What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs...(In the point of view of many Christians)

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by onthedownlow
I believe that biblical days are refferences to eras of time, not measurements of time. While I don't think dinosaurs existed 6000 years ago, I can't be so quick to discount legends of mythical creatures and dragons in our not to distant path. Truth is, Science relies on constants, but we have a very limited proof of constants and we are unsure of the role atmosheric abnormalities might have in these constants- our biggest window is about three thousand years, yet there is still anomalies in that extremely small span of time. Perhaps the debate should be more phylisophical and less combative?


Your poor grammar and spelling dicate to me your level of education. Hence, there would be nothing that we could rationally discuss.

This is my frustration with religious fanatics (Christians being the worst). They are largely feeble-minded and uneducated. They take the easy way out and do not think for themselves. They put all of their trust and faith into a religious book; that was written over millennia; by a motley crew of crazy "stone-age" dudes; who claimed to have been commissioned by God to write down so called truths; to back up their religious claims, rather than to investigate the cold, hard facts!

edit on 7-7-2012 by krazykanuk because: typo
edit on 7-7-2012 by krazykanuk because: grammar...see. I fix mine!




posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by BagBing

Originally posted by works4dhs
Christians base the 6000 year concept on their understanding of the Bible, as well as what theologians teach.



At this point, i have to interject.

Most christians don't believe any such crap. *Most* Christians have no problem with science and religion. Only the wacko fundamentalists hold such ridiculous views.

You do not represent christianity. Only illinformed Christians.
edit on 7-7-2012 by BagBing because: (no reason given)


LOL....then you are more brainwashed than they are!



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Argyll
Try googling "dinosaurs were made up"


And apparently one of the common google search results is "dinosaurs were made up by the CIA to discourage time travel"



well it made me laugh!


google auto completes "Why are americans so" to "why are americans so fat" and "why are americans so stupid". It also came up with "I hate it when you walk out the door and someone randomly throws a fridge at you" lmao...



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by Pressthebutton
I'll just stick to the obvious here, we have so many sites that predate that number! One of the most well known of these I think is Gobeki Tepe,

The site isn't just old, it redefines old: the temple was built 11,500 years ago—a staggering 7,000 years before the Great Pyramid, and more than 6,000 years before Stonehenge first took shape.

Thanks



I'm not really seeking a significant contribution to the topic here, but this much I can address.

What you'll find is that the majority of our dating methods are reliant on the concept of uniformity. Uniformity is demonstrably false, however. Take, for example, the speed of light. The commonly accepted viewpoint up until the mid-19th century was that light was instantaneous. Not only was that theory then proven to be false, but in the intervening years, subsequent results have shown that the speed of light is slowing down (source)

Now, with this being the case, numerous other assumed constants are called into question, including (notably, on this topic) decay rates for various substances. Let's use C-14 dating as an example, given that most people are familiar with it. If we assume that C-14 has a uniform half-life, then we can safely measure the age of any given rock with some accuracy. If, however, the half-life of C-14 does not follow a uniform pattern, or if, like the speed of light, the decay rate has slowed down on an exponential scale, then suddenly the time frames we're talking about are not only incorrect, but they are potentially SIGNIFICANTLY incorrect.

Now, I'm not suggesting that everything your friend has posited on facebook is correct (I disagree with some of the comments you've relayed, on multiple levels), but it's not black-and-white wrong as you seem to think it is.
edit on 7-7-2012 by Awen24 because: (no reason given)


Let's not talk like VSL is proven, because it is not. First of all, your source is from an anti-science christian website that tries paint everything through the lens of scripture and make it fit into christian beliefs. It also takes "controversies" in science and tries to turn those into proof that the bible knows best.

VSL cosmology is a proposed solution to irregularities in wavelength transmission, and what the physicist that came up with it, perceives as am irregularity with Inflationary cosmology - specifically the horizon and why the universe seems so flat. It is not an accepted hypothesis and not new. This was first theorized by Einstein, himself, before putting forth the standard model and special relativity. Today, the most common explanations for both irregularities are dark matter (as well has dense clouds of gas, like H) for the former and dark energy for the later.

