A Question About Adam and Eve vs. Dinosaurs

reply to post by Chadwickus


The OTHER question is this? Why do YOU ASSUME that Noah didn't take dinosaurs?
I think he did and HAD TO under the story and God's orders to Noah...

Read Genesis 6 before commenting o it...

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by Chadwickus

 

The OTHER question is this? Why do YOU ASSUME that Noah didn't take dinosaurs?
I think he did and HAD TO under the story and God's orders to Noah...

Read Genesis 6 before commenting o it...

Damn that ark must have been HUGE!

The tallest and heaviest dinosaur known from good skeletons is Brachiosaurus brancai (also known as Giraffatitan). Its remains were discovered in Tanzania between 1907–12. Bones from multiple similarly-sized individuals were incorporated into the skeleton now mounted and on display at the Humboldt Museum of Berlin;[50] this mount is 12 meters (39 ft) tall and 22.5 meters (74 ft) long, and would have belonged to an animal that weighed between 30,000 and 60,000 kilograms (70,000 and 130,000 lb).

en.wikipedia.org...

Bit of a size comparison:



So we got a pair of dinosaurs weighing up to 60,000kg each.
Plus a pair that are up to 60m long.


Well, we've sorted out 4 of the buggers! Where's the rest of them gonna go?




Oh and I suppose the T-Rex's and Velociraptors went in the cute lil puppy section

Look I want to say something to the Christians posting in here but I don't want to change the topic to Evolution/Creation debate, I am already in one of those...

I understand some of you Christians think that evolution is FACT and you've been taught this bunk. And now ou seek ways to get GOD and evolution to mesh, this is understandable in that you don't want to deny scientific fact but you don't want to deny God so you seek a compromise...

You CAN NOT compromise God's WORD for man's theories. Evolution my friends, no matter what you've been told, is NOT FACT and is ridiculous to real scientists. If they could show one piece of Observable repeatable scientific proof they could claim the over than 5 million offered for such scientific proof, it has not been claimed. They believe that everything came from nothing, we believe everything came from God. You can not sit on both sides of the fence as I stated, these BELIEFS are not compatible.

I do NOT want an evolution debate or comments on what I said about it, this was ONLY for the Christians in this thread and why they shouldn't try to mesh the two theories as I am sure most evolutionists would agree, they are not compatible.

Thanks

reply to post by Chadwickus


More assumptions from you? And clearly LITTLE COGNIZANT THOUGHT!!! I am not slamming you but you are acting IGNORANT!!!

Now you are assuming Noah took Adult Dinosaurs and other things like Elephants WHICH IS RIDICULOUS AT BEST.

Why were 2 of each animal KIND and 7 of the Clean KIND taken aboard? Let me give you a hint, because they would need to repopulate the Earth after the flood so they needed a breeding PAIR or more. Why would you take Adult animals on a boat for a year and more? You take babies aboard and guess what, you'll never believe it, Adult animals are big and BABY ONES ARE SMALL!!!

Babies eat less, are smaller, sleep more and would live longer to reproduce MORE OFFSPRING, which is why you're bringing them!!!

THINK MAN THINK!

[edit on 12/18/2008 by theindependentjournal]

the oldest version of said fiction is unarguably the dead sea scrolls... in there they clam Adam and Eve were taken from separate tribes and placed in the garden... nothing in it ever said that was the beginning of earth....
blame that minor omission from modern bibles to the rabid need to edit truth and make things fit their hidden agendas ... mostly control over the peasant populace...

and while on the subject of repression and truth hiding... "Free Leonard Peltier"!



[edit on 18-12-2008 by DaddyBare]

reply to post by theindependentjournal



I don't need to think, sounds like the bible does that for me.

reply to post by Chadwickus


This is how most people that already have their mind made up react when presented with very good evidence that their NOTIONS of Biblical stories are wrong. When they are shown that it is VERY logical and explainable they run away and say something like.

"The Bible does my thinking for me". Good enough, thanks for listening and maybe next time you will think before laughing at a Biblical story. Particularly one that has over 270 cultures repeating in some form and some Scientists have said they believe happened.

reply to post by theindependentjournal


Indeed, I'm sure that you would have a similar retort if I bother to point out the huge amount of flaws in the bible.

No doubt though, you've heard it all before and have the answers to it all as well.


So, due to my lack of interest in going around in circles, we shall agree to disagree.

reply to post by theindependentjournal


No need to yell, I'm wearing my glasses and can read what you type without the caps.

I understand what you are saying, but you tell me that my problem is I'm reading by chapter and verse and then go on to tell someone else that the story of creation couldn't have lasted thousands of years since the sun came after plants. You can't have it both ways. Either it is in order by chapter and verse or it's not. If it's not, then the sun would have to come before the plants. And seeing as how we have fossils of plants that are hundreds of millions of years old and the oldest homo erectus fossil is 2 million years old and homo sapiens have only been around for about 250k years it's a bit of a stretch to say all that time lapsed in one day. Dinosaurs on the other hand died out around 65 million years ago. Big time lapse there between dinosaurs and modern humans too.

As a side note, since I'm getting dangerously close to being OT, the dinosaurs were long gone before humans came around and could build boats large enough to hold two of every animal, even if those animals were very young and very small, so they couldn't have been on the arc. Not to mention the fossils of young dinosaurs that have been found are nowhere near as small as they would need to be for a human to control them long enough to put them on a boat, not to mention live with for a year, with very few exceptions.

