Tell us about the dinosaurs

[downbeatplumb]

So, Statler, tell us why the rock record clearly demonstrates a history of over 9,000 species of dinosaurs (certainly a large lineage of animals for Noah to overlook, in fact, they were the most diverse species of vertebrates besides the perciform fish), including over 1,000 species of non-avian dinosaurs, that existed on Earth for over 160 million years if the Earth is only 6,000 years? Did god create these fossils to confuse all of us unbelieving scientists, and if so, where is his fossil factory located? And how did Noah manage the plumbing system on such an ark? Surely he must have been the most inventive plumber of all time.

Why get Noah to build an ark anyway, didnt god make the whole world in six days?
One ark would have taken what, six minutes, even if it was a really big one.

He could've gone 'there you go Noah put the amimals in that' but no, Noah had to denude several forrests use tons of nails to build the ark and I assume some sort of ark support structure to hold it till the deluge came.

And still he would've had to support his family and raise the extra funds for this massive project and for all the food for all the different animals and get it delivered just at the right time cos some of it wouldve been perishable.

You know the more I look at it this the less likely it seems that this happened at all, quel surprise.

[Loki_999]

As for the Ark, yes Noah would have had them on the Ark too. Space really would not have been an issue because there really are only about 50 true "kinds" of dinosaurs.

So, 50 "kinds" of dinosaurs, plus all the other "kinds" of animals.

Can you point me to a resource where all the "kinds" of animals that were on the Ark are listed? I mean, there are million's (or is it billions) of species alive today, so that is either one massive ark (where all the creatures were kept fed and cleaned for 40 days - and apparently nights - by just one family) or since the flood there has been some huge amounts of mutations going on very rapidly.

A few extra points:

1) So, if the Dino's were on the Ark, and they also had time to evolve/mutate after the flood - because there are a lot more than 50 types of Dinosaurs cataloged, what happened to them? At what point did they die out?

2) How (and why) the hell did the duck billed platypus migrate from the middle east, all the way to Australia? Not exactly the fastest creature on land, requires freshwater rivers for life, etc. Actually, isn't it just a little strange for you why certain animals are only found in certain parts of the world when according to your beliefs, the ark stopped in the middle east and all the animals disembarked there.

3) Did the Ark have environmental conditioning? Plenty of creatures who require specific environments to survive - freshwater fish vs saltwater fish, polar creatures adapted to the extreme cold, desert creatures adapted to dry conditions.

4) Plants. 40 days submerged under the oceans is going to kill a lot of plant life I would have thought. Why didn't God think of the plants? Bad enough to kill off the animals who were faultless for man's behavior, but the poor plants were left to die.

[Minimalist]

Bad enough to kill off the animals who were faultless for man's behavior, but the poor plants were left to die.

Yeah....that god of theirs is one mean-tempered motherfucker.

You'd think that a 'god' could manage to be a bit more...shall we say "selective" with what he kills? After all, they claim he is "god." How hard could it have been to just kill the humans? Or just the guilty ones?
Why did he have to wipe out the babies too?

Piss poor divine planning if you ask me. I wouldn't trust this guy to organize a brunch.

[Anomalocaris]

Piss poor divine planning if you ask me. I wouldn't trust this guy to organize a brunch.

But that's more than good enough for organizing a theology.

[Statler Waldorf]

Thanks SW. Its great I now know your position on the Dinosaur/Ark business. I would respond now, but I am incredibly drunk (its my birthday today!) so I'll save my response for later this weekend or early next week.

In the meantime, the floor is open for anyone else to comment on Dinosaurs being on the ark.... all i can say, is who had the job of cleaning up the T-Rex's shit?

Happy Birthday

---

---

As for the Ark, yes Noah would have had them on the Ark too.

Space really would not have been an issue because there really are only about 50 true "kinds" of dinosaurs.

Back to the nonsense about "kinds", huh?

