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.

 

Did Humans and Dinosaurs Coexist? Yes!

page: 13
132
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
here we go again!
Hows come religion is like a boat anchor to knowledge. It is clear it is just as proven as any other hypothesis on creation. The op was clearly right in the assertion that man and dino may have coexisted to an extent(even as we do today). However the real conspiracy here is that the REAL reason for this thread was to swindle us into buying the 6000 year old earth, which im sure the majority of us wont bite. So you win with the coexistence, but lose with the young earth. Good day fellow ATSers!




posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


who wouldnt want to worship a genocidial child murderer...

I mean were all so attracted to hitler... why not god? He makes hitler look like a nice guy. Has anyone read teh old testament? I mean really read it without turning on your bible blinders when $&%^ gets crazy.....

i remeber in sunday school hearing all these horrible stories of god murdering thousands of people just because they wouldnt get circumsized... what was worse was hearing the approval of other children... and adults of such behavior because it was obviously gods will.

edit on 16-8-2011 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 


Any Christian that tells you that God is some lovable teddy bear has a very limited understanding of God. God (especially OT God) is angry and vengeful...and I have no problems or misconceptions about that.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by The Endtime Warriorso on personal reflection and some flimsy evidence you have decided this matter to be true,well i bet my life your a creationist and your only trolling on here to spout your beliefs.
 



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by celticwarrior10
 


Nobody is trolling here. If you want to debate the topic and bring some evidence or a real viewpoint to the table then by all means do.

On the other hand, if all you have to add is insults and dismissals of viewpoints you don't agree with...then why waste your time?



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


So you are in support of murder in gods name simpley because its in your magical bible?

Is that what im hearing?



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Mallik
 


Personally i would look at the tooling to see how worn the edges are. I would also take into account the age of the graves they were found in and the age of the nearby settlement and any skeleton's or mummies the stones were buried with. Logically those stones would be fakes or at the very least created near the time the occupant sin the grave sites died. Stones like that couldnt survive for 65+million years without becomming changed or damaged, they are too smooth to be millions of years old and the pictures are too perfect.

One could also assume that it may be possible that some of the peoples may have seen dinosaur bones, sometimes the shifting of land masses over time and erosion can play a hand in exposing dinosaur remains. Dark Age europeans thought dragons were real after seeing exposed dinosaur bones, so it is a very good possiblity.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by samaka


The bible is actually scientifically accurate, show me where it fails at that?



Didn`t god supposedly ` make the sun stand still ` so that Joshua would have enough light to finish a battle ?

Why don`t we see a record of such an astounding event from civilisations such as the Chinese and Egyptians who were known to chart celestial events ?



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 


I didn't say I supported anything...but it is what it is.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 

You lost me on the beaver corkscrew thingamajig lol.
I live in Texas. We have been told over the years that the dinosaur footprints found In Glen Rose there beside the creek had human ones beside it before they were covered up. I've been there, it's nothing really exciting to see.
Now evolution has been brought up in this thread...
Why is it so hard for people to believe that a Loving God created us? Why do people embrace the HYPOTHESIS that we were formed from amoebas? I've never been able to wrap my brain around it.
I heard somebody last week talking about the youth of today acting like animals...teach them they come from animals and they will act like them.
Enjoying the thread thanks!



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
I'm skeptical about your "evidence" it requires a bit too much mental gymnastics for my taste. However, I am even more skeptical of the monopoly macro-evolution has on the scientific community. It has way more holes than people realize and I've had that pointed out to me by agnostics and atheists! (not all criticism comes from theists). The macro-evolution, materialist, Darwinist crowd also has a lot of roots in psuedo-science like eugenics, evolution supporting hoaxes, and ridiculous theories (cucumbers are an ancestor of humans).



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


YOu dont support it but you worship somone who ORDERS the murder of children with rocks, swords, and poison?

Stange statements yoru making trying not to sound like a homocidal maniac yoruself while still saying you are on "gods" side.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by free_form
Someone posted a thread with similar content a few days ago. One of the pictures posted in that thread was particularly stunning - an engraving of what was unmistakably a stegosaurus - on an ancient wall (I think from somewhere in Bangladesh? I'm probably wrong, search for the thread).

I think it's entirely plausible that some species of dinosaur survived into the era of early man, and were most likely hunted to extinction. Take the aforementioned stegosaurus.. A creature that as far as we know, would probably be easy game for a tribe of clever humans.

Many megafauna are documented to have lived in the time of man.. For example, the giant sloth.

