It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Nygdan
Since the world is almost certainly quite a bit older than that.....
Originally posted by Nygdan
But, again, if you could have all the fossils that are had in some remote period (regardless of it being 9,000 years ago or 100 million), then why no fossils ever since then?
When some of the local people of the Likouala region would draw in the dirt or sand a representation of Mokele-mbembe they drew the shape of a sauropod dinosaur. Then when they were shown a picture of a sauropod dinosaur they said that picture is Mokele-mbembe.
Originally posted by Shenroon
Hey since when did someone say it was a brachisaur i read the 'sauropod' bit and everyone says that it would leave a trail of destructio which people would see but the amazon is one huge jungle
Originally posted by Brainiac
They are not educated and would not probably know one animal from another...
Originally posted by spliff4020
Ya, ya..it all sounds good till you realize something..There couldnt just be one of them. They gotta reproduce somehow. And if it was only two of tem and they kept the blood between them, they would go extinct. So in theory there should be a whole lot of these things running around.
Same reason, I dont buy Loch Ness either. There would have to be a few of them running around to. Unless of course, they live 1000s or millions of years. Trust me...if it was there, we would have found it, and it would either be in a zoo over here, or hanging up in the Brittish History Museum (since everything in there is either from Africa, Rome or Greece)
Originally posted by Voidmaster
Do you remember how long the moonlanders legs were? If not, they are about 10-12 feet long.
They were that long because scientists figured the moon was about the same age as the earth.
There is a recent creationist technical paper on this topic which admits that the depth of dust on the moon is concordant with the mainstream age and history of the solar system (Snelling and Rush 1993). Their abstract concludes with:
"It thus appears that the amount of meteoritic dust and meteorite debris in the lunar regolith and surface dust layer, even taking into account the postulated early intense bombardment, does not contradict the evolutionists' multi-billion year timescale (while not proving it). Unfortunately, attempted counter-responses by creationists have so far failed because of spurious arguments or faulty calculations. Thus, until new evidence is forthcoming, creationists should not continue to use the dust on the moon as evidence against an old age for the moon and the solar system."
In an important paper, geologist Dr Andrew Snelling from Australia’s Creation Science Foundation [now Answers in Genesis], and former Institute for Creation Research graduate student Dave Rush, have examined in minute detail all the evidence relating to this argument.1
Well I would say that after the flood the died out in all places except the parts of africa that still had the type of enviroment that they were built to survive in
I can also deduce that since this place is remote that nobody is digging for fossils there.
shenroonbut the amazon is one huge jungle
The footprints they claim to have found also look like Elephant footprints to me.
They will know what each animal is, how to kill it, what bits you can eat, how to cook it, skin it, etc, a lot more then we do.
adn remember the Lock is massive and has access to the sea
a NEW FORM OF LIFE was found in 2002 on the bottom of Loch Ness
But to say they are stupid is wrong
Originally posted by bilgerat
They also showed the natives a picture of a rhino and they responded with "Mokele-mbembe". The natives accurately identified pictures of gorillas and elephants in their local language, but when it came to the rhino picture they got a bit confused...
Originally posted by Gazrok
The idea of dinos around with man....preposterous!
or is it?