|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: dinosaur and human co-existence | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Hyroglyphx writes: Your thesis starts with the assumption that the Genesis account is true and then you seek out ways to make it seem plausible. That's not true, Hyro. As it is with evolutionists, corroborating data is assembled some related to this particular topic and some not, which supports the credibility of the premise, being the Biblical record. The more, the better and the better things jive (as I believe is the case here) the more evidence based the thesis becomes. That you and your evolutionist friends have an obvious bias to your premise does not mean that mine is blind faith based. Not at all. I've cited a whole lot over the years, including fulfilled prophecy, Exodus evidence, ID evidence, etc which builds upon my premise, just as you people calim relative to evolution. You people have your unknowns and iffies as well, do not forget, such as the first and early stages of biogenesis and evolution, not to mention the problems with the singularity event of the BB etc, so don't come down so hard on creationists because we don't have all of the answers to suit your biased intillects. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: What is it about that real world evidence that says the extinction event was caused by a curse, or anything supernatural for that matter. Though I've debated other topics relative to the existence of higher intelligence than that of humans, I have avoided doing that here, other than to say that the Satan would have been involved with the curse. I'm trying to keep on topic here. Need I explain it again, Percy? It is the fact that by and large, one group, the dinos became extinct rather suddenly and that the other did not by and large. I've cited in responses to others, corroborating reasons why the Genesis record of the curse is my premise. You do not believe evolution because you believe it. You cite what you interpret of the observed evidence to build your thesis on your belief. I do the same. I don't understand why you keep needling me on this same ole. If you want me out of this thread, just say the word or close the blamed thing and I'll do something else. Edited by Admin, : Fix quote. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: "Bird from dino", although not conclusively proved is very strongly supported by the evidence. Which is rather better than your speculations which are strongly contradicted by the evidence. Besides, it IS a fact that some dinosaurs are more like birds than they are like some other dinosaurs. So you've got no good explanation for why the curse was partially extended to all dinosaurs and not to the birds.
quote: No, you don't mean that. You mean the stuff that you've made up. For instance the whole idea of only PART off the curse being extended to a huge number of species. That isn't in the text or implied by the text. You made it up. Besides, since your typical dinosaur was no more capable of human speech than your typical snake, there is some pretty good evidence that we are dealing with a myth here.
quote: The dinosaurs around AT THE END OF THE CRETACEOUS were wiped out as part of a mass extinction. Many other species had lived and died over many millions of years from the Triassic through the Jurassic periods. The problem of why NO dinosaurs other than birds survived is a minor one compared to the mass of evidence contradicting your "hypothesis" - which lacks any significant evidential support at all. It's just crazy Bible-twisting nonsense, In fact it's even sillier than the standard YEC view ! Which is really quite impressively silly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
That's not true, Hyro. Are you saying that you were not a Christian before you came to your scientific conclusion?
As it is with evolutionists, corroborating data is assembled some related to this particular topic and some not, which supports the credibility of the premise, being the Biblical record. The more, the better and the better things jive (as I believe is the case here) the more evidence based the thesis becomes. Buz, you haven't provided any evidence. You say dinosaurs and humans lived contemporaneously. Please show some evidence of that.
That you and your evolutionist friends have an obvious bias to your premise does not mean that mine is blind faith based. Not at all. I've cited a whole lot over the years, including fulfilled prophecy, Exodus evidence, ID evidence, etc which builds upon my premise, just as you people calim relative to evolution. What bias do I have, Buz? I am neither a Christian nor an atheist. I am interested in truth. The fact of the matter is there is no evidence of your extraordinary claim. I would like to see some.
