Dinosaurs...

  • Thread starter Thread starter You
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
petrel said:
It’s easy to make a bald claim that somebodies statement is ill-informed and lacking credibility. It takes effort and a certain fortitude of mind and conviction to actually explain how the statement is ill-informed and lacking in credibility.

Therefore I invite you to explain how the starting radiometric readings are derived.
Click to expand...
There’s loads on the web, for instance:

Intro - evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/history_23 and pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/radiometric.html
Methods - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating
More technical - tulane.edu/~sanelson/eens211/radiometric_dating.htm
 
petrel said:
Thanks for the tinyeye technology tip. Very interesting and useful.
Click to expand...
You’re welcome.
Nor would I suggest that such a man was lieing. No, and this is the incredible thing about delusion, the man is not lieing. He sincerely believes that he is looking at a wild boar. It’s when we witness such things that we marvel not just at the human capability to distinguish one object from another but even more so we marvel at how incredibly susceptible the human mind is to abandon even the most straightforward of these capabilities in order to follow after a delusion.
Click to expand...
This makes no sense to me. Are you suggesting that everyone who doesn’t agree with you is deluded? Before answering, consider how you would describe a person who thinks everyone apart from himself is deluded. 😃

Anyway that’s beside the point. It doesn’t matter what pops into our head when we see something. We avoid being deluded by doing research. We do research to minimize the chance of being deluded. When approaching what we think is a church, we ask someone, we look for confirmation. That’s research. We don’t just breeze in and say it must be a church because we decided, and everyone else must be deluded, including the couple in the corner eating popcorn and watching their TV. :rolleyes:
 
petrel said:
Here is another picture this time of stegosaurus in the jungles of Cambodia dating back to the 100’s AD at Ta Prohm…Joseph Meert a young earth creationist skeptic does not claim this to be a fraud or a fake. His take on it is that this is not a picture of Stegasosaurus but is a picture of a wild boar.
Now that is denial at its boldest, one must take upon oneself the heights of imagination or the depths of delusion to conclude that this is a picture of a wild boar. So when looking at pictures of dinosaurs, one man sees a crocodile/leopard river creature, another man sees a wild boar. Why not just accept what is plainly set before us?
Click to expand...
Sorry, strike three!

“There is a substantial problem, however. Not only does creationism distort nature to fit a narrow theological view, there is no evidence that the carving in question is of a dinosaur. If you look at the carving quickly and at an angle, yes, it does superficially look like a Stegosaurus that a kindergartener made out of play-doh. As anyone who has spent time watching the clouds go by knows, though, an active imagination can turn something plain into something fantastic. If viewed directly, the carving hardly looks Stegosaurus-like at all. The head is large and appears to have large ears and a horn. The “plates” along the back more closely resemble leaves, and the sculpture is a better match for a boar or rhinoceros against a leafy background.”

“Even so, the sculpture only vaguely looks like a rhino or boar. We can be certain that it is not a representation of a living Stegosaurus, but could it be a more recent attempt at depicting a dinosaur? Indeed, it is quite possible that this carving has been fabricated. There are many sculptures at the temple, and the origin of the carving in question is unknown. There are rumors that it was created recently, perhaps by a visiting movie crew (the temple is a favorite locale for filmmakers), and it is possible that someone created something Stegosaurus-like during the past few years as a joke.”

“Either way, the temple carving can in no way be used as evidence that humans and non-avian dinosaurs coexisted. Fossils have inspired some myths (see Adrienne Mayor’s excellent book The First Fossil Hunters), but close scrutiny of geological layers, reliable radiometric dating techniques, the lack of dinosaur fossils in strata younger than the Cretaceous, and other lines of evidence all confirm that non-avian dinosaurs became extinct tens of millions of years before there was any type of culture that could have recorded what they looked like. As scientist Carl Sagan said, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”, and in the case of modern dinosaurs the evidence just isn’t there.”

blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/2009/03/stegosaurus-rhinoceros-hoax/
 
inocente said:
It doesn’t look anything like a dinosaur to me. Which species do you think it resembles, noting the long front legs?
Click to expand...
The caption reads “crocodilopardalis.” The mosaic artist tells us it is a crocodile.
 
