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: 31
132
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fisherr
If the world is as young as the bible says it is (about six thousand years old), then man living with dinosaurs makes perfect sense.

I remember this site.. www.genesispark.com...


Please tell me where in the Bible does it say that the world is only 6000 years old. I am a Christian, and NO WHERE, does it say in the Bible that the world is only 6000 years old. This whole idea of world being only 6000 years old came from a 17th century Irish bishop, not the bible. www.skeptically.org...

This Irish bishop is only guessing, It's important to note that God looks at time differently than humans, our concept of time is Man made not God made.
And yes belief in the bible does take faith, but come on, it doesn't take stupidity.




posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


"How does your institution react to you using Creationist sources? "
I just picked one website.. and my institution? how does that have anything to do with me posting something on a thread on ats regarding???? Anyways here are more sources before you go so quick to discredit me. I have an objective view, I only present information regarding sciences dating method.

www.popsci.com...

www.physorg.com...

www.naturalnews.com...

news.discovery.com...



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


This occured to me also. the bone was found in 65mil. year old rock and not done decomposing and did not stop to consider the "accepted" date but rather tries to solve the mystery of something being around for 65 mil. years and not completing decomposition. Seems like circular reasoning, the kind creationists are usually accused of.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Im sure this has been on ats many times, but its relevant to the thread, and it will go towards my post count :p.

in wat angkor, cambodia, there is a stegosaurus in the ancient temple stone carvings.

( i tried to load it, but its not working.. ) heres the picture

www.theness.com...
edit on 17/8/11 by Deadlockxii because: error in html



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Well, you said you were a physics undergrad and the only link you posted was to a Creationist site.Naturally that is disturbing for one purporting to be a Scientist.

How come nobody has gone to the 'horse's mouth' and contacted the people at the Oxford Radiocarbon Laboratory (I posted the link earlier) and asked them about their methodology and the Science behind it?



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jonas86
Hey guys,

I've got shocking evidence the thread starter is actually right!

Here:



That's Jesus on a dinosaur.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
I keep an open mind to the fact some dinosaurs MAY have been around in recent history and some still are.

Nessie comes to mind and the plethora of other "lake monsters".

The Komodo dragon, the Crocodile, Alligators etc are all ancient species that changed little over millions of years of evolution because they are about as adapted as they will ever need to be.

I'm Agnostic so I believe there might be something like a god but I cannot prove or disprove it's existance, honestly I think the bible is just another rehash of alot of PREVIOUSLY believed stuff, I cannot even FATHOM how people could think a book THAT ancient and written by a VERY primitive civilization could have ANY truth to it, it's all MYTH! and historic accounts are also twisted to fit the general religious theme of the bible.

I guess Marilyn Manson said it best; "I'm not a slave to a god that doesn't exist, i'm not a slave to a world that doesn't give a s@#t"



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
My theory from a creationalist point of view is pre-flood humans created some dinosaurs. I believe they were actually more advanced in technologies than we think, hence the flood to destroy mankind and the any remnants of technology.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   
OK it seems to me you ALL are on the right track just think of this I'm a hardcore bible believer I've tried many a times to NOT believe and tried my hardest not to....... But everywhere I turn I find the answers that lead me to believe the bible is indeed correct and the MAIN reason is that ALL of the prophises have come true up to now and more to come, that have been leading up too the final hour. ( just had to get that one out there sorry) And yes we and the dinosaurs did coexist and maybe most of them died before noahs ark! there has been proof in some rocks with BOTH dinosaur and man foot print within the same rock. And about the time line of the earth it actually very well COULD be as old as they say if not older ! And my reasoning behind this is that TIME itself DID NOT start until SIN was created. There was no need for the concept of time and SIN was not created until Adam and EVE eat from the tree of wisdom it does not say exactly HOW long Adam and Eve was in the garden before they eat from that very tree it could have been billions of years and before the eating of the tree the whole universe was perfect just like god made it. It wasnt until they eat form that tree that SIN started and man had to work because GOD had cursed the ground and man had to work for himself for GOD was not going to give anymore handouts and man started to age though very slowly at first and plants and annimals as well .
edit on 17-8-2011 by lovenotwar because: had to take out the word "persay " after "Time itself did not start"



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akasirus
In fact, earlier in this thread I said that evolution and God are not mutually exclusive concepts.


In my opinion, they can't be mutually exclusive, since they are not in competition at all. They are entirely different things. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and lag bolts.

Science deals in the scientific method, the production of explanatory theories that are falsifiable by design of experiments which are repeatable. A theory holds until it is falsified through experiment, and an experiment is only valid if it is repeatable - that is to say, if it can be repeated and the results confirmed by other scientists in other labs. If a new theory is developed that adheres more closely to experimental observation, and covers the observations better, then that theory holds sway until a better one comes along.

Religion is an entirely different endeavor, with a different purpose. By it's very nature, it isn't experimentally falsifiable, since most deities will not jump through hoops for mere mortals in order to allow them to repeat an experiment. It's not science, it doesn't operate in the same way or even the same realm, and is not in competition with science.