You people have your unknowns and iffies as well, do not forget, such as the first and early stages of biogenesis and evolution, not to mention the problems with the singularity event of the BB etc, so don't come down so hard on creationists because we don't have all of the answers to suit your biased intillects. Excuse me Buz, but I am not one you people. I don't subscribe as an evolutionist or an atheist where you would be able to compartmentalize me. I don't subscribe to any kind of codified belief or have any agenda to push. I realize that for some atheists, they need the theory of evolution, but I am not one of them. And conversely evolution doesn't need atheism. Your ideology, however, is completely dependent upon both. Your entire worldview would collapse without it, so forgive me for recognizing that. We can get passed all the hubris and you could simply provide clear evidence that man and dinosaur co-existed. That would be the simplest way to get from point A to point B. "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from mistaken conviction." — Blaise Pascal
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4511 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined: |
Hi Buz,
Buzsaw writes: No. The evidence which better satisfies the co-existing dino/shortie problem you have yet to explain, as to just the dinos (I say dinosaurs themselves-not their descendents) at large, became extinct exclusively and relatively suddenly. So if your "theory" is a better explanation for the evidence, then could you answer the following questions? 1. Are you saying that the K-T extinction event, which took place 65 million years ago and is the one in which the large majority of the dinosaurs became extinct, is the same event as the Fall, which by most creationist calculations took place less than 10,000 years ago? If so, which date is wrong - 65 million years or 10 thousand years? 2. If the K-T event does represent the Fall, what was the cause of the many other mass extinction events our planet has undergone, such as the Triassic-Jurrasic (205 ma, 23% of all families extinct), or the Permian-Triassic (251 ma, 97% of all marine species and 70% or all land species extinct)? Did God have to curse all of the non-mamalian Theraspids in some previous Fall? Was the the Lemorosaurus the most subtle beast of the Permian Garden of Eden 250 million years ago?
3. How do you explain all of the other non-dinosaur families and genera that also died off in the K-T event? Did all the molluscs that went extinct get caught in some general curse fall-out, or can we assume that they did something naughty too? 4. How do you explain the evidence that indicates that mass extinction events extend over thousands or even millions of years? As far as I can tell, there is no "dino/shortie" problem that needs to be explained, and current scientific theory is quite adequate at explaining the above evidence, none of which the Buz Hypothesis accounts for. I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die. -John Lydon What's the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a new puppy? The puppy eventually grows up and quits whining.-Steven Dutch
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
ZenMonkey writes: 1. Are you saying that the K-T extinction event, which took place 65 million years ago and is the one in which the large majority of the dinosaurs became extinct, is the same event as the Fall, which by most creationist calculations took place less than 10,000 years ago? If so, which date is wrong - 65 million years or 10 thousand years? No, Zen. My position has always been throughout this thread and elsewhere that the dinos became extinct at the commencement of the alleged ww flood. which allegedly took place about 4350 years ago or so.
2. If the K-T event does represent the Fall, what was the cause of the many other mass extinction events our planet has undergone, such as the Triassic-Jurrasic (205 ma, 23% of all families extinct), or the Permian-Triassic (251 ma, 97% of all marine species and 70% or all land species extinct)? Did God have to curse all of the non-mamalian Theraspids in some previous Fall? Was the the Lemorosaurus the most subtle beast of the Permian Garden of Eden 250 million years ago? 1) Zen, the fall, according to the Genesis curse account, i.e. non-dino types would not have existed until the time of the curse when the existing dinos laid their eggs. All embryos from then on would be non-dino types. All the account establishes is that a serpent/reptile beguiled the woman. It doesn't say or imply snake, serpent being the word depicting all reptiles.
3. How do you explain all of the other non-dinosaur families and genera that also died off in the K-T event? Did all the molluscs that went extinct get caught in some general curse fall-out, or can we assume that they did something naughty too? Did the molluscs all die off 65 million years ago in the K-T event with the dinos? I don't think so.
4. How do you explain the evidence that indicates that mass extinction events extend over thousands or even millions of years? To my knowledge none of these was as abrupt or extensive an event as the K-T event. The focus of this thread is suppose to be the dinos so to go in depth on other groups would lead off topic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
My position has always been throughout this thread and elsewhere that the dinos became extinct at the commencement of the alleged ww flood. which allegedly took place about 4350 years ago or so. Just so you know... that's impossible.
