiolite]

I was amused by the declaration that all the dinosaurs were originally vegitarian. If it were true we should be forced to conclude that God was rather unkind to those equipped with predatory, carnivorous teeth. Not at all the sort of thing for chewing up plants. The poor things must have been grossly underfed.

[Illuminati]

haha, very funny.

 

Just for a day, I would like to see into the brain of those people who truely believe that.

[insane_alien]

Just for a day, I would like to see into the brain of those people who truely believe that.

 

The cost of the therapy afterwards would bankrupt even bill gates. thats only if you manage to survive the illogic.

[AzurePhoenix]

Oh wow, this just hurts. Seriously, deep down. Ow.

[ydoaPs]

i just can't help but wonder "holy FSM, how was i ever dumb enough to be one of THEM???"

[DeathbySmite]

50 species of dinosaur... lmfao!!! The stupidity of that is MIND RAPING. That's like saying there was only enough space for like 2 dinosaurs in every group! (there were ALOT of groups.) Not having had touched a dinosaur book for years and not using ANY reference, I can think of all these SAUROPODS ALONE: Apatosaurus, diplodicus, barasaurus, camarasaurus, brachiosaurus, supersaurus, ultrasaurus, seismosaurus, saltasaurus... well you get the point. Also, the jump from even one brachiosaurid to evolve into another would take a lot more than 6,000 years!!! Why am I sitting here trying to dismantle divine creation? That's like a paladin in full plate armor picking a fight with a baby. Maybe part of the reason for the success of creationism is that it is treated as an alternative and as a concept that is intellectually EQUAL with evolution. These people are NOT our combatants- just ignorant. Maybe if we stop having tv specials and debates on this debate, people will realize that it could never exist in an effective society.

[starbug1]

50 species of dinosaur... lmfao!!! The stupidity of that is MIND RAPING. That's like saying there was only enough space for like 2 dinosaurs in every group! (there were ALOT of groups.) Not having had touched a dinosaur book for years and not using ANY reference, I can think of all these SAUROPODS ALONE: Apatosaurus, diplodicus, barasaurus, camarasaurus, brachiosaurus, supersaurus, ultrasaurus, seismosaurus, saltasaurus... well you get the point.

 

You have to remember that the guy who wrote this probably doesn't believe in the modern classification of animals. When he sees a cladogram or the taxonomic hierarchy or any species name, he goes "ptttt, that's just science mumbo-jumbo." Strong beliefs are rooted not in reality, but in personal--in this case, religious--perception. This is also true for any other branch of creationism. For Deity's sake, there are still people who believe that the earth is flat!

 

I was amused by the declaration that all the dinosaurs were originally vegitarian. If it were true we should be forced to conclude that God was rather unkind to those equipped with predatory' date=' carnivorous teeth. Not at all the sort of thing for chewing up plants. The poor things must have been grossly underfed.

[/quote']

 

They got really good at swallowing everything they ate whole. The teeth are for social intimidation only.

[CanadaAotS]

there are fossils of "part amphibian part dinosaur". This guy would be funny if you didnt realize that he actually believes what he's saying.

[alchemy]

ayyyy ignorance people should really not post any statement.

funny post by the way.

[AzurePhoenix]

50 species of dinosaur... lmfao!!! The stupidity of that is MIND RAPING. That's like saying there was only enough space for like 2 dinosaurs in every group! (there were ALOT of groups.) Not having had touched a dinosaur book for years and not using ANY reference, I can think of all these SAUROPODS ALONE: Apatosaurus, diplodicus, barasaurus, camarasaurus, brachiosaurus, supersaurus, ultrasaurus, seismosaurus, saltasaurus...

Aye, and those you mentioned are only among the most commonly known laymen species. Far over seven hundred known and counting, and those are likely no more than one percent of all the dino species that ever lived! Not to mention birds!

[sunspot]

When one thinks of dinosaurs, one normally thinks of T-Rex among others. But alligators, crocodiles, sharks, turtles, were around during that time and were part of the dinosaur time of historu. It is strange that all the dinosaurs were not wiped out. These four were around for Adam and Eve, (6000-7000 years ago) so the fundamentalist are technically correct, as long as they didn't say "around when all the dinosaurs were around".