Okay, tell me this - are a garter snake and a cobra the same "kind" (they're both snakes!). How about a polar bear and a panda (they're both bears!)? How about a tiger and a house cat (they're both cats!)? How about an eagle and a toucan (they're both birds!)? How about a gorilla and a spider monkey (they're both apes!)? I could go on and on....

Where exactly is the dividing line that distinguishes a "kind"?

These dinosaurs were all different sizes from smaller than a chicken to the sauropods.

You really should stay off that answersingenesis website. It'll rot your brain.

If space really was an issue Noah could have taken Juvenile ones on the Ark.

Because young T. Rexes would only bite off your fingers, as opposed to adults which would bite off your head.

I don't think he needed to conidering the huge amount of space he had on the Ark.

A boat that couldn't have possibly been built given the technology of the time.

These dinosaurs most likely survived after the Ark and sparked many of the dragon stories in China and Europe.

Then when do you think all the dinosaurs died off? Because this scenario is just ridiculous.

There have been modern stories of alleged dinosaur sightings in Australia and Central Africa.

Unsubstantiated anecdotal bullshit.

People who have seen these creatures describe them very accurately despite some of them never even knowing about dinosaurs.

And people have also "seen" and provided descriptions of Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster and the Abominable Snowman. Unfortunately, there is no concrete evidence that any of these creatures actually exist or existed.

We find pictographs that closely resemble dinosaurs.

I've never seen a pictograph of a T. Rex, a Triceratops or a Stegasaurus. You'd think people would have drawn pictures of these amazing beasts. Instead, we have pictures that could easily be representations of common lizards. Occams's Razor.

The finding of Coelacanth amongst serveral other species of animals and trees has shown that animals that supposedly lived millions of years ago could still live today.

And this is supposed to prove......?

---

You really didn't prove much with this post. A few quick points. If we had found fossils of bigfoot and people who had never seen these fossils accurately described the creature based off of sightings I would most likely take their word for it. The fact that we can show tribesman in Australia a fossil of a duck-billed dinosaur leg and they can draw exactly what that animal looked like is pretty amazing. You would have been one of those guys laughing at the reported sightings of Coelacanth in the early 19th century. Then you would have looked like a fool after the 1930s. The ark actually could have been built very easily given the amount of time Noah was given and the help and technology he had. It didn't have to sail, just float. It's actually a very sturdy design. Actually there are temple carvings of stegosaurus, long before its fossils were every discovered. What does the fact that there were dinosaurs as small as chickens and as large as sauropods have to do with AIG? If you do not believe this then maybe you need to read up on your dinosaurs.

P.S. AIG knows that brontosaurus never existed, maybe you guys should read their work more.

---

Evolutionists stuck them in that group based on their Evolutionairy ideas. Based on the overwhelming mountain of evidence.

Fixed that for ya. my bold

Just to point out that was a deliberate missquote for humerous effect.
Just learnt that is against the rules. #slaps own wrist#

He's a creationist...evidence means nothing in this thread.

No, I just know that evidence doesn't actually "talk". It requires interpretation. I am just more intellectually honest than you are. I can interpret all the evidence to fit my worldview, you can only interpret some of it to fit your's.

[orogenicman]

Thanks SW. Its great I now know your position on the Dinosaur/Ark business. I would respond now, but I am incredibly drunk (its my birthday today!) so I'll save my response for later this weekend or early next week.

In the meantime, the floor is open for anyone else to comment on Dinosaurs being on the ark.... all i can say, is who had the job of cleaning up the T-Rex's shit?

Happy Birthday

---

---

As for the Ark, yes Noah would have had them on the Ark too.

Space really would not have been an issue because there really are only about 50 true "kinds" of dinosaurs.

Back to the nonsense about "kinds", huh?

Okay, tell me this - are a garter snake and a cobra the same "kind" (they're both snakes!). How about a polar bear and a panda (they're both bears!)? How about a tiger and a house cat (they're both cats!)? How about an eagle and a toucan (they're both birds!)? How about a gorilla and a spider monkey (they're both apes!)? I could go on and on....

Where exactly is the dividing line that distinguishes a "kind"?

