So the next question probably will be how cell-phones are explained in the John’s Revelation. I think it is absolutely necessary to find some links on this problem right away) As for those links on dinosaurs, they are just ridiculous, especially the first one. In my humble opinion, everything is possible, but as a proof, they are nothing. We will never know for sure what was the source of inspiration for the Biblical authors. Have you ever heard of hyperbole as a poetical trope? They could describe, and hyperbolize, anything. People cannot live without symbols, even those people who deny this fact and try to explain everything rationally or literally, and whatever the sources of dragons, unicorns, and phoenixes were, these creatures have always existed on a psychological level. At least, I cannot put on the same level a voracious, ugly, stupid, and quite pragmatic creature (dinosaur) and a personification of Chaos and creativity (dragon). But this consideration in no way diminishes the value of the Bible, let alone that it doesn’t make it false.
Yes I have heard of hyperbole, which is synonymous with exaggeration. And I also know that it is Evolutionist who are more familiar with that word than the Bible. And what is ridiculous, is when the Bible gives such a eye opening description of a gigantic beast, you immediately attack the writers of the Bible for exaggeration. I can assure you, they were not exaggerating, they were speaking the truth, and it was a truth that does not line up with your belief in Evolution, so you attacked them. Believers in Evolution have developed a way of filtering out any kind of information that side steps their theory. Believers in the Bible believe that dinosaurs walked the earth thousands of years ago, not millions. Now Evolutionist have been telling us that we will never find soft tissue in dinosaurs bones because soft tissue disappears after only 10,000 years. A few months ago scientist found a Tyrannosaurs Rex thigh bone in a remote region of Montana. They had to break it in two to get it into the copter and guess what? To their amazement, they discovered soft tissue. Now that discovery lines up with the time line of the Bible, and not Evolution. So this has created a problem for Evolutionist. Yet I can predict what the Evolutionist next move will be. The theory of soft tissue only lasting for 10,000 years will be replaced with a new theory that will state, that soft tissue now can remain soft for 70 million years. And this is what they call science. Whatever theory sidesteps their Theory of Evolution, those theories WILL all have to be changed. It really gets complicated trying to protect a lie.
I dont know about the soft tissue but Im agreeing with you 100% on the principle you are communicating. Bang on. When it becomes no longer possible to deny every region of the earth has been subjected to massive flooding... the theory will be changed in whatever way can accomodate but NOT concede. Many, many 'regional floods' but at many different times over history. When it becomes abundantly clear you cannot find gradual changes in the fossil record... the theory changes to 'punctuated equalibrium'. You could probably make a 300 page list with this principle you have stated. The problem as you stated: 'Oh what a web we weave when we choose to deceive'. Evolutionists find themselves reaching saturation point and its building fast folks. Now you have to change it to Punc-eek and oh crap.. that screws a whole lot of the work put into the 'mutation plus selection' theories. And then you dont need 'millions of years' anymore and too many Geologists start taking the opportunity to finally reduce the age like they want .. I mean we are just touching on the 'gyst of it' here and not going into the chaotic details but itsa coming.
I usually don't like even commenting on these things, but there are some things that I'd like to add: 1) In terms of the flexibility of evolutionary theory, it is a strength and a weakness. The thing is that evolution is supposed to be observable, but, due to it's random qualities, it is not testable in an experiment and is not repeatable. Portions are, yes (like bacteria developing resistances), but others are not (like common ancestry). So, it can, as a theory, adapt to new discoveries, but so long as it is doing so, it's hard to take anyone that says "evolution is a fact" seriously because facts don't change. 2) The evolutionary tree is based on form. A fossil's ancestry and descendency is based primarily on it's shape (if it looks similar to a horse, but has some small variations, it is probably related to the horse) and remotely on things like geography. The problem is that we know that today, form isn't a reliable method of determining ancestry. A dolphin fossil would be very similar to a shark fossil based on morphology, but in reality, dolphins are closer to humans than they are to sharks. The problem is that we base fossil relationships on morphology when we have no reason to do so and good reasons to *not* do it. 3) Unfortunately, not every fossil is dated using radiometric or other forms of dating. The most common method is rock strata formation. A certain strata is dated to XX million years, therefore the fossils Y and Z that were found in the strata must be XX million years old. Unfortunately, other strata are then dated to XX million years because they contain the fossils Y and Z. See the circular problem? The fossils date the rocks, then the rocks date the fossils, that date the rocks, that date the fossils... 4) In terms of hyperbole being used in the text in Job, there is no reason to think that the passages in Job are hyperbole. It doesn't make sense in the context of the passages, and is not found anywhere else in the book. Hyperbole is only effective when it is obvious. The passage indicates that it is not hyperbole, but speaks of an actual creature.
I have never attacked them for this. What I really want is: more exaggeration. Until you come to the point where no exaggeration’s possible. I know. But you can’t prove. Wait a minute. Are you saying this to me? I don’t believe in evolution. Actually, I don’t care what evolutionists think or say. Everybody has his/her own madness.
First of all, there is no reason to think that the book of Job correctly describes a real event. And what the author wants to say, describing those imaginary creatures, easily makes sense: even in your imagination you can create only measurable and limited, however enormous and unleashed it is; you can neither imagine nor grasp your God, because he does not yield to any measure. Too formal opinion. If, reading something, I am sure that all these words are just tropes and nothing more, the text doesn’t affect me much. Because, if hyperboles are obvious, it’s just literature. How?
