Mummified Dinosaur Testing Faith of Creationists

52 Responses to “Mummified Dinosaur Testing Faith of Creationists”

1. John Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 2:41 pm

   1 But you must remember that time is a relative thing. It is most likely that the 7 days is more for the understanding of mankind prior to the knowledge of eons and millenia. In Ezekiel, God says “A day for a year” in commanding Ezekiel to fast for Israel. An old joke says, “A man asked God what a million years was to him. God replied, ‘Only a second my son, only a second.’ The man then asked God what a million dollars was to him. God replied, ‘Only a penny my son, only a penny.’ Then the man asked God to give him a million dollars. God replied, ‘Sure my son, just give me a second.’” Much of the Bible is metaphorical and not literal so to take the bible in a wholly literal context would be to misinterpret it. I am a creationist. I also believe in the Big Bang. I believe in Evolution. These things were all created by God, caused by God, and guided by God. Science supports God and God supports science. Reply to this comment.

2. Mike Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 3:44 pm

   2 It’s pretty interesting how this dinosaur (that couldn’t possibly have existed 6000-10000 years ago) has flesh and all. One would think that in 65 million years, something would decay. But nope, it’s more realistic to believe it was perfectly preserved for 65 million years rather than 6000. (obvious sarcasim throughout) I am a creationist. There are far to many holes in the Big Bang Theory and Evolution. I’m not having a trying day at all. As a matter of fact, this article further supports Creationism because it is impossible for anything (bones included) to be preserved for 65 million years. Everything would have to decay after time. If you disagree, then prove it. Last I checked no human is 65 million years old and can cue us in on this phenomenon. Carbon dating is a tired arguement. Reply to this comment.

3. Jim Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 3:54 pm

   3 First off, most creationists do not believe the world was made in a single day. I do not know of a single group that believes that. The group in the link you gave espouses a 6-day creation. Secondly, I see no problems with this dino-mummy in a creationist worldview. That the dino is mummified at all indicates a rapid burial and mineralization before decay could begin. This particular dino is entombed in sandstone - a sedementary rock. Therefore it is most likely that the dino was rapidly buried in a massive mud/sand flow. This is the kind of burial you would expect during a catastrophic Flood. John - yes, some of the Bible is metaphorical. Psalms for instance is poetry, and by its nature metaphorical. However, most of the Bible is historical. It tels the story of a people (Israel). I do not adhere to a strict literal reading of the Bible. However, I do think that the Bible should be read plainly. Genesis is not written in poetic/metaphorical language. It is written as a historical document. In this case, it is plain that the author intended the book to be read as such, not as metaphor. Reply to this comment.

4. Ryan Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 4:30 pm

   4 Actually, I see it as the opposite. A young earth creationist sees this as proof for what he or she knew all along, that dinosaurs roamed the earth far more recently than 65 million years ago. The real explaining needs to be done by the Atheist/Darwinist camp. Really, after 65 million years, how on earth is there a mummified dinosar? This discovery and others like it require the Darwinists to do some fast talking, while the creationists sit back and watch the show. Perhaps even saying “told you so!” Reply to this comment.

5. Robert Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 4:44 pm

   5 @mike. I imagine it’s quite easy to believe in creationism when you reject valid evidence. “Carbon dating sucks, therefore creationism is real”. Carbon dating is not accurate to a day, sure, but it’s an actual, verifiable process. Carbon has a known half life, therefore measuring the carbon in a sample produces a reasonable estimate of age. It’s also amazing that you reject the idea because humans haven’t been around for 65 million years, last time i checked the bible was written long after humans were created too, making it several thousand years late even if you accept creationist rhetoric. And Jim, if Genesis is not intended to be metaphorical we have a huge problem. There are two separate creation stories in Genesis. If both are historical, both us and the earth would have had to have been created twice. So either it’s a metaphor, or it’s completely impossible. I come from a family of ministers, even they don’t try to suggest that all of the bible and the creation story are historical accounts. It’s entirely possible to believe in god and that he created the universe and all its processes, including evolution, without being antagonistic towards science. Reply to this comment.

6. Yvonne Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 5:02 pm

   6 If you’d actually read the article instead of a blog commenting on the article, you’d see that it is a FOSSILIZED mummy, not a SOFT-TISSUE mummy like Egyptian ones. It is a rock, just like all other fossils. This body was mummified BEFORE being fossilized where usually the body is stripped to bones. So the statements that it “can’t” be millions of years old because it’s a mummy are based on mis-information and completely groundless. Please get your facts straight before commenting, unless you like sounding stupid. http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/03/18/dinosaur.mummy.ap/index.html Reply to this comment.