These dinosaurs were all different sizes from smaller than a chicken to the sauropods.

You really should stay off that answersingenesis website. It'll rot your brain.

If space really was an issue Noah could have taken Juvenile ones on the Ark.

Because young T. Rexes would only bite off your fingers, as opposed to adults which would bite off your head.

I don't think he needed to conidering the huge amount of space he had on the Ark.

A boat that couldn't have possibly been built given the technology of the time.

These dinosaurs most likely survived after the Ark and sparked many of the dragon stories in China and Europe.

Then when do you think all the dinosaurs died off? Because this scenario is just ridiculous.

There have been modern stories of alleged dinosaur sightings in Australia and Central Africa.

Unsubstantiated anecdotal bullshit.

People who have seen these creatures describe them very accurately despite some of them never even knowing about dinosaurs.

And people have also "seen" and provided descriptions of Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster and the Abominable Snowman. Unfortunately, there is no concrete evidence that any of these creatures actually exist or existed.

We find pictographs that closely resemble dinosaurs.

I've never seen a pictograph of a T. Rex, a Triceratops or a Stegasaurus. You'd think people would have drawn pictures of these amazing beasts. Instead, we have pictures that could easily be representations of common lizards. Occams's Razor.

The finding of Coelacanth amongst serveral other species of animals and trees has shown that animals that supposedly lived millions of years ago could still live today.

And this is supposed to prove......?

---

You really didn't prove much with this post. A few quick points. If we had found fossils of bigfoot and people who had never seen these fossils accurately described the creature based off of sightings I would most likely take their word for it. The fact that we can show tribesman in Australia a fossil of a duck-billed dinosaur leg and they can draw exactly what that animal looked like is pretty amazing. You would have been one of those guys laughing at the reported sightings of Coelacanth in the early 19th century. Then you would have looked like a fool after the 1930s. The ark actually could have been built very easily given the amount of time Noah was given and the help and technology he had. It didn't have to sail, just float. It's actually a very sturdy design. Actually there are temple carvings of stegosaurus, long before its fossils were every discovered. What does the fact that there were dinosaurs as small as chickens and as large as sauropods have to do with AIG? If you do not believe this then maybe you need to read up on your dinosaurs.

P.S. AIG knows that brontosaurus never existed, maybe you guys should read their work more.

---

Evolutionists stuck them in that group based on their Evolutionairy ideas. Based on the overwhelming mountain of evidence.

Fixed that for ya. my bold

Just to point out that was a deliberate missquote for humerous effect.
Just learnt that is against the rules. #slaps own wrist#

He's a creationist...evidence means nothing in this thread.

No, I just know that evidence doesn't actually "talk". It requires interpretation. I am just more intellectually honest than you are. I can interpret all the evidence to fit my worldview, you can only interpret some of it to fit your's.

Have you ever heard of oopart? If you have, then you aren't being intellectually honest. If you haven't, then perhaps you should learn more about it before you make claims of stegosaur drawings on temple walls.

[Statler Waldorf]

BTW Waldo, this ark you are so proud of would be impossible to build with the technology of the day.

Re this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_(schooner) even with modern techniques you can't go past a certain size.

P.s where did Noah keep all of the marine species that would have undoubtedly perished with the massive influx of fresh water that the rains would have brought?

And it's strange that all of the civilizations around at the time(2500bce) signally failed to notice the flood happen.

Pps still waiting to hear how anisotropic light propagation(even if it's true,which it isn't) supports the idea of a young universe.

Though I've always considered the flood myth a perfect example of why god is such an incompetent buffoon. Any halfway decent deity would have simply eliminated humanity( just made them disappear for instance).

But Yo-yo has to destroy the whole biosphere, It's like dynamiting your house to get rid of a cockroach.

Wikipedia is so lame. There were vessels the exact same size as the ark built in China that did fine. They actually sailed, which was something the ark didn't even have to do.

I am sure you are aware that marine animals did not have to be taken onto the ark. Due to drastic plate tectonics a lot of the water that flooded the Earth was already sea water, so your salinity argument doesn't hold much water.

