Dinosaurs
 

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2.../trexskull.jpg

Dinosaurs!

I have no problem with dinosaurs.
There is room for different views here, some believe all dinosaurs were destroyed during the flood, (there is much fossil evidence for flood related dino-deaths), others believe eggs or young were carried on the ark and survived the flood, only to later become extinct at the hands of men—who called them "dragons." The Bible uses ancient names like "Behemoth” and “tannin.” (Job 40:15-19) The word dinosaur was not heard until the 1800's. At any rate, here a few items you may enjoy from my archives about dinosaurs...

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2...softtissue.jpg
70 million-year-old fossil yields preserved blood vessels. Tissue fragments from a Tyrannosaurus rex femur are shown at left, when it is flexible and resilient and when stretched (arrow) returns to its original shape. The middle photo shows the bone after it is air dried. The photo at right shows regions of bone showing fibrous character, not normally seen in fossil bone.

Are they really that old?
If they survived the flood, dinosaurs would have come under increasing pressure from hunters and weather changes—many believe Earth's atmosphere after the flood was changed quite a bit. They were killed out of fear and for food, just like many other large animals down through history. Remember, God has a "master plan"—but that includes allowing men to pretty much handle things on Earth as stewards of the natural world. Men have driven many species to extinction, not just the dinosaurs. Amazingly, scientists (Mary Higby Schweitzer of North Carolina State University) have now found T-Rex bones with blood and soft tissue still present—providing strong evidence to suggest they were on the Earth far more recently than some care to admit. Take a look, they certainly don't look 70 millon years old to me:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/

More recently, it appears another team has retrieved similarly unfossilized dinosaur bone from Alaska's Colville River in the Liscomb Bone Bed. The team reported that some of these bones are petrified and some are unpetrified or unfossilized, see here:
http://www.christiananswers.net/catalog/bk-alaska.html

Evidence for Men and Dinosaurs together?
There is a lot of speculation here, but there are references to dragons in the Bible, and people fighting with dragons throughout European writings and artwork, Marco Polo wrote of the Chinese training dragons, and there is evidence suggesting that dragons or dinosaurs may have been seen by Anasazi Indians in North America at the first link below, related info at bottom:
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2705
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/2.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/crea...9/i4/blood.asp

The so-called Taylor Trail of the Paluxy River in Glen Rose Texas, has been hotly debated over the years. Some creationists have insisted that during the 1960's and 70's it once showed a detailed series of 14 sequential, fossilized human-like footprints on the same sediment platform with at least 134 dinosaur tracks. Of course evolutionists have their own interpretation on this, and much of this evidence has been reported as either naturally eroded indistinct metatarsal dinosaur tracks (see Paleo link below) or simply fakes. Some creationists, such as Ken Ham, have also suggested the tracks are not human, and yet others (Dr. Don Patton) insist the original stratum was destroyed by erosion and disturbed evolutionists with a crow bar, but you can still see what are claimed to be the remarkable series of un-retouched original photos from the 1970's here. Patton claims these images were taken before the two men who attended his presentation destroyed them with an iron bar, the high resolution photos appear to show all five toes, instep and clearly defined heel, take a look and decide for yourself:
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/taylor-trail.htm
http://paleo.cc/paluxy/elong.htm

The American Sioux Indians have long described the so-called "Thunder Bird" in their culture and history, and always draw it as strangely similar to the pterosaur Pteranodon. There is also a very good bas-relief picture of what appears to be a stegosaurus in the ruins of Angkor outside of Siem Reap, Cambodia:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2007/0115angkor.asp

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2...an/komodo3.jpg
Komodo's "dragons" were not documented by Europeans until 1910

Conclusions...
I think believers should keep an open mind about dinosaurs, as I say, I have no problem with them, and as time goes on we may learn more about them and exactly when they existed. I think it is dangerous to be dogmatic on some things, after all---It was once held that mammoths and mastodons became extinct 30,000 to 40,000 years ago. However, when flint spear points were found in mammoth bones, the evolutionist scientific community had to concede reluctantly that these animals were actually being hunted in America by humans:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/crea...9/i2/stone.asp

I believe that most dinosaurs were killed in Noah's flood which explains dinosaur burial grounds where the bones of sometimes hundreds of dinosaurs are found piled together. I believe that Noah must have carried some dinosaurs onto the ark and that they survived many years after that. This explains the stories of "dragons" in many civilizations over the centuries. There is real evidence that dinosaurs might even be alive today.