StAnastasia said:
The caption reads “crocodilopardalis.” The mosaic artist tells us it is a crocodile.
Click to expand...
Crocodile/leopard. Tells us the artist was familiar with both creatures but he could not classify the creature he was depicting as either a crocodile or a leopard, but described it as being somewhere in between both species.
Crocodiles, as everyone knows, survived the K-T extinction which apparently killed all the dinosaurs. So the artist was saying, this creature, whatever it was, was somewhere in between a cousin of the dinosaurs - that is, a cold-blooded reptile, and, a warm blooded mammal, a leopard. Dinosaurs, as we all know, are believed to also be warm-blooded and reptillian in appearance…
 
You said:
Crocodile/leopard. Tells us the artist was familiar with both creatures but he could not classify the creature he was depicting as either a crocodile or a leopard, but described it as being somewhere in between both species.
Crocodiles, as everyone knows, survived the K-T extinction which apparently killed all the dinosaurs. So the artist was saying, this creature, whatever it was, was somewhere in between a cousin of the dinosaurs - that is, a cold-blooded reptile, and, a warm blooded mammal, a leopard. Dinosaurs, as we all know, are believed to also be warm-blooded and reptillian in appearance…
Click to expand...
It looks like this is a doctoral dissertation project just waiting for you. Find a PhD program and propose a project in which you will identify this dinosaur and prove that it lived along the Nile a few thousand years ago. When you have completed your doctorate and stunned the world of paleontologists, there may even be a Nobel Prize waiting for you!
 
vz71 said:
Well, no. That is an example of an incorrect assumption of what others believe.
Click to expand...
If they are being honest about their biblical literalism this is how they should view it. but most young earth creationists are not honest.
 
StAnastasia said:
If they are being honest about their biblical literalism this is how they should view it. but most young earth creationists are not honest.
Click to expand...
So what exactly are you talking about.

You have gone from creationists to biblical literalists to young earth creationists.
All in an effort to make your blanket fit.

Just admit that the blanket was inapproprietely tossed and move on.
 
vz71 said:
So what exactly are you talking about. You have gone from creationists to biblical literalists to young earth creationists. All in an effort to make your blanket fit.
Click to expand...
It fits perfectly. YECs who argue for the creation of the universe 6,000 years ago, and who claim there was a literal global flood, do so because they interpret the bible literally as a science text. But if they were to do this honestly, they would conclude that the world is a flat disc supported on pillars at the corners, and with holes poked in the ceiling for rain and snow to come through
 
StAnastasia said:
This is how a creationist should view creation, yet they dishonestly do not.
Click to expand...
But not all creationists fit so nicely into this statement…so
StAnastasia said:
…most young earth creationists are not honest.
Click to expand...
We aren’t really talking about creationists, just young earth creationists.
Which may or may not fit, and again is too general…so
StAnastasia said:
YECs who argue for the creation of the universe 6,000 years ago, and who claim there was a literal global flood…
Click to expand...
We now have creationists, that believe in an earth that is 6000 years old AND believe in a literal global flood.

Congratulations, I believe you trimmed the blanket down enough to make the statement truthful.

Now, about this belief that you know precisely what is going on in their head…😉
 
You said:
Before the Old Testament was written merchant ships traded across the Med. and beyond. Any sailor worth his salt would notice the ships sinking below the horizon and then returning up from the horizon. Please credit ancient people with some intelligence. They could see their world was curved, not flat.
Click to expand...
Indeed, though that insight might have been more difficult for those living well inland. It probably accounts for some ancient stories of the world being on the back of a giant turtle, which also has the correct shape locally, and doesn’t have the problem of people having to live upside down on the bottom of a sphere…

rossum
 
You said:
Science News – “]Without Hot Rock, Much Of North America Would Be Underwater” – ScienceDaily (June 25, 2007) — A University of Utah study shows how various regions of North America are kept afloat by heat within Earth’s rocky crust, and how much of the continent would sink beneath sea level if not for heat that makes rock buoyant
Click to expand...
Fascinating.
 
vz71 said:
Dishonesty implies deception, and you need to have knowledge of what they know and when they knew it to make that determination.
Click to expand...
There is indeed dishonesty and deception. Look at convicted felon “Dr. Dino” Kent Hovind. Look at Duane Gish of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) , who when shown he is wrong will go on to use the same argument fifty more times in different locales, because he can get away with it in places where simple people can be taken in. There is the “Gish bullfrog” case – Duane Gish was told about a mistake, agreed that it was a mistake, and went on happily repeating it in debates.

holysmoke.org/gishlies.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top