The civilizations that were around at the time were destroyed, your dating methods assume that no flood ever occurred so they cannot be ussed to disporve the flood. Never assume what you are trying to prove. I am sure you are aware though that the Chinese character for "boat" literally means "eight people in a vessel", which of course alludes to the account of Noah, and no other flood stories. The other flood stories are corrupted re-tellings of the true account of Noah.

I think the light model horse has been beaten to death. The model allows for an apparent old age to the universe while still maintaining a young age using time measured on Earth. There are several other models that make distant starlight not a problem to a young Earth as well.

Not understanding "why" God did something does not prove he did not do it, but I am sure you are already aware of that. The flood was used to symbolize the coming messiah (the ark), and God's final judgement. That's why he did it that way.

---

---

Thanks SW. Its great I now know your position on the Dinosaur/Ark business. I would respond now, but I am incredibly drunk (its my birthday today!) so I'll save my response for later this weekend or early next week.

In the meantime, the floor is open for anyone else to comment on Dinosaurs being on the ark.... all i can say, is who had the job of cleaning up the T-Rex's shit?

Happy Birthday

---

[hide]

As for the Ark, yes Noah would have had them on the Ark too.

Space really would not have been an issue because there really are only about 50 true "kinds" of dinosaurs.

Back to the nonsense about "kinds", huh?

Okay, tell me this - are a garter snake and a cobra the same "kind" (they're both snakes!). How about a polar bear and a panda (they're both bears!)? How about a tiger and a house cat (they're both cats!)? How about an eagle and a toucan (they're both birds!)? How about a gorilla and a spider monkey (they're both apes!)? I could go on and on....

Where exactly is the dividing line that distinguishes a "kind"?

These dinosaurs were all different sizes from smaller than a chicken to the sauropods.

You really should stay off that answersingenesis website. It'll rot your brain.

If space really was an issue Noah could have taken Juvenile ones on the Ark.

Because young T. Rexes would only bite off your fingers, as opposed to adults which would bite off your head.

I don't think he needed to conidering the huge amount of space he had on the Ark.

A boat that couldn't have possibly been built given the technology of the time.

These dinosaurs most likely survived after the Ark and sparked many of the dragon stories in China and Europe.

Then when do you think all the dinosaurs died off? Because this scenario is just ridiculous.

There have been modern stories of alleged dinosaur sightings in Australia and Central Africa.

Unsubstantiated anecdotal bullshit.

People who have seen these creatures describe them very accurately despite some of them never even knowing about dinosaurs.

And people have also "seen" and provided descriptions of Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster and the Abominable Snowman. Unfortunately, there is no concrete evidence that any of these creatures actually exist or existed.

We find pictographs that closely resemble dinosaurs.

I've never seen a pictograph of a T. Rex, a Triceratops or a Stegasaurus. You'd think people would have drawn pictures of these amazing beasts. Instead, we have pictures that could easily be representations of common lizards. Occams's Razor.

The finding of Coelacanth amongst serveral other species of animals and trees has shown that animals that supposedly lived millions of years ago could still live today.

And this is supposed to prove......?

---

You really didn't prove much with this post. A few quick points. If we had found fossils of bigfoot and people who had never seen these fossils accurately described the creature based off of sightings I would most likely take their word for it. The fact that we can show tribesman in Australia a fossil of a duck-billed dinosaur leg and they can draw exactly what that animal looked like is pretty amazing. You would have been one of those guys laughing at the reported sightings of Coelacanth in the early 19th century. Then you would have looked like a fool after the 1930s. The ark actually could have been built very easily given the amount of time Noah was given and the help and technology he had. It didn't have to sail, just float. It's actually a very sturdy design. Actually there are temple carvings of stegosaurus, long before its fossils were every discovered. What does the fact that there were dinosaurs as small as chickens and as large as sauropods have to do with AIG? If you do not believe this then maybe you need to read up on your dinosaurs.

