Why Aren't Dinosaurs In The Bible?

Don't wanna start a fight! (yet!) but can anyone explain why, if genesis is to be believed. There's no mention of Tyranosaurus Rex in the bible?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Probably because it is just a very big lizard

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Quite a number of big lizards who ruled the planet for millions of years. You'd think they'd get at least a footnote

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

While the word "dinosaur" is a relatively new word, there seems to be evidence in many places around the world that men and these creatures have co-existed. In the Bible, when God is responding to Job, in Job 40 and 41, we see two creatures described, the 'behemoth' and the 'leviathan.' Both are described as extremely large animals and seem reminiscent of descriptions of a dinosaur and a giant sea creature. Although Bible notes in many modern translations suggest these animals might be a hippo, a crocodile, an elephant, or other known animals, the Biblical descriptions defy those identifications.




http://www.rae.org/pteroets.html

The Bible and Pterosaurs: Archaeological and Linguistic Studies of Jurassic Animals that Lived Recently

The Chinese histories and legends abound with dinosaurs. But they are not called "dinosaurs." They are called "dragons." The dragon is one of the twelve animals of the Chinese zodiac. What is interesting is that all the other eleven are commonly known animals and there is no hint of 'mythology' involved with their identities. It seems as if the dragon was just a commonly known at one time. The pictures are often fantastical, but so are their stylized pictures of horses and other animals. I checked the web for accessible information on this. I was able to find a few things that were not having to do with video games, sculptures, movies, items for sale, and such. The following links may be of interest. There are more. If you have access to books, you might want to check the epic of Beowulf, in which he battles a monster. If you have access to a good book on the history of art, you may be able to see some dragons and sea monsters painted on ancient Roman pottery. The legends abound all over the world. They do not seem to be connected to each other, but each telling of its own place. We have the story of St. George and the Dragon; there is the reference regarding Alexander the Great of his army disturbing some giant monster in a cave on their way to India. The American Indian thunderbird may very well be one of the ancient flying reptiles. An excellent essay by Lourella Rouster is "The Footprints of Dragons," at http://rae.org/dragons.html





A couple of pages which chronicle a bit the possible existence of monsters in Europe are dragon myths from Austria http://www.strangescience.net/stdino2.htm page includes two paintings of dragons from the seventeenth century that are quite interesting!





Doug Sharp, whose webpage "Revolution Against Evolution" has Rouster's essay, also carries the following: http://rae.org/tuba.html

The Rhamphorhynchoid Pterosaur -- Scaphognathus crassirostris: A "Living Fossil" Until the 17th Century All in all, then, there is reason to doubt the evolutionist timeline that says dinosaurs -- or the dragons -- died out before man ever arrived. There is simply too much evidence in stone, art, writing, and legend which contradicts that idea. - Fryman

><>

 

Inspector,
Don't forget about loch ness!!!
Please come down to earth where dragons aren't real and humans did not live with dinosaurs (except on land of the lost

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

).

 

See, also, the Tuba City dinosaur tracks at www.rae.org (under the dinosaur subsection) for more enlightening, valid information.

For those humanists wanting to explain away yet even more evidence refuting the fallacy of macro-evolution, see talkorigins for a limited, naturalistic hypothesis. ;-)

><>

 

Any explanation as to why there is an abundance of geologic evidence for dinosaurs before 65 million years, then suddenly nothing? Did all of those survivors just not die until the 17th century, and then just vanished?

A few questionable footprints (even by the author) and a literary analysis of some words isn't enough to throw out the large amount of hard evidence for the dinosaurs being long extinct (or lack of evidence of non-extinction, in this case).

 

inspector, just curious, do you believe humans existed alongside dinosaurs?

 

"just curious, do you believe humans existed alongside dinosaurs?"
-----------------


Yep.



"Any explanation as to why there is an abundance of geologic evidence for dinosaurs before 65 million years, then suddenly nothing?"
------------------


Yes. There is an obvious and valid explanation that many evolutionary biologists, paleontologists and archaeologicsts do not want you to know about. Dinosaurs (or anything for that matter) did not exist 65 million years ago. Although, perhaps, off the topic, evolution and the geologic column (which, BTW, is flawed in many ways) is based on the assumption of evolution. This is called circular reasoning. Additionally, the dating methods used such as potassium-argon, carbon 14 and others are based on specific assumptions which cannot be proven, and, are therefore unreliable.

><>

 

Why would they not want us know about it? They dont want the world to know that evolution IS NOT real? :bugeye: Is this some sort of anti-religous movement that Im not aware of?

 

How do you propose humans survived during this time? It's safe to assume the human population was much, much lower than it is now. Probably on the order of a few hundred, maybe a few thousand (after all, this was 65 million years ago). Wouldn't these primative humans make easy prey for any carnivorous dinosaur? Even today, it's speculated that a hunting rifle could not pierce the skin of larger dinosaurs such as the T-Rex (for ex. the modern day alligator is practically bullet proof except on it's underside), how could primative humans have defended themselves?