Perhaps archaeologists are aware of these historical discrepancies, but it's become a hush-hush sort of thing. Like many other sensitive things (the true origin of man, for example), it will never be disputable within mainstream science.. if you try and dispute those things, you're labelled as 'crazy', and would lose all of your credibility. If I were an established archaeologist, I would surely not want such a label attached to my name (see: Buzz Aldrin's bashing in the media after his extraterrestrial claims).

Science is already figured out.. everything is set in stone already..


No, but what I'm saying is that something as fantastic as the discovery of dinosaurs coexisting with mankind would challenge so many beliefs, not to mention what we've had labelled as historical fact for so many years.
edit on 16-8-2011 by free_form because: dyslexia


Yeah, but a true scientist has learned to keep their minds open. We wouldn't know what we know now if archeologists had closed minds. If i recall there was a time in archeology when if you believed in dinosaurs you would have been the laughing stock of your peers and back then (as now) you would have been labelled crazy or eccentric.

Also, do not forget that people thought that Copernicus and Galileo were also insane or witches and threatened to burn them for heresy unless they recanted. Some 400 years later they were proved to be genius and vindicated. The true scientist must be patient and never waver from their course, time will tell and vindicate them if they are correct. A closed minded scientist will eventually hit a wall and then their career dead ends. Science is where it is nowadays because brave men dared to dream and have the audacity to search for clues and evidence to prove their beliefs.
edit on 16-8-2011 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by kallisti36
 


Yes but their "lunacy" is fine because it is based on "science" isn't it? On the other hand...I'm bat-turd insane because of my religion.




posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


i dont believe i insulted anybody my friend i only asked where you a creationist,in your thread you showed no real evidence of what you are trying to prove, on the other hand if you would like me to produce some evidence to debate your claim well im afraid this page and thousands more would not have enough room to hold it all.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by celticwarrior10
in your thread you showed no real evidence of what you are trying to prove,


Then what was all that in my OP?:


on the other hand if you would like me to produce some evidence to debate your claim well im afraid this page and thousands more would not have enough room to hold it all.


Humor us....please.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
What gives evolutionary scientists any more credibility that creationist scientists?


Uh ... science does.

Scientific theories evolve as scientific study over time brings more evidence to light. Creationists believe a number of theories with unchanging faith ... and fit the accumulating evidence into supporting those beliefs.

Call it faith. Call it whatever you want. Just don't call it science.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 




Didn`t god supposedly ` make the sun stand still ` so that Joshua would have enough light to finish a battle ? Why don`t we see a record of such an astounding event from civilisations such as the Chinese and Egyptians who were known to chart celestial events ?


This particular example isn't some mystical God doing a favor for just Joshua, it is a description by one culture of a worldwide event.


The second secular source about Joshua’s long day, which was mentioned by Totten, is based on what seems to be a recently lost ancient Chinese manuscript. In 1810 Gill presents the account:

In the Chinese history27 it is reported, that in the time of their seventh emperor, Yao, the sun did not set for ten days, and that men were afraid the world would be burnt, and there were great fires at that time; and though the time of the sun’s standing still were enlarged beyond the bounds of truth, yet it seems to refer to this fact, and was manifestly about the same time; for this miracle was wrought in the year of the world 2554, which fell in the 75th, or, as some say, the 67th year of that emperor’s reign, who reigned 90 years.28



Tales relating to Joshua’s long day abound in North America. Almost all of the tales in North America tell of a long night. The only exceptions are those related in the chapter on Hezekiah’s sign. Olcott31 has collected five of particular interest.
The Ojibways tell of a long night without any light.32
The Wyandot Indians told missionary Paul Le Jeune of a long night.33
The Dogrib Indians of the North-West tell of a day when the sun was caught at noon and it instantly became dark.34
The Omahas say that once the sun was caught in a trap by a rabbit who checked his traps at the break of dawn, presumably before sunrise.35 (This may be Hezekiah’s sign, instead.)
Finally, the Bungee Indians from the Lake Winnipeg area of Canada also tell of a long night.36

The preponderance of long night tales in the Americas would rule out the theory that Joshua’s long day was a miracle which was local to Canaan. It also rules out the speculation that the story migrated around the world, for then it would everywhere be a long day (or a long night), but not a mixture of long days and long nights.


www.geocentricity.com...



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
It's a possibility... anything really



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by kallisti36
 


Yes but their "lunacy" is fine because it is based on "science" isn't it? On the other hand...I'm bat-turd insane because of my religion.



They can support and repeat processes using science, however all religion offers to do is blame all the bad stuff on satan and allow god credit for the good.

Science can be proven, your god can't. That's all it boils down to.



new topics




 
132
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join