As far as dating methods, the only people who call those into question are biblical believers, fringe-thinkers (like ancient astronaut theorists), and science-deniers. Sites like Gobeki Tepi are anomalies, no doubt, and cause us to question our view of stone age civilization. However, it doesn't lend any credibility to the notion that our dating methods are flawed and researchers usually use multiple dating methods to confirm.
edit on 7/7/12 by solomons path because: omission
edit on 7/7/12 by solomons path because: spelling



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
sorry but didn,t read through all the replys........i did see god this and that through some tho.....ok we,r talking dinosaurs here and if humans co-exsisted.......they may have well done,who knows.......we started with a big bang now so where does god come in to that......weren,t we led to believe god created everything? so if main stream science now believes everything came from nothing from a big bang then where does this god theory cum in to it?god was created to give every1 a purpose in life,something to believe in.....nothing else



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by BagBing

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by Pressthebutton
I'll just stick to the obvious here, we have so many sites that predate that number! One of the most well known of these I think is Gobeki Tepe,

The site isn't just old, it redefines old: the temple was built 11,500 years ago—a staggering 7,000 years before the Great Pyramid, and more than 6,000 years before Stonehenge first took shape.

Thanks



I'm not really seeking a significant contribution to the topic here, but this much I can address.

What you'll find is that the majority of our dating methods are reliant on the concept of uniformity. Uniformity is demonstrably false, however. Take, for example, the speed of light. The commonly accepted viewpoint up until the mid-19th century was that light was instantaneous. Not only was that theory then proven to be false, but in the intervening years, subsequent results have shown that the speed of light is slowing down.

Now, with this being the case, numerous other assumed constants are called into question, including (notably, on this topic) decay rates for various substances. Let's use C-14 dating as an example, given that most people are familiar with it. If we assume that C-14 has a uniform half-life, then we can safely measure the age of any given rock with some accuracy. If, however, the half-life of C-14 does not follow a uniform pattern, or if, like the speed of light, the decay rate has slowed down on an exponential scale, then suddenly the time frames we're talking about are not only incorrect, but they are potentially SIGNIFICANTLY incorrect.

Now, I'm not suggesting that everything your friend has posited on facebook is correct (I disagree with some of the comments you've relayed, on multiple levels), but it's not black-and-white wrong as you seem to think it is.


Post ONE paper that agrees with your 'views'. And do it honestly. I bet you can't...

[of course you can't - you're a muppet]


DAVID, A. (2005, April 12). Speed of light may be slowing, as experts challenge Einstein. Age, The (Melbourne). p. 1.

Luntz, S. (2006, Is light slowing down? Australasian Science, 27, 13-13. Retrieved from ezproxy.utas.edu.au...://search.proquest.com/docview/223707876?accountid=14245

Courtland, R. (2009). Is the universe slowing down?. New Scientist, 202(2703), 6-7.

Merali, Z. (2007). Is time slowing down?. New Scientist, 196(2635/2636), 8.



...your turn.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by BagBing

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by Pressthebutton
I'll just stick to the obvious here, we have so many sites that predate that number! One of the most well known of these I think is Gobeki Tepe,

The site isn't just old, it redefines old: the temple was built 11,500 years ago—a staggering 7,000 years before the Great Pyramid, and more than 6,000 years before Stonehenge first took shape.

Thanks



I'm not really seeking a significant contribution to the topic here, but this much I can address.

What you'll find is that the majority of our dating methods are reliant on the concept of uniformity. Uniformity is demonstrably false, however. Take, for example, the speed of light. The commonly accepted viewpoint up until the mid-19th century was that light was instantaneous. Not only was that theory then proven to be false, but in the intervening years, subsequent results have shown that the speed of light is slowing down.

Now, with this being the case, numerous other assumed constants are called into question, including (notably, on this topic) decay rates for various substances. Let's use C-14 dating as an example, given that most people are familiar with it. If we assume that C-14 has a uniform half-life, then we can safely measure the age of any given rock with some accuracy. If, however, the half-life of C-14 does not follow a uniform pattern, or if, like the speed of light, the decay rate has slowed down on an exponential scale, then suddenly the time frames we're talking about are not only incorrect, but they are potentially SIGNIFICANTLY incorrect.

Now, I'm not suggesting that everything your friend has posited on facebook is correct (I disagree with some of the comments you've relayed, on multiple levels), but it's not black-and-white wrong as you seem to think it is.


Post ONE paper that agrees with your 'views'. And do it honestly. I bet you can't...

[of course you can't - you're a muppet]


DAVID, A. (2005, April 12). Speed of light may be slowing, as experts challenge Einstein. Age, The (Melbourne). p. 1.

Luntz, S. (2006, Is light slowing down? Australasian Science, 27, 13-13. Retrieved from ezproxy.utas.edu.au...://search.proquest.com/docview/223707876?accountid=14245

Courtland, R. (2009). Is the universe slowing down?. New Scientist, 202(2703), 6-7.

Merali, Z. (2007). Is time slowing down?. New Scientist, 196(2635/2636), 8.



...your turn.


So far bunk . . . The first two don't bring up anything on google, so post actual links to docs please.

The third is not about what you were talking about before (VSL cosmology). It's about this . . .