Here is an article from National Geographic telling of an intact "mummified" dino that was found just a few years ago.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...dinomummy.html

They cannot explain the remarkable state of preservation of this dino, they can even tell what foods this dino had eaten before it's death!

Instead of seeing this as evidence that dinos lived until very recently, evolutionists have said there must be a previously unknown process of preservation that must be researched. :rolleyes:

There are even reports of recovering DNA which is extremely fragile. It would be remarkable for DNA to survive even a few hundred years, much less 70 million years or so when dinos were supposed to have gone extinct.

Here is an article on the mysterious Ica Stones of Peru that show man and dinos living together.

http://www.omniology.com/IcaPeruDinoArt.html

Thanks for your post and comments on the Dinosaurs...
here are more links on the Ica stones of Dr. Javier Cabrera:
http://members.cox.net/icastones/photographs.htm
http://members.cox.net/icastones/photos.htm
http://members.cox.net/icastones/my_visit.htm

Thank you.

The interesting thing about the Omniology site is that the author was an atheist, but through his sincere studies came to believe that the Bible account of creation is true and became a Christian. His testimony can be found on the site.

You mentioned the mammoths in your first post, here are some photos of mammoths that prove they are still alive today!

http://www.omniology.com/LivingMammoth.html

Hmmm, I'm not an expert on pachyderms, how does that differ from an ordinary Asian elephant brother?

Well, I am no expert on elephants either. :)

But these elephants caused quite a controversy, being much larger than any Asian elephants ever found, and because of the exaggerated bump or dome on their heads. Some believe these are true relatives of the mammoth, some claim they are birth defects or mutations.

It is hard to find info, but here is one article I found.

http://web.ncf.ca/bz050/HomePage.gne.html

What is truly amazing about the article is that they main reason they give for not accepting this as a "STEGODONT" elephant (even though it has features known only to this elephant) is simply because it does not fit their evolutionary assumptions that it went extinct over a million years ago!

Thanks that is interesting... also I didn't realize there has been so much confusion on elephant and mammoth classification, here's more on that from AIG:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home.../appendix1.asp

I know I am repeating myself, but look at this line from that article:

"the problem is that the Stegodont , the ancestor of both the African and Asian elephants we know today, as well as the extinct mammoth, apparently died out more than a million years ago"

This is the problem with evolutionists, whenever they find evidence that might discredit their pre-conceived assumptions, they simply ignore it or try to explain it away.

Now, I'm not saying these are living Stegodants, but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck....

Yes, you are correct brother, if it doesn't fit the evolutionary mold including millions of years, modern man flips out and short circuits himself, despite the evidence. Please see my extensive comments on this here:
http://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=825

Oh and by the way, here's another "duck" they thought had died out millions of years ago, this one is still swimming:

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2...coelacanth.jpg

Yes, the Coelacanth was a huge embarrassment for evolution (one of many).

I used to debate with evolutionists, but it is useless and will just wear you out. They have their minds set and no evidence can change their minds.

I liked your thread, we have done a lot of similar reading. :)

I often wonder about the Loch Ness monster. It seems many lakes have similar creatures lurking below the water, each very similar in description and often suggested to be dinosaurs.

Not meaning to re-introduce the Gap Fact/Theory (Fact coming before Theory in terms of the alphabet :) ), but if dinosaurs were destroyed during Noah's flood why wouldn't it be possible for some of these to have survived until today, hiding in these deep bodies of water.

Does it really matter? Is my salvation in any way effected by all this?

Not at all. It's just interesting.