Did the molluscs all die off 65 million years ago in the K-T event with the dinos? I don't think so. In that case, then neither did the dinos... they're birds now. Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Catholic Scientist writes: Just so you know... that's impossible. For a relative uniformist, yes but that would not be the case with the flood.
In that case, then neither did the dinos... they're birds now. Have you been following closely, CS? This does not apply to other than the actual reptile dino K-T group. If birds were included, they would be among the survival group which survived and thrived. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DC85 Member (Idle past 380 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
To my knowledge none of these was as abrupt or extensive an event as the K-T event. Like normal your knowledge is inadequate The Permian Extinction 250 million years ago was far "worse" then the KT event. 96 percent marine and 70 percent of land dwelling life went extinct during the Permian event. Was this an earlier fall?Why did 53% of families living at the time suddenly disappear? These families have none living today. It appears you're wrong Buz.... Care to explain? Edited by DC85, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Hi Buz,
I'm trying to reach common ground. If you believe the curse is not on-topic in this thread then I won't mention it again if you won't. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Buzsaw writes: No, Zen. My position has always been throughout this thread and elsewhere that the dinos became extinct at the commencement of the alleged ww flood. which allegedly took place about 4350 years ago or so. What is your evidence that dinosaurs lived as recently as 4350 years ago?
1) Zen, the fall, according to the Genesis curse account, i.e. non-dino types would not have existed until the time of the curse when the existing dinos laid their eggs. Since the curse is off-topic, what you meant to say is that at around the time of the flood dinosaurs, which were reptiles of the orders Ornithischia and Saurischia, laid eggs from which sprang lizards and snakes of the order Squamata. What is your evidence that anything like this ever happened? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4511 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined:
|
Hi Buz.
Buzsaw writes: No, Zen. My position has always been throughout this thread and elsewhere that the dinos became extinct at the commencement of the alleged ww flood. which allegedly took place about 4350 years ago or so. You're dodging the real issue. In fact, you've made your position even more untenable, hard as that may be to believe. Are you now contending that the K-T event took place about 4350 years ago and not 65 million? What's your evidence for this claim, and how do you counter the whole body of evidence that says otherwise?
Buzsaw writes: Zen, the fall, according to the Genesis curse account, i.e. non-dino types would not have existed until the time of the curse when the existing dinos laid their eggs. All embryos from then on would be non-dino types. All the account establishes is that a serpent/reptile beguiled the woman. It doesn't say or imply snake, serpent being the word depicting all reptiles. What happened to your oft stated assertion that no kind of creature can give birth to another kind? A T. Rex laying an egg and hatching an iguana or a cobra seems like a single-generation change in kind to me. Also, you're missing the point of the question again. Granted that the K-T event represents the Flood and not the Fall (apparently), then what explanation is there for the other major extinction events? Are you asserting that humans were around 250 million years ago as well, and that God had to wipe them out with a Great Permian Flood too?
Buzsaw writes: Did the molluscs all die off 65 million years ago in the K-T event with the dinos? I don't think so. No, but a lot of them did, as well as plenty of plants, fish, insects and micro-organisms. Were they cursed too? Also, if the K-T event is the same thing as the Flood, which is what you seem to be saying now, does this massive die-off of dinos and non-dino simply represent all the families and genera that didn't make it onto the Ark?
Buzsaw writes: Zen, the fall, according to the Genesis curse account, i.e. non-dino types would not have existed until the time of the curse when the existing dinos laid their eggs. All embryos from then on would be non-dino types. All the account establishes is that a serpent/reptile beguiled the woman. It doesn't say or imply snake, serpent being the word depicting all reptiles. 1. Do you mean is that the dinosaurs were changed at the Fall and within a single generation started giving birth to snakes? 2. Additionally, are you claiming that some of the individuals who were cursed at the Fall then lived on until the Flood, thus explaining the co-existence of snakes and dinos? That gives us some pretty old dinosaurs, don'tcha know? 3. So the Serpent was perhaps actually a velociraptor, or some other devilish bipedal predator? (I just don't see a duckbill being up to the job.)