7. Mike Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 5:04 pm

   7 Robert, There is actually one account of creation. Genesis 2 is a more detailed account of a single day. Check this out for details: http://www.gotquestions.org/two-Creation-accounts.html My point is no reasonable logic can say, “This dinosaur, mummified and containing skin and all, has been perfectly perserved for 65 million years.” This can never, ever be proven or tested. I hold true to most aspects of dispensationalism. I believe what the Bible says unless it is obviously allegorical, metaphorical, or poetry. I do not see this as the case when it comes to the Genesis account of creation. There is far too much evidence out there that the story proves itself over and over again. The Word is inspired by the Lord. It can be written after the fact because God was always ultimately holding the pen. Reply to this comment.

8. Todd Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 5:10 pm

   8 I wonder how many days the universe was created in the non-creationists view? The Big Bang? That sounds like something pretty quick. Creationists never have a trying day with things like this, if they are Christ-followers. Our faith in Christ, and the transformation of our lives and family legacy kind of put big dinosaurs, flashy rhetoric regarding carbon dating, evolution, and other things of science (which have flip flopped quite a bit over the last…YEAR) into the “non issue” pile. I think we write here, and visit here more to see what science will think of next to push away from God. I mean really, the last few years with global warming, global cooling, big bang, not big bang, millions of years, billions of years, *three* years. When do you just stop and say - We don’t really know, it’s a little bigger than ourselves. Brush away, though. Just realize every little brush stroke is revealing a creature created by God. And the answer and meaning and purpose you seek for your life will never be satisfied by each grain of sand removed from this creature. Reply to this comment.

9. Wolff Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 5:11 pm

   9 @mike. I imagine it’s quite easy to believe in creationism when you reject valid evidence. “Carbon dating sucks, therefore creationism is real”. Carbon dating is not accurate to a day, sure, but it’s an actual, verifiable process. Carbon has a known half life, therefore measuring the carbon in a sample produces a reasonable estimate of age. It’s also amazing that you reject the idea because humans haven’t been around for 65 million years, last time i checked the bible was written long after humans were created too, making it several thousand years late even if you accept creationist rhetoric. And Jim, if Genesis is not intended to be metaphorical we have a huge problem. There are two separate creation stories in Genesis. If both are historical, both us and the earth would have had to have been created twice. So either it’s a metaphor, or it’s completely impossible. I come from a family of ministers, even they don’t try to suggest that all of the bible and the creation story are historical accounts. It’s entirely possible to believe in god and that he created the universe and all its processes, including evolution, without being antagonistic towards science. Hmmm. Carbon dating has been recently proven questionable. Living turtles have been dated as 5,000 years old. It’s not a good method of dating things. For one, it assumes that rates of radioactive decay are constants. Something we simply don’t know, because we haven’t been observing nearly long enough. And the way it dates living mollusks and reptiles is so far off, it’s not even seriously used in debate anymore. Reply to this comment.

10. Dave Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 5:16 pm

    10 I love creationists; they’re such fun to argue with. I especially like how they argue with information that is researched and presented by teams of scientists (who have completed degrees and doctorates) their research is then presented for publication where it is reviewed by a number of other doctors. The articles are then published in journals if they meet the high criteria so that other researchers can investigate them, are peer reviewed and available to be challenged. Most of these professors spend their entire lives researching and writing about a single specialised subject and become experts in their field. If only these scientists could tap into the wealth of knowledge that many creationists apparently have at their fingertips. @ Mike: It’s amazing how you with presumably no training in the field of carbon dating are such an authority and have access to some bank of information that scientists working for decades in the very same area have no access to. You really should put in a call to an archaeological journal and sort it all out for them I’m sure they would be overjoyed at your input. At the end of the day I really don’t see why scientists should be forced to provide evidence to any little thing that crops up. Give me one piece of scientific evidence that you use to support your hypothesis other that “My invisible imaginary friend said so and if you don’t agree with me he’s going to punish you for eternity”. Some creationists do I’ll admit come across nuggets of information that scientists discover and use it to support their beliefs but here’s a news flash: That isn’t how science works! To borrow an argument from Bobby Henderson (creator of pastafarianism (look it up if you’ve never heard of it, it’s great)) scientists would save years of research time if they went about their jobs as creationists do i.e. to start with a conclusion and then work back finding evidence to support it and ignoring anything that contradicts it. Reply to this comment.

11. Mike Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 5:43 pm

    11 Not too long ago scientists, whom would have had the equivalent to a degree, PhD, etc. believed it to be fact that the world is flat….. I do not put my faith in bad science, I put my faith in the Words that have withstood the test of time, time and time again. The words that are most argued about, but always prove themselves. Reply to this comment.