ABSTRACT The article discusses an analysis of nearby supernovae. It states that the analysis suggests space might not be expanding as quickly as it once was, a hint that the source of dark energy may be more exotic than originally thought. According to the article, the evidence has suggested that dark energy is constant, though its effect on the universe has become stronger as the universe has expanded and the gravitational force between objects weakens with distance.

Courtland, Rachel

You didn't claim that Dark Energy was not constant, but Light. And that article doesn't prove it is not a constant either. Right now, cosmologist are have a hard time figuring out why the expansion of the universe is speeding up. They offered the possibility that DE is not constant, as a reasoning, but are no more sure of that than any other possibility. They are still researching.

The fourth example I had to pay for . . . not worth it when it is talking about time slowing anyway, not light as you proposed before. Time has never been seen as a constant.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Pressthebutton
 


So the Christians believe the Great Flood wiped out the dinosaurs 4,400 years ago? But what about all of the marine reptiles that lived back then, did they drown too....



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   
I read the whole thing. Some of it is interesting, but it's still bs. Most telling is how they use scientific facts to back up what they want to say, and then turn around and dismiss the same facts to debunk science.

Thanks for the link. Interesting read.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Pressthebutton
 


I didn't bother to read all of this but this is what RADICAL RELIGIOUS people believe about the co-existence of dinosaurs and humans together at the same time on this planet in this universe, not a parrallel one or the universe before this one, no matter how much i wish it were:

According to scripture and some convoluted scientific research there was a great flood. According to these radical religious folk this great flood was not a normal one; this flood flashed from god's holiness, and boiled from the heat of the earths core.

They believe that the great flood wiped out the dino baddies, and that the heat of the water cooked the carbon material of the bones to such a degradation that when we'd carbon date said remains of dino baddies, the date would come out 65 millions years ago and such and such.


COMPLETE NONSENSE.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   
The Bible does not say how old the Earth is, the Catholic Church said it was 6000 years old. So I hardly see why everyone is under the impression that it says that in Genesis or anywhere in the Bible. Ignorance goes both ways.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by hxc408
The Bible does not say how old the Earth is, the Catholic Church said it was 6000 years old. So I hardly see why everyone is under the impression that it says that in Genesis or anywhere in the Bible. Ignorance goes both ways.


Actually, the Catholic Church does not hold an official position on the age of the earth. But, they have come out to support both the Big Bang and Evolution, which would mean by proxy that they believe it to be billions of years old.

The idea that the earth is only 6000 years old is a Evangelical Christian belief that has gained popularity since the 20's amongst fundi-american sects. However, even before the rise of young earth creationism, it's always been a protestant notion.

The Catholics don't take a literal view of the scriptures . . . only Protestants.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pressthebutton
I saw this article on Facebook today, posted by one of my more radical Christian friends. It is supposed to explain how dinosaurs coexisted with humans. I have no problems with religion, I could care less what people believe, BUT that being said, when I see things like this it makes me realize the brainwashing Chistains recieve, and im sure this happens in the other religions as well.
The article is shown here:
What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs?
In the article, I found many things that went against everything I believe and I would say it goes against what a majority of the members on ATS believe. Of these things what I found most interesting is shown here:

According to the Bible: Dinosaurs first existed around 6,000 years ago.3 God made the dinosaurs, along with the other land animals, on Day 6 of the Creation Week (Genesis 1:20–25, 31). Adam and Eve were also made on Day 6—so dinosaurs lived at the same time as people, not separated by eons of time.

Gen 1:25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [fn] and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
As you can see they were both created on the same "day", but not at the same time. If each day is not a literal 24 hour period the bible in way is contradicted by dinosaurs being around long, long before man.


That is a red flag right there. It claims that its only been 6,000 years since they roamed the Earth, I'll just stick to the obvious here, we have so many sites that predate that number! One of the most well known of these I think is Gobeki Tepe,

The site isn't just old, it redefines old: the temple was built 11,500 years ago—a staggering 7,000 years before the Great Pyramid, and more than 6,000 years before Stonehenge first took shape.

This is based on a literal 24 hour day interpretation as well.


Another interesting statement made in the article is this:

After the Flood, around 4,300 years ago, the remnant of the land animals, including dinosaurs, came off the Ark and lived in the present world, along with people. Because of sin, the judgments of the Curse and the Flood have greatly changed earth. Post-Flood climatic change, lack of food, disease, and man’s activities caused many types of animals to become extinct. The dinosaurs, like many other creatures, died out. Why the big mystery about dinosaurs?