Why don't we see any human remains dated back to the time of the dinosaurs? Why don't we see any human remains alongside dinosaur remains? Why did the dinosaurs get whiped out when the meteor hit Earth if the humans survived? If humans and dinosaurs evolved at the same time, one would expect them to share a common ancestor, however this is clearly not the case (dinosaurs were reptilian, humans are mammalian). Why is there a 65 million year gap in human existance? In that 65 million year gap we have not found a single fossile to suggest a human being present at that time, nor have we any history from that time period. As far as we can tell, humans have only existed for a few thousand years, if they have really existed for 65 million years or more why are we at the surprisingly low level of technology we're at now? Considering that in just a few thousand years we went from primative spear-throwers to tank driving technological beings should suggest that in a time span of 65 million years we would develop technologies far beyond what we currently posess.

Can any of these questions be answered logically and scientifically? Personally, I think the view that humans existed alongside dinosaurs is absurd, and the problems listed above are just some of the reasons why.

True, most dating system contain some assumptions, but these are not blind assumptions. The assumptions you're referring to are likely those of the radioactive decay of substances. We assume decay occurs as a steady rate which we then use to measure the age of the substance. While this is an assumption, it is a perfectly logical one. All evidence we have seen to date suggests radioactive substances do decay at a steady rate (half lives), and we have seen no evidence that the rate of this decay can be naturally affected to such a degree as to throw off dating techniques. Not to mention that they are incredibly consistant.

I have seen examples where a specific piece of rock was dated more than 30 times using different samples of the rock, all of which have agreed to within 1 or 2 percent. This seems to be the case in all dating experiments. It is unlikely that, if our assumptions are wrong, these results would be so consistant. There really is no reason to doubt radiometric dating methods.

 

Humans did NOT live next to dinosaurs. Dinosaurs died out loooong before Astralopethicus(spelling?) came around, which is considered to be the first 'human'.

__________________________________________
There is no god, afterlife or divine love. There is only Entropy, the mother from which we were all born. She tugs our souls with the beautiful, maternal love of chaos. Why do you keep Her waiting?

-central philosophy of Zero, Sage of Chaos

 

Actually there is now considerable debate as to Australopethicus being the first 'humans'. There is evidence of another hominid that existed before 'lucy'. Can't remember the name right now...

Just thought I would point that out...of course you would still have to go back a further 60 million years to put humans and dinosaurs together, which is ridiculus.

 

No, you have it backwards. The existence of the geologic column was noted and worried over long before Darwin. Additionally, all of the supposed 'flaws' that I have seen posited have been explained quite handily by the geologic evidence. Geology is quite a different science than biology and is in no way based upon biological hypotheses or theories.

While indeed there are such assumptions the results based upon these assumptions are corroborative with other methods of testing. To assume that all of these methods are in agreement due to coincidence stretches the bounds of probability.

To give an example: I show you a ruler that I made which I declare is accurate. You refute it's accuracy by pointing out that I have based my determination upon certain assumptions, which is indeed true. However, I also have 5 other rulers, all of which have been made based upon differing assumptions by different people. All of these rulers are in agreement with mine. It is more unreasonable at this point to assume that all 6 rulers are in agreement by chance or coincidence than it is to believe that my assumptions are reasonably accurate.

~Raithere

 

I'm quite happy for this to go where it will as long as at some point someone can explain that when, on the seventh day "God rested"

You know the ALL POWERFUL deity worked for a week, mostly by talking, "let there be this, let there be that" etc
It took it out of him so much he rested for millions of years before filling the earth with giant monsters.

He subsequently got bored with these and buggered about with the temperature so they all popped off.

Then a little while later he thought "Hmmm maybe something in my OWN image might be more chic!"

Hense an ape!

Just playing devils advocate you understand

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

fadingCaptain,

I think what you may be referring to is Sahelanthropus tchadensis

See: http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahelanthropus_tchadensis

Take care

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

There is not a single anatomically detailed description or picture: they are all stylised pictures. If there were a reasonable number of accurate drawings(enough to rule out chance similarities) then it might be different. Christ, half of them have multiple heads or breathe fire. For the seasoned skeptic this might be the first clue that these drawings are not 100% grounded in observation.

Gullible creationists often claim dinosaur and human tracks are found together to the amusement and bemusement of palentologists. The most famous are the Paluxy tracks where dinosaur prints were eroded to the point where they resemble human ones. The more credible creationists(oxymoron, I know) realise just how dubious these claims are and avoid them.
The tuba tracks:
http://members.aol.com/Paluxy2/arizon.htm

Before this claim can be credibly made, one must explain why no human fossils are found in the same strata as dinosaurs. And why human fossils are always found above dinosaur ones.

 

just for the record..a dinosaur is not a lizard

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Thanks Chagur...

 

I like the way talkorigins explains away the plesiosaur caught in a Japanese fishing net in 1977.......... by saying it was a "basking shark". This is yet more proof, at talkorigins, of intellectuals 'dumbing down' their followers in a feeble attempt to maintain the integrity of geo-paleo-science through a flawed fossil record and geologic column. If one seeks the truth, then one must pursue the truth.

><>