12. Rob Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 5:56 pm

    12 Spot on Dave. I feel that way all the time about some people’s “research” approach. And as a scientist, it is very frustrating to dedicate your time and energy to research that is completely destroyed by a piece of evidence that is contradictory to previous observations and its back to the drawing board. The steps it takes to be labeled “theory” are immense; you don’t just declare ” I have a theory” and start spreading possible answers as if they are they are fact. One shread of evidence that disproves your hypothesis and you get to start over and say “well lets try again”. Science doesn’t prove anything, it only filters fact from fairytale. Thats why science starts with observations and tries to figure out whats going on; not answers and start “proving” why you are right. How easy it would be to start with the answer you are looking for and work backwards. Reply to this comment.

13. Dave Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 6:06 pm

    13 @ Mike; no too long ago christians were embarking on crusades. In the years 1942-1943 also in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveliç, a practicing Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. There were even concentration camps exclusively for children! The atrocities were appalling enough to induce bystanders of the Nazi “Sicherheitsdienst der SS”, watching, to complain about them to Hitler (who did not listen). The pope knew about these events and did nothing to prevent them. Priests get death sentence for Rwandan genocide BBC NEWS April 19, 1998 A court in Rwanda has sentenced two Roman Catholic priests to death for their role in the genocide of 1994, in which up to a million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed. Pope John Paul said the priests must be made to account for their actions. Different sections of the Rwandan church have been widely accused of playing an active role in the genocide of 1994… And from http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/who-has-killed -more-satan-or-god.html I counted the number of people that were killed by God in the Bible. I came up with 2,270,365, which, of course, greatly underestimates God’s total death toll, since it only includes those killings for which specific numbers are given. No attempt was made to include the victims of Noah’s flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, or the many plagues, famines, fiery serpents, etc., with which the good book is filled. Still, 2 million is a respectable number even for world class killers. Reply to this comment.

14. Els Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 6:07 pm

    14 Not too long ago scientists, whom would have had the equivalent to a degree, PhD, etc. believed it to be fact that the world is flat….. I do not put my faith in bad science, I put my faith in the Words that have withstood the test of time, time and time again. The words that are most argued about, but always prove themselves. Any story can be written, translated, passed on. What is the difference between your bible and the religion that the Native Americans believe in? It has also “withstood the test of time” and still being practiced today. I would like to know the parts the “always prove themselves”. Would that be the part where in Old Testament it says to kill your wife if she is not the same race as you? Or where catholics are going to hell? You are acting like the bible has NO problems in it, but science is full of them. Are you divorced? Because you are living in sin. Please don’t sit here and attempt to make the bible out to be a perfect pristine document, because it isn’t. Have you looked at the evolutionary theory? As a college student who went to private christian school, and previously immersed in religion I was astounded how it makes sense. More so than all of the discrepancies in the bible. Please don’t act like everyone who does not believe in your religion is a bumbling idiot, because fact shows the holes in your “words”. Reply to this comment.

15. Rob Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 6:07 pm

    15 Yeah and what happened to those ideas that the world is flat? Science disproved it. I guarantee you that if the bible said “I assure you children of Israel, the world is flat” or “Man shall never walk on the moon”, the same people would be arguing that man walking on the moon was a hoax, or pictures of a round Earth are fake. I can hear them now: “Have you ever been on the moon? No. Then it is impossible. Those moon rocks are fakes. Have you ever seen the world from space? Me neither. I would believe it if you would show me REAL proof, not this fake research made up by anti-Christian scientist!” The ONLY reason that evolution is controversial is because it is contra-bible and that makes fundamentalist upset. I pray that some day it won’t. Reply to this comment.

16. Dave Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 6:20 pm

    16 Sorry for the double post but there seems to be no way of editing my earlier post. This is @ Wolff: Can you provide any evidence for your theory that carbon dating has been proved questionable? By proof I mean an article which has either been peer reviewed, draws on reputable sources or is written by an expert in the field. I suspect you will not find such an atricle. Reply to this comment.

17. Tristan Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    17 @Mike: These scientists you’re referring to took their beliefs that the world was flat from their religion, those “Words that have withstood the test of time” as you put it; the same words that prophesied in Ezekiel 29 that Nebuchadrezzar would rule over Egypt, and that Egypt would be made desolate for 40 years and no man or beast would walk through it, prophesies that never came true. To blindly follow a several thousand year old book is to put yourself on the same level as these scientists who you mock for believing the same book. As for the idea of carbon dating not being accurate, check this article out. Carbon dating only produces incorrect results when used incorrectly. Testing it on a live animal while we’ve been pumping loads of carbon into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution is not using carbon dating how it is supposed to be used, and will of course produce inaccurate results. Reply to this comment.