Just because something isn't mentioned explicitly in the bible doesn't mean it isn't so...slightly off topic, I once heard a theory from a pastor that the dinosaurs were put on earth originally (explaining fossil evidence) as an "experiment" and then wiped them out before recreating life in the order of Genesis. It was based on the idea that Genesis only states the earth was formless and void "in the beginning" before getting into the creation of life in 7 days, almost alluding that it had been there for sometime at that point.

reply to post by Chadwickus


Yeah I am sure there is lots of flaws heck you just pointed out that the smart thing for Noah to do was to take Adult animals aboard, which shows me how you think. Which means you have lots of flaws in the Bible, YEAH YEAH I got ya no need to keep trying to convince me. I gave reasoned information and you can not respond, happens all the time. I won't hold it against you personally, I know there's LOTS of flaws, but I did notice you didn't point out anymore, is that because you know I will retort with the LOGICAL thinking answer to it?

How did Noah catch the wales, and the squids and the nasty nasty fish that live hundreds of feet below the surface?

Can snakes and donkeys talk too?

[edit on 18-12-2008 by TXRabbit]

reply to post by theindependentjournal



Please don't spin me not being bothered debating this as some sort of win for you.

But, out of interests sakes and keeping on topic I have a couple of questions.

How do you explain the carbon dating of skeletal remains from millions of years ago? Is it all just made up?

You mention that Noah took babies of animals onto the ark which, is an ok theory but I would actually take young adults on board. this way they are not dependent on their parents and will also be closer to an age of reproduction (unless it is a species that can reproduce at infant age).

What are your thoughts on birds being direct ancestors of dinosaurs? Some dinosaurs even had feathers. Isn't this a clear case of evolution?

Or did the chicken get a little freaky with a young T-Rex whilst floating about on the ark?

reply to post by Jenna


NO I am saying it is in Order just you don't stop reading at Genesis chapter 3 because 2 ended. When originally given it was a narrative, a story and the Chapters and Verses are good for finding a particular verse or story but i does not mean that you're not starting in the middle or stopping in the middle of the WHOLE STORY...

In Genesis it is easy to know where a narrative starts and stops and it is at the "These are the Generations of" line. So Genesis 2-5 is Adam's story and they didn't name anyone but the first born male heir. Genesis named two for the reason that Cain the first born lost his birthright when he killed Abel, so then Seth became the next Heir as Cain was disowned and Abel was dead, had Seth died the next son woulda been named...

Check out the last verse and Adam had MANY daughters and Sons, they don't name the other sons either. How many kids could you have in 935 years?

From what i've gathered on here....

Dinosaurs came AFTER humans right? Erm....

The snake was the ONLY animal that could talk.... What happened to its vocal parts?

Erm...

And at this time of pre-historic madness, the first humans were having sex with their borthers and sisters....

erm...

reply to post by TXRabbit


WHAT? Why would he need whales to save them from the WATER? See what I mean about NOT READING THE STORY!...

And ring by pairs all LAND animals with the BREATHE OF LIFE in their NOSTRILS. Do squid have nostrils? Whales? Beetles? Let's keep it to the story and to common sense people...

why the hell would he need to save water dwelling creatures from lots of water???

Great point.


Polar bears. Where did he get the polar bears from?

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by theindependentjournal

 

How do you explain the carbon dating of skeletal remains from millions of years ago? Is it all just made up?

Pretty much, they test live animals at over 450,00 years old. They test different parts of the same animal 100's of thousands of years apart. They don't know how much carbon14 (if it exists) was in the air 2000 years ago let alone 6K. There are many great scientists that have debunked carbon dating as inaccurate.

You mention that Noah took babies of animals onto the ark which, is an ok theory but I would actually take young adults on board. this way they are not dependent on their parents and will also be closer to an age of reproduction (unless it is a species that can reproduce at infant age).

OK will give you this one, I didn't mean Babies in the newborn sense but young ones that are still small but weened.

What are your thoughts on birds being direct ancestors of dinosaurs? Some dinosaurs even had feathers. Isn't this a clear case of evolution?

There is no proof of a dinosaur having feathers, the two so called finds have been shown as fakes, I think i is called the something optrix I can get you the link if you would like... I do not believe in any part of evolutionary theory other than what they call Micro-evolution, which I call change or adaption within a species. Like breeding dogs for a special trait and getting a miniature dobie. Yes the dog is different in looks but it is still a dog that can interbreed with other dogs, it didn't turn into a horse...

[edit on 12/18/2008 by theindependentjournal]

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by spy66

 

You can't find Dinosaurs in the Bible? Is this because you've never read it?? hey are very clearly there, land and water and even a FIRE BREATHING dinosaur is in there.

If you meant you've NEVER READ the Bible and therefore you have no knowledge of it being there then well you are wrong.

Your right i have not read the whole Bible page by page. I dont have to.
I get what it is all about. And it has nothing to do with the dinosaurs at all.

reply to post by theindependentjournal


Then my point stands. If it is written in order, Cain did not have a sister or a wife until he had already been banished and started his own family line. Not to mention the following line from Genesis 4:

15And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

There wouldn't have been any to find him outside of Adam and Eve. There were four people at that time according to the Bible till Cain killed Abel. Then there were three people. I don't think there was any worry about Adam and Eve hunting him down. They would have done so before he was kicked out and went to Nod.

Then there's this:

25And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

Why would she say she had been appointed another seed instead of Abel if she already had more sons and daughters? That just doesn't make any sense.