Harley

I too am fascinated by dinosaurs, especially the Loch Ness Monster, and all the other similar creatures that lurk in lakes all over the world! I've done a lot of reading on it. Not sure why it's so fascinating to me. I personally thing they are plesiosaurs. :)

I've been asked before why I'm interested in whether or not there were dinosaurs, as well as why I believe there were unicorn's, dragons, satyrs, and the like. As has been discussed numerous times on this board, I believe the men who translated our King James bible to be the highly intelligent men that they were and, for example, if they had ment rhino rather than unicorn they would have said so. I realize I differ from others in this opinion and we can agree to disagree.

I look at the platypus and the dodo - wonderful creatures, certainly with a cartoon like quality. Then I consider the panda bear surrounded by its green habitat and the penguin with wings that does not fly.

The behemoth and leviathan, I wonder why we have to deprive them being magnificient creatures, along with the unicorns and the dragons etc and find someway to make the extraordinary ordinary.
There is certainly nothing ordinary about our Creator or the manner in which He created. I don't understand it, I simply marvel at it:

Ps 72:18 ¶ Blessed be the LORD God, the God of Israel, who only doeth wondrous things.

Why do we insist that because we have never seen one of these they could not have possibly existed? Rhetorical question.

Harley

Hey guys thanks for your comments here,
I love learning about dinosaurs too...

Harley, I think the Loch Ness monster story was greatly damaged when it was revealed the famous surgeon's photo had been a hoax, however let me quickly add, there may have been a real creature there to start the stories long before that photo was ever made, and there are similar stories from many other witnesses around the world of strange sea creatures, so who knows. I agree with you, as the Coelacanth and the Megamouth Shark (Megachasma pelagios) have already proven, scientists really have no idea what lurks in the deep oceans.

Josh, I agree there there is plenty of evidence suggesting that dragons or dinosaurs may have been seen by modern man, all it takes is an open mind and an honest review of the evidence. If you haven't already, please check out my first post on this thread, I have several very good links under the section "Evidence for Men and Dinosaurs together." Please feel free to add more links and articles, God bless...

From Job 40:

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.

17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.

19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.

20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.

21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.

22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.

England alone has hundreds of eye-witness accounts of dragons. And some of these reports were documented by Kings themselves, not silly persons.

Here is a fascinating site about Dinosaurs in past history.

http://s8int.com/dinolit1.html

Speaking of DRAGONS, here's something you might enjoy...


http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2...ragonskull.jpg

In 2004, a dinosaur/dragon skull with “dragon-like horns and teeth” was given to the Children's Museum of Indianapolis and is called dracorex hogwartsia. The first part of that word is Latin (draco) for dragon:
http://www.crministriesphilly.com/additionalinformation

LOL, they even named it after the Harry Potter dragon, see links below...
Dinosaur is dead ringer for Potter dragon
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...icle724781.ece
http://www.hmnh.org/archives/2006/05...-dear-readers/

GOOD NIGHT! What is that! Is that for real?

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Yes brother it's for real.
Here's the funny part: to evolutionists this is just another Dinosaur which LOOKS LIKE a Dragon. They quickly scrambled to classify it as a "flat-headed pachycephalosaur." But one can't help but wonder if this is actually a Dragon which is being CALLED a Dinosaur. (?) This comes as no surprise for Bible believers, who have been calling Dinosaurs "Dragons" for many years.

Fact: The KJV uses the word "Dragon" or "Dragons" no less than 34 times.

Fact: The official news release from the museum states:
"It has been called a “Type Specimen” which is unique in that it is the single specimen that defines the species... The new species flummoxes old theories... The combination of a flat forehead and a multitude of spikes and lumps have never been seen before. Dracorex hogwartsia is an exceptionally ADVANCED SPECIES."

Adrienne Mayor states, "the shape of the dinosaur’s skull, with its long muzzle, bizarre knobs and horns, surprised the scientists,” Mayor said. “But the skull looks strangely familiar to anyone who has studied dragons! Dracorex has a remarkable resemblance to the dragons of ancient China and medieval Europe.” Mayor has utilized her keen interest in paleontology and researched an abundance of long-forgotten literary, artistic and paleontological evidence to support her thesis that at least some of the fantastic mythological monsters were based on paleontological realities."