18. Jason Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 6:57 pm

    18 Wow…there are some really ignorant folks here. I used to be a Creationist, fundamentalist born again Xian, same as many who comment on these pages, and who doubt the theory of evolution. I know what’s going through these folks minds right now…oh shit! Believe me, there’s hope, people. If I can change and allow the scales of faith to fall from my eyes, so can others much worse than I was. That’s the only faith I have today…that others can change. Change is the only thing that is constant. This century is going to really freak out a lot of fundies…lots of stuff coming down the pipe. Get ready for it. Stand still and become irrelevant. Progress and become useful. Reply to this comment.

19. Blant Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 7:06 pm

    19 The Word sure has had to carry an unholy burden since the 3rd century AD, when the weight of increasingly sophisticated investigation of the natural world began to pile up not just by levels, but by orders of magnitude. The Word, however, rejects this burden by the very fact that it does not present scientific conclusions or even propound theories; as The Word it simply tells it like it is. The only variables are in how each of us chooses to accept the telling, in whatever measure we choose to accept it, or any part of it. As a thing unto itself, The Word holds up fine, as evinced by its continued prominence in much more intellectually advanced debates than this. Reply to this comment.

20. Dave Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 7:49 pm

    20 Ok, Peeps. I’m sure I will get some great replies from this thread. So here it goes. I honestly don’t know why people get into debates over this crap. Creationists, you are wrong. Evolutionists, you are wrong as well. So are Buddhists, Satanists, Athiests, and everyone else, including me, we’re all wrong. Please read that previous line again for sake of sanity. The Bloods honest truth is that no one knows what the hell happens after we die. Nor does the past hint to any truth of who we are, where we come from, or what will happen in the future. If you want to believe in a fantasy God, great. If you want to believe in a spontaneous explosion, great. If you want to believe that there are Tootsie Roll candy wrappers full of gaseous microbial hubcaps from dimension X who play the game of life which dictates our universe, great. But for harmonies sake, please, please, stop debating these issues. What matters is what YOU believe in and there is really no need to discuss, debate, argue, acquiesce, or preach to anyone else other than to learn from what you choose to learn from. After all, its just experiences we have to go through in our lifetime. Nothing Else. What is great is that this dino unearthing is a wonderful experience to witness in our lifetimes. Regardless of what it means, implies, or instigates in people. I can say the same thing about watching a baby ladybug crawl around a tulip, having a limb amputated, or eating aged cheese in a dank basement of some European farm house. And yes, I know I am contradicting myself by making blanketing statements about what should and should not be realized. If you can’t see the reasoning behind it, don’t even try to reply with an email rebuttal. It will be a waste of both your time and my time. If you can feel a sense of the reasoning I am suggesting, then you should also understand that I am completely wrong about my words and what I have said as well. Make sense to you? So go ahead and type away, give it your best shot at a reply to this thread. Because honestly, it doesn’t really matter. Good luck picking sides people, thats the way peace is eroded. -Dave p.s. No, I am not a grammar major. So if you choose to reply (which I am sure some of you will feel the compelling need to do so), stick to your experience. Again, contradiction, isn’t it great!! :) Reply to this comment.

21. Rob - Houston, Texas Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 7:59 pm

    21 These same scientists told us there were thousands of Earth like planets in many solar systems. Now we read that with new telescopes that can see planets, that the Earth is a rather unique place. Some things are fact and some are theory. If some one has died, then you can verify that their body no longer functions, fact. How long they have been dead, unless you were there to witness it, is all based on theory. So if you have a theory, and someone with multipul degree’s, spends their whole life working on it. Prepares a paper on their findings, submits it to other scientists, and they agree that the paper is correct. It is still an opinion on a theory. Reply to this comment.

22. Professor T Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 8:03 pm

    22 I am a Bible-believing creationist and the finding of a mummified dinosaur doesn’t test my faith at all. Not one bit. What we have here is yet another darwinian anti-creationist saying the usual stupid, asanine, and idiotic things that darwinian anti-creationists love to say. Anyone who knows about the Ica stones, the Acambaro dinosaur figurines, the artwork and writings of ancient cultures that speak of “dragons,” and yes, the descriptions of the behemoth and leviathan of the Bible, KNOW that humans and dinosaurs did, in fact, co-exist. I don’t care what all these athiest, Bible-hating, God-rejecting so-called “scientists” have to say on the issue. They are WRONG. I’m looking forward to hearing the “scientific community” try to talk their way out of an eternity in HELL when they have to explain to Jesus Christ why they deceived and mislead generations of people on this and a host of other issues. Good luck. Reply to this comment.

23. Adam Dorsey Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 8:11 pm

    23 I think it is biased to overtly state that any evidence found must be conclusive of evolutional history. The mummification of such an animal would apparently suggest it was quickly covered with sediment in a great flood. Infact, the same can be said for all world-wide fossils. Fossils are created in a very specific way, look into it and don’t be fooled by the foolish statements of “experts” who are really unjustified. Reply to this comment.