So no, they are not mutually exclusive, in spite of the efforts expended by people in both camps to try to drive square pegs into round holes with a sledge hammer in an effort to force both of them into the same mold, and make a competition of it.




edit on 2011/8/17 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 11:37 PM
link   
I didn't forsee these reactions to your thread!

Obviously, ATS is not as open minded or truth seeking as it states,

members quickly assume things and dismiss given evidence, this is a very liberal insanity method.

You will have no luck showing people the light of your discovery. The tomb was enough for me, but since I actually READ I've seen this type of thing before. Although i'm a creationist of a different caliber )aliens( I believe you still.

One of the things OP I think you'd be interested in are the eyewitness accounts of Dinosaurs in the congo, which skeptics should know is uncharted. and yes it's a rainforest. I think that this may be one reason why no one is educated about the congo, everyone seems to think africa is a giant desert. Americans alone are prone to mental dissorders involving the Ego and arnt able to grasp the simple concept of life outside their planet... in a universe of uncountable stars and planets..

I appreciate your effort to shed light. But i'm afraid they are already zombies my friend.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


Wonderful thread! VERY entertaining read. I starred and flagged this, as it is well deserved. There is one thing I conclude about evolutionists and creationists. It's not about who's right, or who's more right than the other. The thing I have concluded is this-
We're ALL wrong. Nobody on this planet can actually say, without a single doubt, that they know where we came from, how we got here, how LONG we've been on earth,or WHO or WHAT we co-existed with. Evo's and Crea's BOTH have swiss cheese like holes in their stories. Maybe one day, we will discover the "tell-all" history book, and may it be factual. But until then, I suppose we continue our quest for the truth, I know I will.

Cheers



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sternblut

Americans alone are prone to mental dissorders involving the Ego and arnt able to grasp the simple concept of life outside their planet... in a universe of uncountable stars and planets..

I appreciate your effort to shed light. But i'm afraid they are already zombies my friend.


pardon? why is it every opportunity is taken to stereotype millions of people in the usa, on the ats site? read my sig. the people who are skeptical, are from all over the world. good freakin grief. what is with this bash americans every chance ya get thing? . next thing i know, i'll be told i'm growing an extra head off my big toe because i'm american. i don't get it.


edit on 18-8-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stovokor
The two species that are separated by 65 million years of evolution.

I think some ATS'ers have lost their minds.

You can have your opinions and beliefs, but you can't have your own facts.

Now show me a fossilized stegosaurus with a saddle then I might start to believe In the looney.



NO, NO NO, not bloody evolution again, Na sorry pal, don't buy the evolution N.W.O crap...... Evolution is not science and has never been science.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 02:30 AM
link   

edit on 18-8-2011 by steveknows because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 


And here I was thinking, after reading a book on physics, the in a nutshell entropy meant that all order must revert to chaos.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 02:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by GJPinks
reply to post by Ewok_Boba
 


The dark ages were actually the centuries that the masses were not allowed to read or hear the "actual word of God" meaning to read or heard the Bible. The only thing permitted was what the priests preached. They would take a little of the Bible and mix it with Church Doctrine. What the Priests or Pope said was the only "truth" allowed.


That's true the church ruled but also critical thought wasn't allowed and any kind of observation or scientific leaning could have easily caused you a painful death dished out by the church hence mankind was in the dark. Even today and even on this blog site, if you point out something that's obvious and doesn't back up what religion has to say the churchies jump all over you.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   
Hello has very one forgotten about or never learned of in the first place the archaeopteryx lithographica fossil? It shows a the link between dinosaurs and bird. There's no cave paintings of Teradactles or any other flying lizard but there are cave paintngs of birds so that would indicate that man arrived after birds and as birds evolved from dinosaurs then it's a fair bet man arrived long, long after the dinosaur went the way of the Dodo







The archaeopteryx lithographica fossil shows scientists the transitional link between dinosaurs and birds. Can you spot its bird-like wings and its reptilian tail? These clues show scientists the way that some dinosaurs evolved to become birds.
edit on 18-8-2011 by steveknows because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
Man, I just started perusing this site a few weeks ago in earnest and this post crosses that blurry line from 'interesting to contemplate' to 'someone call a Doctor' territory. And Carbon-14 dating is only accurate to about 62k years. Archeologists would not even use that technique to date dinosaur fossils. There is so much crazy in this post that I'm not even going to waste my time refuting this babble because I don't see a point. It would just become a circle-jerk when dealing with this type of logic anyway.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stovokor
The two species that are separated by 65 million years of evolution.

I think some ATS'ers have lost their minds.

You can have your opinions and beliefs, but you can't have your own facts.

Now show me a fossilized stegosaurus with a saddle then I might start to believe In the looney.


no, hes right, have you not seen that documentary..... erm whats it called ...... oh yeah, the flintstones lol


but seriously, prehistoric animals still do co-exist with man, google The Cœlacanth or The Horseshoe Crab, these are just 2 examples of real living fossils and i dont think anyone is trying to cover them up. as for the giant reptile kind, you never know in the world of cryptozoolagy, maybe theyll capture the lochness monster soon



new topics

top topics



 
132
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join