Buzsaw writes: ZenMonkey writes: How do you explain the evidence that indicates that mass extinction events extend over thousands or even millions of years? To my knowledge none of these was as abrupt or extensive an event as the K-T event. The focus of this thread is suppose to be the dinos so to go in depth on other groups would lead off topic. The Permian-Triassic extinction event was far more extensive, as I mentioned in my previous post. Also, an abrupt event in geological terms means something that took place over thousands rather than millions of years. Not one year. Did the Flood just sorta kill off the dinos but let some of them linger for a few thousand years afterwards? Oh wait, or are you saying that there are still dinosaurs alive today? You can see the sorts of issues that arise when you start to claim that events that happened over the span of millions of years actually all happened in the last six thousand. Considering that Jericho, for example, has had people living in it continuously for at least two or even three thousand years before the date of the Fall, never mind the Flood, you can start to see how it's getting difficult to figure out how your chonology is supposed to work. As I understand it, your particular version of OEC asserts that the Creation Event took place at some unknowably distant point in the past. Did Adam live for millions of years from Creation to Fall? Are you claiming to be accurate back until 6000 years ago or so, and then everything before that just goes all whacky and utterly mysterious? And I believe that bringing in non-dinosaur extinctions is on-topic, as your theory has to account for them too. If you want to claim that humans were indeed alive at the same time as the dinosaurs were, then you should be able to provide some sort of chronology for all these events: Creation, Fall, and Flood. And you also have to somehow be able to reconcile a geological record that shows multiple extinctions events just like the one that killed off the dinosaurs going back hundreds of thousands of years. Lots of questions. Take your time. Edited by ZenMonkey, : No reason given. I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die. -John Lydon What's the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a new puppy? The puppy eventually grows up and quits whining.-Steven Dutch
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: What is your evidence that dinosaurs lived as recently as 4350 years ago? That would have to fall back on flood evidence which would be another topic to explain, in that it would involved discussion of reliability of radiometric dates relative to the possibility of a flood.
Percy writes: Since the curse is off-topic, what you meant to say is that at around the time of the flood dinosaurs, which were reptiles of the orders Ornithischia and Saurischia, laid eggs from which sprang lizards and snakes of the order Squamata. What is your evidence that anything like this ever happened? Now we're back to square one which again goes into how the observed evidence of the by and large extinction of dinos and the survival of the others is interpreted. I have no other direct evidence. If my understanding is correct, you have no direct evidence that an asteroid wiped out the dinos or whatever event you attribute their extinction to. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
I think you're getting into another topic, DC. No comment.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4511 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined:
|
Buzsaw writes: Now we're back to square one which again goes into how the observed evidence of the by and large extinction of dinos and the survival of the others is interpreted. I have no other direct evidence. If my understanding is correct, you have no direct evidence that an asteroid wiped out the dinos or whatever event you attribute their extinction to. quote: Of course, some of this evidence is also in agreement with the hypothesis that a period of increased volcano activity and subsequent climate change was a cause of the K-T event. It's possible that both were major factors. And as the article notes, the fossil record is not conclusive with regard to how long the full K-T extinction event took. What is quite clear, however, is that there is no evidence whatsoever that T. Rex and friends went extinct because they somehow lost their passports and tickets to get on the Ark some 6000 years ago. And you admit as much. Lots of evidence. No evidence. Who appears to be making the better case? Edited by ZenMonkey, : No reason given. Edited by ZenMonkey, : No reason given. I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die. -John Lydon What's the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a new puppy? The puppy eventually grows up and quits whining.-Steven Dutch
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024