24. Dr. Ted Baehr Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 8:18 pm

    24 The Word of God is absolute. Dinosaurs and fossils are nothing but the works of Satan. If America could only form a successful Christian theocracy under the greatest President in U.S. history, George W. Bush, we could immediately eliminate this blasphemous “evolution” and “science”, and maybe also do something about the gays and Mexicans, who also offend me. Reply to this comment.

25. tobjudged Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 8:25 pm

    25 Job Ch. 40 Then answered the Lord unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me…Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox…he moveth his tail like a cedar…he is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. Ch. 38 Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in search of the depth?…Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail? …. By what way is the light parted? which scattereth the east wind upon the earth? I could go on and on… but I think that if nothing else, they knew of things in 1611 when this bible was written that MODERN MAN did not know until the last 100 years. I think it is safe to say that God knew them, because he created them, and we should realize that we don’t know all there is to know. One day, all will be revealed, and where will you stand? God is not mocked, for whatsoever a man soweth, that also shall he reap. Do we have a valid, fully proven “scientific” reply against God? No. Not then, and not today. Have any of the scientific community who mock God actually read of Him and His claims to creation? I think not many have considered that He told us the world was round, that the deep had springs, about constellations, weather, the water cycle, the waves, the blood, and so many other “scientific discoveries” that only required the reading of His word. Reply to this comment.

26. Sam Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 8:44 pm

    26 Actually Mike, the world was proven round before Christ even lived. It’s actually not that difficult to deduce for anyone who traveled great distances north and south. Polaris, for instance, dropped lower and lower to the northern horizon as one traveled south. If the world was flat, Polaris would remain at the same elevation relative to the north horizon regardless of whether the observer was in Europe or central Africa. They even made reasonable estimates of the world’s circumference. When Columbus sailed west, he wasn’t out to prove the world was round, but to find a faster route to the East Indies. So your argument that until recently, scientists believed the world to be flat, is invalid. Reply to this comment.

27. Professor T Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 9:03 pm

    27 If anyone wants to see the evidence that humans and dinosaurs did, in fact, co-exist; please visit the following websites: http://www.s8int.com http://www.omniology.com The atheist ruled “scientific community” has been deceiving and misleading the public for generations on this issue in order to support the nonsense that they want people to believe. As far as the comment posted by “Dr. Ted Baehr” is concerned; this guy sounds like an evolutionist trying to pass himself off as a “Bible-believing Christian.” Don’t fall for it. Reply to this comment.

28. nic1234 Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 9:09 pm

    28 I think there’s a misunderstanding. while the news reports have referred to Dakota Dinosaur as “mummified” it’s actually a fossil of a mummified dinosaur, where the animal’s dried tissues have been transformed to rock through fossilization. Reply to this comment.

29. Sigh....... Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 9:20 pm

    29 Most of you “believers” are swimming in bullshit… Look, if you don’t know what in hell you’re talking about, shut up. What you “believe” is absolutely irrelavant. What you “think” is useless to any exchange of information. The only “truths” we know are those revealed through a process of examination that points us in particular directions - the “scientific process.” Any other opinions/beliefs/speculations are useless. I’m sorry some of you have “faith” because all religion is absolute nonsence. But, what’s the use, you idiots are doomed to a life of stupidity. Reply to this comment.

30. Dan in Missouri Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 10:10 pm

    30 Hmmm. Carbon dating has been recently proven questionable. Living turtles have been dated as 5,000 years old. It’s not a good method of dating things. For one, it assumes that rates of radioactive decay are constants. Something we simply don’t know, because we haven’t been observing nearly long enough. And the way it dates living mollusks and reptiles is so far off, it’s not even seriously used in debate anymore. Actually, carbon dating is well known to be unreliable for anything that lived since the use of fossil fuels filled the ecosystem with so much ancient carbon. It is also inaccurate beyond about 50,000 years old. That’s about as old as carbon-14 can measure (about 9 half-lives, or down to 1/512th of the original amount). It can be used to see if a sample is older than that, but not by how much. If you use other isotopes (potassium, argon, etc) you can date things farther back in time. There are hundreds of overlapping dating techniques that are used to verify the age of things. I have worked in archaeological dating, comparing techniques and ranges. Reply to this comment.