P.S. AIG knows that brontosaurus never existed, maybe you guys should read their work more.

---

Evolutionists stuck them in that group based on their Evolutionairy ideas. Based on the overwhelming mountain of evidence.

Fixed that for ya. my bold

Just to point out that was a deliberate missquote for humerous effect.
Just learnt that is against the rules. #slaps own wrist#

He's a creationist...evidence means nothing in this thread.

No, I just know that evidence doesn't actually "talk". It requires interpretation. I am just more intellectually honest than you are. I can interpret all the evidence to fit my worldview, you can only interpret some of it to fit your's.
Have you ever heard of oopart? If you have, then you aren't being intellectually honest. If you haven't, then perhaps you should learn more about it before you make claims of stegosaur drawings on temple walls. [/hide]

Since you brought it up I am sure you are also aware that something being considered OOPArt (a term coined by an Old-Earth naturalist) does not make it invalid. It only means it is out of place or unexpected. Classifying such things as OOPArt is also a subjective game, trust me the numerous drawings of dinosaurs are not unexpected or out of place to any Creationists. They are exactly what we would expect and confirm the Biblical model of creation.

---

So, Statler, tell us why the rock record clearly demonstrates a history of over 9,000 species of dinosaurs (certainly a large lineage of animals for Noah to overlook, in fact, they were the most diverse species of vertebrates besides the perciform fish), including over 1,000 species of non-avian dinosaurs, that existed on Earth for over 160 million years if the Earth is only 6,000 years? Did god create these fossils to confuse all of us unbelieving scientists, and if so, where is his fossil factory located? And how did Noah manage the plumbing system on such an ark? Surely he must have been the most inventive plumber of all time.

Well I am sure you are aware that the Biblical "kind" is not at the species level and there is only about 50 families of dinosaurs. I am sure you are also aware that we call a lot of dinosaurs different species when they are more likely the same dinosaur just different sizes. It's not God's fault you cannot interpret the evidence correctly, it's really not that hard to interpret. I think you will have a tougher time explaining why dinosaurs all of the sudden "appear" in the geological record and there are no species that are "almost" dinosaur or "on there way to becoming" a dinosaur? Kind of amazing considering you believe a 40 foot tall Sauropod is a descendant of a single celled organism. Someone has some blind faith and it's not me.

---

Welsh cake if your going to show contempt for someone start your post with a haha, works for creation boy.

Except I'm not, I don't regard Statler as 'inferior', I'm just annoyed that he's trying, and failing, to derail the conversation.

We don't get that many young Earth creationists here (thank God) and I was hoping to address his argument and follow on from there.

Not drrailing anything, you didn't use the word "literal" correctly so I pointed it out. What else would you like me to address?

---

As for the Ark, yes Noah would have had them on the Ark too. Space really would not have been an issue because there really are only about 50 true "kinds" of dinosaurs.

So, 50 "kinds" of dinosaurs, plus all the other "kinds" of animals.

Can you point me to a resource where all the "kinds" of animals that were on the Ark are listed? I mean, there are million's (or is it billions) of species alive today, so that is either one massive ark (where all the creatures were kept fed and cleaned for 40 days - and apparently nights - by just one family) or since the flood there has been some huge amounts of mutations going on very rapidly.

A few extra points:

1) So, if the Dino's were on the Ark, and they also had time to evolve/mutate after the flood - because there are a lot more than 50 types of Dinosaurs cataloged, what happened to them? At what point did they die out?

2) How (and why) the hell did the duck billed platypus migrate from the middle east, all the way to Australia? Not exactly the fastest creature on land, requires freshwater rivers for life, etc. Actually, isn't it just a little strange for you why certain animals are only found in certain parts of the world when according to your beliefs, the ark stopped in the middle east and all the animals disembarked there.

3) Did the Ark have environmental conditioning? Plenty of creatures who require specific environments to survive - freshwater fish vs saltwater fish, polar creatures adapted to the extreme cold, desert creatures adapted to dry conditions.