There is no reason to think that the Book of Job correctly describes a real event? I can tell you know very little about the Bible, because only a person unfamiliure with this Book could ever make a statement like that. If you just considered the recent discoveries they are making today, you would know that some of the major Bible stories are being proven by archaelogy. If you understood anything about the prophecies of the Bible, you would be able to see all the ones that have been fulfilled in the past, and you would be able to see all the ones being fulfilled in detail in the day we live. There are actually many reasons to believe the Bibe is telling you the truth, because it is the Book of truth. If the Bible was just literature, then why is it archaelogly being proven? If the Bible is just literature, why are the prophecies true and still coming to pass? Why does this Book know the future?
I bet they all got down on their knees when they saw that asteroid coming at 'em. Including the atheists (just to be on the safe side).
Carbon dating is only one way of dating fossils. Uranium lead and phosphorus sulphate are others, the latter is able to be aged over a billion years.
Look, its perfectly simple. Yes, God made the dinosaurs but he (sorry, He) did not mention it in his memoirs. And who can blame him (or Him)? Has anyone ever seen one of those things in the movies, crashing around banging into things, knocking stuff over, generally showing no respect. And they didnt even bother to build a church or a mosque or temple or shopping mall to show their gratitude. So he pulled the plug and did a little editing and if he doesnt want to talk about it anymore, nor should we. Anyone can make a mistake. Imagine how mortified he must have been when we started digging up bones? Give the guy a break and move on. He's made loads of great stuff since. Hasn't he?
Does that also include Neanderthal, who were big brutish lumbering creatures always bumping into things and not worth God’s time or effort to save :H Hotwater
Sorry, but God did mention dinosaurs in His memoirs. You can read about it in the Bible. Leviathan has the following attributes according to Job 41, Psalm 104:25,26 and Isaiah 27:1. This is only a partial listing-just enought to make the point. "No one is so fierce that he would dare stir him up" "Who can open the doors of his face, with his terrible teeth all around?" "His rows of scales are his pride, shut up tightly as with a seal; one is so near another that no air can come between them; they are joined one to another, they stick together and cannot be parted. "His sneezings flash forth light, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning. Out of his mouth go burning lights; sparks of fire shoot out. Smoke goes out of his nostrils, as from a boiling pot and burning rushes. His breath kindles coals, and a flame goes out of his mouth." "Though the sword reaches him, it cannot avail; nor does spear, dart, or javelin. He regards iron as straw, and bronze as rotten wood. The arrow cannot make him flee; slingstones become like stubble to him. Darts are regarded as straw; he laughs at the threat of javelins." "On earth there is nothing like him, which is made without fear."
The only real evidence for an earth model being billons of years old, is the fact that the philosophy of Evolution requires it. Uranium lead cannot be depended on for accuracy because science can never be sure if the rate of decay remained constant. To use Uranium lead for a proof for Evolution requires almost a religious faith, and as you know, that would not be good science.
I think you called it in Campbell about how Evolutionism, by its very nature and infamy can just morph and change to 'get out of anything'. Ceolocanth fossil is found and they declare its a 'proof' of an 'inbetween' fish and land animal. Its put in textbooks as a 'stage' and millions of students mistakenly say "Aha.. SEE.. Evolutionism is science because here is facts" Ok. Then it turns out Ceolocanths are swimming around just fine and are exactly the same as they always were. Not a tiny smidge of 'evolving'. Oh shit right? Nope. The evolutionist simply adds a new part of the story saying "well... see, over millions of years some species just stayed the same... and we can prove this is a fact because 'we' have Ceolocanths today who stayed the same" Did you see that? See how that got turned around to 'sound like' it was 'their science' being validated. Fascinating. So here is what will happen with the Dinosaur soft tissue. If it does turn out it really is hemoglobin and soft tissues then you called it right - now they will say "We have discovered that Hemoglobin, in some rare instances can survive for 40 million years and here is the name of a 'process' we made up and we can prove this by showing you the T-rex soft tissue we have" But wait, Even if thats not possible and we really can no longer deny that megafauna like Behemoths, (Dragons/Dinosaurs) lived recently. Lets say it becomes overwhelming. Ok, The Evolutionist just says the same thing as he says about Crocodiles and Coelocanths and all the '500 million year old' animals. 'Some' branches just perfected and survived as they were. Thats why Dinosaurs are found in the last 5,000 years. See how it works? You cant falsify evolutionism because its not a real 'thing'. Not saying there has been confirmation on the soft-tissue issue yet but here is an article and it also explains the mentality Evolutionists employ: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0325Dino_tissue.asp This is an interesting video by Kent 'Wacky' Hovind and introduction by 'Erik' but its actually pretty interesting stuff on Dinosaurs and even if you dont buy Creationism or see some 'nutty' things - there is some very interesting points: Hovind on Dinosaurs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgHK_NDkAyY
Yes one could say that, but the Bible does not fabricate stories. And we have the evidence to prove this. And the details of this story agree with recent findings of dinosaurs of today. So unless the writers of this story got their information from their local museum, they would of had to of gotten it first hand.
Campbell, I've been hearing about dinosaurs since I was a little kid, studied them in school as we all did; there's a big dinosaur excavation site near my home city that's open to the public...never once have I heard of a dinosaur that sneezed lightning, and breathed fire and brimstone. Dinosaurs were very big lizards ...what you are describing is a mythical dragon. If you know of real scientific evidence to back up your claims, I'd like to see a link to it
I agree in general - there were no fire breathing dinosaurs. However - one small point is that Dinosaurs were not in fact just big lizards. Modern lizards are descended from dinosaurs, but not quite the same thing. An interesting dino fact I came across recently - evidently, at the time of the large flying dinosaurs like the teradactyl, there must have been a higher concentration of oxygen in the atmoshpere, or they couldn't have developed muscles strong enough to enable them to fly. I guess that's another problem for those who fantasize that human and dinosaur once shared this planet.