31. Rob Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 10:19 pm

    31 The scientific World is united on their ideas. We all are on the same level. If you look at the many different Fundamentalistic opinions above, you have one person saying that fossils are fake and works of the devil, and one person saying that the bible mentions the factual existence of dinosaurs and everything in between. That just shows you that they are scrambling for answers in a chaotic fashion. Shouldn’t that be a little curious to the Fundamentalist crowd? Can’t you just open your minds for a moment and see what could be so evident that millions of people are on the same level? And please don’t tell me that I’m going to Hell for knowing about Dinosaur fossils or understanding evolution. I go to mass everyday and believe in Jesus Christ. I have respect for you if you don’t want to believe what I believe. We live in America and you should absolutely get to believe whatever you want. But don’t condemn someone for his or her beliefs. I live in Kansas; I get to hear that junk all day. Jason, I like your comments. I really do. You mentioned that the only faith you have now is that people can change. Do you mean that you have no faith in God now? I’m not trying to put you on the spot; I am just honestly curious as to what happens after a fundamentalistic fallout. I have some friends that are fundamentalist and I want to know if I should keep trying to show them the truth or let them be. Reply to this comment.

32. Rob Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 10:37 pm

    32 Hey professor T: You said thay you are looking forward to hearing the “scientific community” try to talk their way out of an eternity in HELL when they have to explain to Jesus Christ why they deceived and mislead generations of people on this and a host of other issues. How are you going to hear us unless you are sitting right next to us? How much hate is in your heart that you condemn others 4 days before Easter? Why are you so angry? Is it because this dinosaur fossil makes you uneasy? Either God is testing you or you should rethink your hate religion. What kind of name is Professor T anyway? You sound like a WWF wrestler or some bad-guy from a children’s comic book. Reply to this comment.

33. Larry Wilhelm Posted: Mar 19th, 2008 at 11:32 pm

    33 What an inane blog thread. Scientists: Ignore creationists for they are not playing an intellectually honest game. Demonstrability means nothing to them. They have never contributed to solving any of the world’s problems. They are scared, medieval intellects (or rather lack thereof) and do not face the challenges of the world with their brains. If jesus wasn’t a myth I’m sure he would be disgusted with how poorly they follow his teachings (you know, the peace and love thing). When is he coming back again? They’ve been predicting if for over 1500 years and haven’t got it right yet. But again, that means nothing to them because they are intellectually dishonest. Reply to this comment.

34. pbhj Posted: Mar 20th, 2008 at 3:05 am

    34 They are scared, medieval intellects (or rather lack thereof) and do not face the challenges of the world with their brains. And even a mediaeval intellect knows that ad-hominem attacks don’t prove anything other than that you’ve nothing else to say. Reply to this comment.

35. darwin the christ Posted: Mar 20th, 2008 at 9:50 am

    35 Although I’d love to poke fun at those who believe the story of the bible - I would be poking fun at my own inherited beliefs. My mother made me study the bible until I moved out of her home (I must admit that none of it made logical sense), but when I was free to study what I wanted - it only took me about 6 months with a 1st year biology text book to realize I had been made to waste a good portion of my natural life. Science is a proper pyramid - it collects observable facts and builds on them until a conclusion or substantive theory can be reached that properly describes that data. Creationism is a pyramid turned on its head - it first creates a conclusion, and then glues non-fitting parts around that conclusion in an effort to describe the data. Reply to this comment.

36. MBF Posted: Mar 20th, 2008 at 3:29 pm

    36 @ Mike; no too long ago christians were embarking on crusades. In the years 1942-1943 also in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveliç, a practicing Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. There were even concentration camps exclusively for children! The atrocities were appalling enough to induce bystanders of the Nazi “Sicherheitsdienst der SS”, watching, to complain about them to Hitler (who did not listen). The pope knew about these events and did nothing to prevent them. Priests get death sentence for Rwandan genocideBBC NEWS April 19, 1998 Wow, I didn’t expect my little country to be mentioned on a Science forum. I don’t know do you realize this, but Romancatholics are mostly EVOLUTIONISTS!!! They believe that God created the world from BIG BANG. Me, I’m a Baptist. I do not shake my hand with Rome. So, I don’t see how your argument disproves Creationism. Bunch of evolutionist priests were killing people! That’s a fact!!! True Creatinists (like myself) see all humans not as evolved primats but as God’s special creatures, no matter of their colour, language or nationality. Evolutionists, on the other hand, see things a bit differently… but that’s all right, they just need some more time and some more disproved “facts”, a few millenia of “Darwin delusion”… Did I say millenia … I meant billenia :) Greetings from a Creationist! Reply to this comment.

37. Larry Wilhelm Posted: Mar 20th, 2008 at 6:27 pm

    37 They are scared, medieval intellects (or rather lack thereof) and do not face the challenges of the world with their brains. And even a mediaeval intellect knows that ad-hominem attacks don’t prove anything other than that you’ve nothing else to say. Precisely. I have nothing else to say to those who ignore factual data and cling to myth. What would the point of saying anything to them be if they are not going to engage in an adult conversation about the actual data at hand? Maybe you could demonstate how creationism has helped solve any of the pressing problems of the world? I can demonstrate science has. Give me one example where non-fact-based thinking has alleviated pain and disease, helped solve the energy problem, anything. One valid example and I’ll change my view. Are you open-minded to the possibility that you’re way of thinking might be wrong? Reply to this comment.