"The skull was donated to The Children’s Museum of Indianapolis by Steve Saulsbury, Patrick Saulsbury and Brian Buckmeier, all from Sioux City, Iowa. The three friends found the fossil during a fossil collecting trip in the Hell Creek Formation in central South Dakota. Dracorex hogwartsia was unveiled on May 22, 2006 at 10 a.m. The museum houses one of the largest displays of real juvenile and family dinosaur fossils in the United States."
You can read the entire press release right here:
http://www.insideindianabusiness.com...D=18136#middle

Now that is COOL!!!!! :jaw:

Looks like a Dragon to me!

I like this line particularly in the article:

"According to Mayor, Sioux Indians who found a skull like this might have identified it as “Unktehi,” the mythical horned water monster of the South Dakota badlands, where the fossil was unearthed."

So, the Sioux Indians believed in a dragon-like creature called "Unktehi". They find a skull that resembles the creature the Indians spoke of. Now any rational person would come to the conclusion that this creature was indeed real and existed in history, but evolutionists still insist it was mythical.:pound:

And you see this everytime from evolutionists. They find a "mummified" dinosaur (not fossilized) but write numerous times in the article that it is at least 77 million years old. Then they say there must be some process of preservation that is not known and needs further study. The completely intact dinosaur that was found had it's skin, soft tissues, muscles, and organs. It was not a fossil which would lead most reasonable people to believe that it could not have been there very long, a few thousand years at most. No matter how much evidence you show an evolutionist that dinos lived very recently, they rationalize it away to fit their theory.

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2...n/mosasaur.jpg

LEVIATHAN in the Bible
Fire Breathing Dragon, Dinosaur or Myth?

Now let's take a look at Job 41 and LEVIATHAN...

Job 41 describes LEVIATHAN as a very powerful dragon or dragon-like marine creature, and having the ability to spew fire out of its mouth. That's right friends, I said FIRE. Many evolutionists and critics of our Bible have used this passage to try and cast doubt on God's Word. No doubt many debates have been peppered with those attempting to ridicule the Bible by making remarks about the "mythical fire breathing dragons of Job 41." But regardless of what others may say, the Bible does indeed indicate that Leviathan was very real, and a fire-spitter at that:

"Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out. Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron. His breath kindleth coals, AND A FLAME GOETH OUT OF HIS MOUTH." Job 41:19-20

So like it or not, it is evident from scripture that God created some type of creature that had a fiery breath!

Animals that make fire?
Some have suggested that this means some dinosaurs could breathe fire. Could methane or some other gas have been used by the dragons of old? There have been some good articles written by Creationists about this, with references to the Bombardier Beetle, which sprays a high-temperature jet of gas for protection (fueled by hydroquinones and hydrogen peroxide with oxidative enzymes), but to my knowledge this is not fire. We know of the Spitting Cobra, a serpent that can easily project venom several feet with enough accuracy to hit a man directly in the eyes, but this is not fire. We know that some of God's creatures produce a glowing bioluminescence, and the Electric Eel can produce 600 volts of electricity on demand, but again--this is not fire. Some have drawn attention to the fact that natural arsene gas (AsH 3 ) and phosphorous forms diphosphane gas (P 2 H 4 ), and when these gases come into contact with oxygen they will spontaneously ignite. This is all very interesting, you can read more about that here:
http://www.creationworldview.org/art...view.asp?id=50

Ocean dweller of old...
But let me say up front, I'm not sure Leviathan really was a dinosaur or any other "normal" animal. This would be opposed to BEHEMOTH, (Job 40) which appears to be simply a large, herbivorous sauropod dinosaur with a tail like a cedar tree. Unlike Behemoth, Leviathan appears to be an ocean dwelling creature that God made to "play in the sea." (Psalm 104:24-26, Job 41:31). Isaiah 27:1 calls Leviathan "the dragon that is in the sea." The Bible states, "He maketh a path to shine after him," (Job 41:32) and I can tell you from experience this may be a reference to the bioluminescent path given off by microscopic marine life at night when animals or people move through the water. I have seen this many times in warm tropical waters, it is a sight to behold.

