It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Footprint in Dinosaur Print...

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:06 AM
link   
I'm putting this here for a reason, i've come to not only argue with silly, intelligent and admirable ats members in the content of religion, but also pastors, church members and others in the topic.

I have found this one seriously troubling, but not worth of my attention, until I found a video that is well over a decade ago, proving this false, and feel it should be brought up.



So it doesn't go elsewhere mod: this is being place here with a description.

Many 6,000 year old earth believing critics for religion, tend to grasp in arguements that they have found a human footprint in a dinosaurs footprint.

There was a dinosaur footprint, into the ground in Texas, with a print in it, that many saw as a human footprint, ultimately proving that dinosaurs and humans walked the earth together! Wrong!

The footprint of a man, was mistaken, as dawkins poetically referred to Hamlet, in different objects/animals any noun, seen in a cloud.

Creationist have long used this as a source of proof for creationism being right, but it is false.

Moreover this is DISINFO, that is why it is here.

I don't expect anyone really to reply star or flag. Just to understand that this is a Hoax, and boosted sales in the paperbacks that wrote for it's grand discovery (of falsehood).


If those who would like to watch the whole series of "The Blind Watchmaker". It also describes beautifuly the details of how the eye was evolved and not just sprang into action, which you make like as well to understand.




posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   
I probably should mention the way it came about of the misunderstanding.

There was a Dinosaur footprint, which we find and is fairly uncommon, now what was weird and enhanced religious people of creationism was the bare foot, which was not a bare foot, but a demonstration of erosion which took place, that "happened" to look like a human foot, just like a cloud looks like a whale to one, and a giraffe to another!

We see what we want to see, but what we see may not be right!



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Lol, went I first saw this video, I thought it looked like a guy sitting on the toilet!



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scooby Doo
reply to post by Republican08
 


Lol, went I first saw this video, I thought it looked like a guy sitting on the toilet!


I know it was a different time, with a certain type of acceptable shorts.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:34 AM
link   
Darwin could be right.??...I could win a million bucks.
It will happen, I just have to wait 2 billion years so the growth of money can come on trees near me...




posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ChemBreather
 


Eventually it would.

Eventually, you just won't live that long.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
reply to post by ChemBreather
 


Eventually it would.

Eventually, you just won't live that long.


Yea, that's the sad part..


They say Dinos died 65 million years ago was it ? YET, the foot prints they found are still there, after 65 million years ?



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChemBreather

Originally posted by Republican08
reply to post by ChemBreather
 


Eventually it would.

Eventually, you just won't live that long.


Yea, that's the sad part..


They say Dinos died 65 million years ago was it ? YET, the foot prints they found are still there, after 65 million years ?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
and that surprises you?
the footprints fossilized and the mud/sand/dirt became rock. rocks last a long time.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 05:56 AM
link   
so, the logic here is that the creationists were seeing what they wanted to see and making an assumption based on their beliefs. this has been shown by evolutionists when they came up with an explanation based on their beliefs which allowed them to see what they wanted to see?!?

forgive me, but aren't both groups just making the most logical assumption based on their own beliefs?



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


But this would of been a piece of proof people could use that dinosaurs co-existed with humans, which would go against what science teaches.

The most logical answer was the one that took three years to discover, from the scientific method, not from look a cloud, there is a god


I know you probably see science and get a little acid spilling into your stomach like ugh, but science isn't a bad thing.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
But this would of been a piece of proof people could use that dinosaurs co-existed with humans, which would go against what science teaches.
so it's illogical for you but seeing as the bible teaches both lived together, it's a logical assumption for creationists, which was my point.


The most logical answer was the one that took three years to discover, from the scientific method, not from look a cloud, there is a god


right, would you mind describing the method used to determine the nature of the print. oh yeah, it consisted of "well if the dino walked like no other dino, on it's heel, this print would be consistent. seeing as humans didn't exist, it couldn't be a human print so we must be right"


I know you probably see science and get a little acid spilling into your stomach like ugh, but science isn't a bad thing.


i've probably forgotten more "science" than you will ever know, but well done with the assumption.




top topics



 
5

log in

join