38. Professor T Posted: Mar 20th, 2008 at 6:51 pm

    38 Hey professor T: You said thay you are looking forward to hearing the “scientific community” try to talk their way out of an eternity in HELL when they have to explain to Jesus Christ why they deceived and mislead generations of people on this and a host of other issues. How are you going to hear us unless you are sitting right next to us? How much hate is in your heart that you condemn others 4 days before Easter? Why are you so angry? Is it because this dinosaur fossil makes you uneasy? Either God is testing you or you should rethink your hate religion. Hey Rob: First, NO dinosaur fossil has ever made me uneasy, but I have some information that will make people like you very uneasy. Go to the following websites and look at all the evidence that humans and dinosaurs did co-exist: http://www.s8int.com http://www.onmiology.com Your so-called “scientists” haven’t been telling you the truth. Second, was Jesus preaching hate when He told the educated “academics” of His day: “You are of your father the devil,” and “Serpents, brood of vipers, how shall you escape the damnation of HELL?” Was Jesus preaching hate when He said these things? Yes, I am angry. I’m angry because a group of atheist deceivers have taken control of origins science and have been misleading millions and millions of people into believing things that are absolutely untrue. The idea that dinosaurs went extinct 50-65 million years ago is one of the outright falsehoods that your “educated” atheists have been deceiving the public with. Most of the dinosaurs died in the Genesis flood. THAT is the truth. Your “scientists” are WRONG. I’ll see you on Judgement Day. Reply to this comment.

39. docwho Posted: Mar 20th, 2008 at 9:50 pm

    39 But you must remember that time is a relative thing. It is most likely that the 7 days The 7 days come from the Sumerian 7 Tablets of The Epic of Creation. On the 7th tablet, the Sumerians praised their god. Plagiarism so to speak. Reply to this comment.

40. Tammyfae Posted: Mar 21st, 2008 at 2:06 am

    40 The notion of ‘deity’ is purely human. Anything derived from that notion is also strictly human. This fully explains the lack of lizard churches, simian baptism, and a kangaroo savior. Reply to this comment.

41. jesusfreak Posted: Mar 21st, 2008 at 2:08 am

    41 I am a Christian and I will never believe in evolutionism however compelling the evidence is. You see, I have this wonderful thing called ‘faith’ which is more powerful than any scientific theory. I will never give in to reason and science (unless I get cancer or something where science would fix it.) Reply to this comment.

42. GMAN Posted: Mar 21st, 2008 at 2:58 am

    42 Sorry you “Creationists”, but you are all delusional. God does not exist in reality, only in your mind. Let’s put it this way, as far as you are concerned, there is only one “God”, your “God”, and using your superior brains, have dismissed all other “Gods”, well using your same logic, I have just dismissed your “God” which means that your “God” does not exist… Sorry to burst your indoctrinated brain, but please, wake up, you’re all living in la la land. Let your “God” smite me down if your right.. Oh, I’m still here… LONG LIVE THE DINOSAURS!! The REAL OLD ones. Oh, and the bible is just a story, esp. the New Testament. Check out Emperor Constantine and the 2nd Council of Nicaea. Get your facts straight first before denouncing others. At least I do the research and not go along with BLIND FAITH, BLIND being the operative word!! Have a nice day in la la land. :o) Reply to this comment.

43. Bob der Baumeistr Posted: Mar 21st, 2008 at 3:26 am

    43 Creationists: The Computer you are using to write your texts is built based on many many scientific theories, like Thermodynamics, Computability, Math and Quantum Theory. Oh noes!! The Devil!!!! Reply to this comment.

44. Tumlokh Pagal Hu Posted: Mar 21st, 2008 at 6:49 am

    44 I am what you call creationist. I believe word of my Gods. However, I feel that science is wrong in that it not dated the earth to be old enough! I am Hindu. I believe in all my heart that the universe was created over one hundred and fifty trillion years ago. Then, bhagwan, Lord Brahma, created the Earth, the stars, and the planets of higher and lower Beings. You foolish Christians who say earth only 6,000 years old, and you blasphemous evolutionists who claim Earth only ten billion years old do not think highly enough of the task of creating our Universe, and all splendor and majesty in it. If Christian God so great because he is around for 6000 years, if Bible so great it lasted 6000 years, think how much greater that the words and decrees of bhagvan, Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva last for 150 trillion years! Reply to this comment.