[Sayonara]

there are fossils of "part amphibian part dinosaur". This guy would be funny if you didnt realize that he actually believes what he's saying.

He has to believe it, or he'll suddenly be alone.

[AzurePhoenix]

When one thinks of dinosaurs' date=' one normally thinks of T-Rex among others. But alligators, crocodiles, sharks, turtles, were around during that time and were part of the dinosaur time of historu. It is strange that all the dinosaurs were not wiped out. These four were around for Adam and Eve, (6000-7000 years ago) so the fundamentalist are technically correct, as long as they didn't say "around when all the dinosaurs were around".

[/quote']well, if you're going for technicalities, the alleged Adam and Eve's would have had to been soemthing like 200,000 years ago, or at least the closest proximity to the idea of an Adam and Eve. I wouldn't consider those four as anything more dinosaurish than the jellyfish, frogs and beetles that were also around. Of course birds (actual dinos themselves) were and are still around, but no matter how you twist the wording, the article is utterly wrong and shouldn't be intrepted as such.

[Ophiolite]

They got really good at swallowing everything they ate whole. The teeth are for social intimidation only.

I see your point......is it a canine?

[starbug1]

I see your point......is it a canine?

 

Could be. It would baffle even the best paleontologists.

[SilentQ]

This is the dark side of the Internet: any nitwit with a computer and an opinion can write garbage like that.

[insane_alien]

Its NOT garbage! it has HUGE entertainment value.

[starbug1]

I found some more entertaining and informative articles on answersingenesis. http://www.answersingenesis.org/search/default.aspx?qt=dinosaurs

 

2. So, were dinosaurs on the Ark?

 

John Woodmorappe

An in-depth study that provides detailed answers to the major criticisms of Noah’s Ark. What animals did Noah have to take on board? How could Noah and his family have cared for 16,000 animals, including dinosaurs (juvenile specimens)? How did they all survive for a year on the Ark? What did the carnivorous animals eat during and after the Flood, and how could their waste products be disposed of? This book provides answers! How could all the current varieties be descended from comparatively few kinds of animals on the Ark?

 

In Genesis 6:19–20, the Bible says that two of every sort of land vertebrate (seven of the 'clean' animals) were brought by God to the Ark. Therefore, dinosaurs (land vertebrates) were represented on the Ark.

 

oh, the ignorance. and this is how they justify themselves...

 

3. How did those huge dinosaurs fit on the Ark?

Although there are about 668 names of dinosaurs, there are perhaps only 55 different 'kinds' of dinosaurs. Furthermore, not all dinosaurs were huge like the Brachiosaurus, and even those dinosaurs on the Ark were probably 'teenagers' or young adults.

Creationist researcher John Woodmorappe has calculated that Noah had on board with him representatives from about 8,000 animal genera (including some now-extinct animals), or around 16,000 individual animals. 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.

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).

 

shoot me.

 

There's so much to quote, but it would take me all day. However, here's something I couldn't pass up, an excerpt from a fan.

 

I just wanted to tell anyone that might see this, that I absolutely love this website. Everything on this website is absolutely perfect. The articles, all the materials, everything is just great. I get excited about coming to work now just so I can peruse the site during down time. I have learned more in reading one article on this site, than I did in my entire time in science classes in public education. There truly is overwhelming evidence for the case for Christ and creation. The idea of understanding genesis to better understand who Christ was and what He accomplished has opened new doors for deep revelation. I wanted to thank you for keeping up with the site and just for providing such a plethra of information. I hope to subscribe to the magazine soon, and possibly make a contribution to AiG, since I am being fed so much!! Thanks and God bless.

 

I don't know what to say...shoot...him maybe, put him out of his misery.

[ydoaPs]

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.

that stuck out in the previous post. aren't they an anti-evolution group?

[bascule]

that stuck out in the previous post. aren't they an anti-evolution group?

 

They think God created a bunch of "kinds" of animals and that descendants evolved from there. Kinda like "Well we believe evolution so far, but as soon as it conflicts with Genesis we gotta go with that"