I dont think I have to further elaborate on the misguided words of this article, but that is just my opinion and to each his own. I just had to vent my frustration from reading this

Thanks

Many people have misguided interpretations of things, religious and non-religious. However I leave you with this.
www.pbs.org...
They may be wrong, but they are still right. Remember that before you ridicule someone for something, you may end up looking the fool yourself.
edit on 8-7-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


I'm sorry but the coelacanth does not prove your point in any shape or manner . . . sorry. It disappeared from the fossil record and no living person had seen one, so the logical assumption is that they had gone extinct. Until that is . . . one was fished up. Now that we know their habitat, researchers can study them again.

How does that give validity to the notion of a global flood or the bible's version of creation? . . . it doesn't. A fish story that's a red herring, go figure!

Either the bible is god's word and to be taken at face value . . . because god is infallible! Or we get to bend space and time to make god's word fit the natural world. That's a slippery slope for a book that is supposed to hold "the truth" and serve as a moral compass, don't you think?

I giggle that misinterpretation is always how the believer defends against the non-believer, but is never the case when the believer is evangelizing to the non-believer. Convenience of authority, I suppose? Also, funny there is no convenience of authority when the believer is out of their element.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by solomons path
 


Funny how your belief is so ingrained that you can't see a simple point. They claim people lived with dinosaurs. You laugh and giggle calling them silly because there is no possibility people lived on the same Earth as dinosaurs. Only they did, and they do, the coelacanth, so your giggling at one groups erroneous belief exposes your own.

ETA: I showed how the Bible itself is not in error, the interpretation is. Nice of you to say that since one persons interpretation is wrong all interpretations must be wrong, what was that you were saying about logical fallacies?
edit on 8-7-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by krazykanuk
Your poor grammar and spelling dicate to me your level of education. Hence, there would be nothing that we could rationally discuss.


What does dicate mean? If you're going to insult someone on their grammar you might want to get your own right. Or else I might make an inference on your level of education and intelligence. You smack of someone with medoicre intelligence trying to make themselves feel superior.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by solomons path
To get this thread back on topic . . .

I know none of you bible worshipers or science-scoffers will go for this one either, but dinosaurs didn't "die out". While most species of dinosaurs died out during an ELE 65 million years ago, not all did and we see them every day . . . to this day (unless you are locked in a jail cell without windows). They're called birds. Even before the ELE, the fossil record shows us they were transitioning into what we would recognize as birds, today.

Prime example is the Archeopteryx. see link
Archaeopteryx

That certainly wasn't the only species, but probably the best known example. Also, if you look at the bone structure of both it is clear to see. Today, birds are in the same phylogenetic clade as theropods (or two legged dinos).

Also, Crocodilles are the last species remaining from the reptilian dino clade Archosauria.

SO . . . I guess you can say that humans and dinosaurs did "co-mingle" . . . Ah the beauties of evolution!!
edit on 7/7/12 by solomons path because: to add


I'm reposting my reply from page 2 . . . I've already made the same point you're trying to fit into a young earth view.

Only, we both know that when young earther's are claiming that dinosaurs co-habituated with man . . . they aren't talking about birds, crocodiles, or ceolacanths.

Again, it's always just a misinterpretation when the good book is in error. I also never said that all interpretation is wrong. Just, that it seems to be all too common when the evidence doesn't support the word, such as "a day isn't a day, it's an epoch". And BTW, a ceolacanth is a fish, not a dinosaur, phylogenetically speaking . . . so you're example still proves nothing. Chalk it up to another misinterpretation.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 02:58 AM
link   
reply to post by solomons path
 


Following the definition of dinosaur, you are correct. Coelacanth is unique, and crocodiles or birds does not have the same power in this argument. My point was, and is, be careful when you try to mock someone for their beliefs, because you open yourself up for the same (as my post above on the grammar Nazi). I never used the term epoch either. Logically speaking God would not communicate with early humans and say well I did this and it took 4 billion years, then I did this and it took 320 million years, then this took 1.2 billion years. Sometimes less is more, and using terms they understand such as day makes far more sense.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by krazykanuk
Religion = Ignorance....You're all a bunch of nutters!
Look at the hard evidence people. Are you still living in the dark ages? Sheesh! i am sure glad all you religious fanatics are not our local detectives, doctors, scientists or heaven forbid politicians....LOL.
edit on 7-7-2012 by krazykanuk because: (no reason given)


I still dont see what dinosaurs and humans co-existing have to do with religion...? Seems like you non believing birdbrains are putting words in peoples mouth. So if a christian believes that aliens exists, that means its a christian belief? This thread makes no damn sense...



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by dayve
 


It is humorous that a website where many believe humans were created by God-like aliens in order to mine gold for their atmosphere this is brought out. Ah well.





top topics
 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join