45. Spectate Swamp Posted: Mar 21st, 2008 at 7:41 pm

    45 I have video here of dinosaur skin. I know 2 other locals that have made even more impressive finds. One is a perfect copy of a fish head that is 5 feet long by 3 feet deep. The fish must have been 20 feet long. The other is of 2 10 to 12 foot long dolphins in the river bank. There is a picture of the fishhead. I’ll post it when I get my hands on it. Dinosaur skin find on the river with scoobie http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3003450669139294561 dinosaur skin and bone in large block on river bank http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbmcjqw5xe4 Dinosaur Skin find after we got it home. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Srr12AXsS9o dinosaur bone in block and some skin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FJmaUupkdY Dinosaur bone and skin in block of sandstone skin too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIX2r5_UaXY Large block of sandstone with bones. no skin here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYZBixDl1gc Reply to this comment.

46. Brieal Posted: Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:34 pm

    46 So, just a question, being the naive child that I am, but why does this matter? If you want to ignore scientific research (or, likewise, Christian Doctrine), then why can’t you without having someone else’s beliefs shoved down your throat? You’re all just saying the EXACT SAME THING (albeit in different contexts) to each other, and then getting strung-out over it. If any of you are the adults you allude to be, then you’ll give up your whining and leave each other alone. Both sides of this argument are growing weak and stale. For the sake of just being NICE to another human being, why don’t you all find another corner of the internet to mumble in. Thanks. Reply to this comment.

47. Dave Posted: Mar 22nd, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    47 At the end of the day I guess people can believe what they want. I have a massive problem with people condemming me in God’s name however. If I am to subscribe to christianity then I am to belive that God made me and therefore gave me my brain as well. Why would God punish me for using somethig that He gave me? Based on my own investigations (I’m nearly at the end of a science degree) and research along with the present thinking by the leading minds on this planet I accept the theory of evolution. It is my descision and I see no evidence to the contrary I cannot see how this is a sin from any angle. I am only choosing to follow what I belive to be right as are the christians whole follow creation teachings. How can any God that is meant to be loving take offence at that and punish me for eternity? However I still believe that my beliefs are different from those of creationists because I do not have faith in science I trust it based on repeated testings of it. If the theory of evolution is proved false for whatever reason I will change my ideas. That is the key point here, my beliefs are FLEXIBLE based on the most up to date evidence at any point in time. It is that that I personally belive makes my beliefs superior to creationists because they ignore any facts to the contrary. I know that rational argument will not convert any creationists I just really like debating with them because maybe someone somewhere will come up with a good enough counter-argument to make me have to think about it. Reply to this comment.

48. Mike Posted: Mar 26th, 2008 at 5:19 pm

    48 I never condemned anyone for believing evolution. I’m just trying to present some “truth” in this discussion. Evolutionists come down on Creationists for believing the Word of God and the creation account. I find it interesting because evolutionists put their faith in text books. And we all know they are always changing. Reply to this comment.

49. Mike Posted: Mar 26th, 2008 at 5:22 pm

    49 Check out this website Dave, one of many that may help you out in your investigations. It obviously dealing with creation but it has loads of good material to check out. www.answersingenesis.com Reply to this comment.

50. pingback: Posted: Mar 30th, 2008 at 5:11 pm

    50 » Hillary Clinton’s Pastor What’s Required: Progress in the Commonwealth […] It’s probably shocking enough to those of you who have read some of my Environmental Graffiti posts to hear that I had a pastor, much less a Baptist one, or that I somehow shared one with Bill […] Reply to this comment.

51. guy Posted: Apr 3rd, 2008 at 4:13 am

    51 Another scientific finding spuring a ridiculous history debate. Christians are inherently selfish. Their entire motivation for standing up for the “truth” of creationism is to get into heaven. They don’t care if the people they are arguing with in this blog are “in their opinions” going to hell. The biggest problem they have is that they waste away their lives fighting frivolous bullshit battlers like this one, and in doing so alienate those who they are “according to them” supposed to save. The people mocking them are only responding to the bile and poison that the majority of fundamentalist christians are incuring upon themselves. And once again, they don’t care. because they are selfish. Worse than the people they try to cleverly mock. Reply to this comment.

52. Chris mankey Posted: Apr 15th, 2008 at 9:14 pm

    52 “If you disagree, then prove it. Last I checked no human is 65 million years old and can cue us in on this phenomenon. Carbon dating is a tired arguement.” Carbon dating is a tired argument? Clearly you know next to nothing about science! Carbon dating isn’t used to date dinosaur fossils. They use other radioactive dating methods with element with longer half lives. And they date the rocks not the fossils them selves. Also several different methods are used with elements that decay at different rates, but they give the same ages. Wow, creationist are very dumb! Reply to this comment.