4) Plants. 40 days submerged under the oceans is going to kill a lot of plant life I would have thought. Why didn't God think of the plants? Bad enough to kill off the animals who were faultless for man's behavior, but the poor plants were left to die.

Well the Biblical "kind" does not directly fall into our biological tree. It is most likely between the "family" and "genus" categories depending on the animal. This would have meant (including dinosaurs and other extince animals) that Noah would only have to take about 2000-3000 actual animals on the Ark. Very doable.

To your frist point, all those species of Dinosaurs were killed before the flood (or during the flood), so they did not live after the flood. A lot of dinosaurs would have had trouble adapting to the post-flood conditions so they would not have been real numerous, though some did live after the flood.

To your second point...pointing to a "problem" that exists for both sides doesn't really get us anywhere. Evolutionists have huge issues with the fact that there are many animals (wolves for example) that are morphologically identical (aside from reproductive systems) but some live in Australia and some live in Europe. The Catestrophic Plate Tectonic model does solve this problem for Creationists though, it would allow for many animals to move to Australia and then be separated by plate tectonics and melting ice bridges.

To the third point, I have no idea. Lots of these environmental needs would have most likely have developed after the flood as the animals re-populated the Earth and moved into many new ecosystems.

Plants would have been destroyed by the flood, but not really as a matter of judgement, the Bible does not look at plant life the same way as animal life. Seeds can survive flooding for a long period of time, so plants re-populating the Earth would not have taken long at all.

---

Bad enough to kill off the animals who were faultless for man's behavior, but the poor plants were left to die.

Yeah....that god of theirs is one mean-tempered motherfucker.

You'd think that a 'god' could manage to be a bit more...shall we say "selective" with what he kills? After all, they claim he is "god." How hard could it have been to just kill the humans? Or just the guilty ones?
Why did he have to wipe out the babies too?

Piss poor divine planning if you ask me. I wouldn't trust this guy to organize a brunch.

All Humans are guilty. Learn your Theology.

[orogenicman]

Well I am sure you are aware that the Biblical "kind" is not at the species level and there is only about 50 families of dinosaurs. I am sure you are also aware that we call a lot of dinosaurs different species when they are more likely the same dinosaur just different sizes. It's not God's fault you cannot interpret the evidence correctly, it's really not that hard to interpret. I think you will have a tougher time explaining why dinosaurs all of the sudden "appear" in the geological record and there are no species that are "almost" dinosaur or "on there way to becoming" a dinosaur? Kind of amazing considering you believe a 40 foot tall Sauropod is a descendant of a single celled organism. Someone has some blind faith and it's not me.

Perhaps you could provide a list of these 50 "familes" of dinosaurs. So what you are saying is that in order to get the over 9,000 species of dinosaurs already identified by scientists (with no apparent end in sight, since there are nearly daily discoveries) into Noah's ark, you simply reduce the number of species to 50 families (ignoring the obvious nomioclatural error of doing so) that are not recognized by anyone outside of creationist circles. Do you even understand how families fit into standard binomial nomenclature? And how many species are associated with just one typical family?

All Dinosaurs suddenly appear in the geological record? At the same place, at the same time? On what planet? Just curious because there is no place on THIS planet where ALL dinosaurs appear in the geological record at the same time. Your reference to the "no transitional fossils" argument, of course, ignores the thousands of transition species already identified as well as the fact that all species are transitional. That the genomes of all species of animals studied to date contain evidence of their single cell ancestry apparently escapes you, as well as the fact that all species are related by the fact that all lving species contain DNA, the blueprint of all life on Earth.

Oh, and Statler, the offer of meeting you at the Creation Museum for an afternoon of real field studies in geology still stands, if you dare.

[Minimalist]

All Humans are guilty. Learn your Theology.

I cannot think of any field of study more fucking worthless than "theology." Pompous asses with absolutely nothing to offer.

[Anomalocaris]

All Humans are guilty. Learn your Theology.

This is not OUR theology, this is YOUR theology; Humans are not guilty, creationists and theologians are, you worthless piece of guilty tulip shit.