Leviathan is used five times in our King James Bible; twice in Job, twice in Psalms and once in Isaiah. From what I can read in the Bible, Leviathan was very unique, possibly a one-of-a-kind fire breathing, monster of a beast that was impervious to the weapons of that day like spears or arrows (Job 41:28-29). The Bible suggests Leviathan was covered with scales (Job 41:15).

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2.../mosasaur2.jpg
Artist's rendering of a Mosasaur

Some Creationists and dinosaur experts have suggested that a Mosasaur or Kronosaur would fit this description. Still others have suggested a whale, which perhaps appeared to people of Bible times to blow "hot steam" out of its blowhole. But whales have no scales, and I think any of those above (including the marine dinosaurs) could have been killed by men with harpoons and ships. According to recent findings, Kronosaurus and Mosasaurs were only 30-60 feet long, while modern whales top out at about 100 feet, and men have taken those for centuries with harpoons and small wooden vessels.

A few more thoughts...
I do not see a long line of Leviathans, like we see with dinosaurs, but only one, and the Bible states clearly: "Upon earth THERE IS NOT HIS LIKE, who is made without fear." (Job 41:33) I suppose it is possible there were more of them before this passage was written, but it appears there was only one at the time of Job. The Bible portrays Leviathan as a frightening creature, but there is no mention of it killing anyone or attacking people in this passage. Although it appears to be difficult for men to kill Leviathan, the creature is not immortal; God Himself kills Leviathan and gives the meat to people in the wilderness. "Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, and gavest him to be meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness." (Psalm 74:14) The term "heads" (plural) here is very interesting. Did the Leviathan have more then one head? Was this the same fire-breathing creature mentioned in Job 41 or a reference to something else perhaps in Revelation... I don't know, but it's called Leviathan and it appears to have a physical body that was used for meat.

Legends abound...
There have been various legends handed down about a creature called "Leviathan" in different cultures. For example, according to the ancient Jewish midrash, the Leviathan was created on the fifth day (Yalkut, Gen. 12). Originally God produced a male and a female leviathan, but to keep them from multiplying and destroying the world, He slew the female, reserving her flesh for the banquet that will be given to the righteous on the advent of the Messiah. In a legend recorded in a Midrash called Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer it is stated that the whale which swallowed Jonah narrowly avoided being eaten by the Leviathan, which generally eats one whale each day. Of course, we can't give any of these legends the same authority as scripture.

Other interpretations...
To be fair; there are other views and interpretations on this. I won't give much credit to those who consider Leviathan to be a simple crocodile (which can be easily taken by men with spears or darts), but some very good authors consider at least some of the references to Leviathan to be Satan or a demonic monster associated with Satan, and that is certainly possible (Isaiah 27:1-3). As we know, Satan is called a dragon many times throughout chapters 12 and 13 in Revelation. Brother Ruckman makes some very good points on this dragon in his commentaries. Also, some writers suggest that Psalm 74 describes God’s record of salvation for his people, and verses 13 and 14 refer symbolically to his deliverance of Israel from Egypt. They point out that here the term "tannin" [Heb., than‧ni‧nim′, plural of tan‧nin′] is used as a parallel expression to “Leviathan,” and the crushing of the heads of Leviathan may well refer to the crushing defeat administered to Pharaoh and his army at the time of the Exodus.

Still, in my opinion, it seems that Job 41 is carefully describing some type of specific, unusual PHYSICAL creature in this passage, not just a spiritual one. Of course, all of this will be subject to debate and friendly discussion. Frightening dinosaur or fire-breathing monster, Leviathan is very interesting, and it must have been an awesome sight!

Well, I believe Leviathan breathed fire simply because the Bible says so. This is also backed up by many reports of "fire-breathing dragons" reported by many various civilizations over the centuries. Just because people think it fantastic doesn't mean it isn't so.

Here is petroglyph of a fire breathing dragon:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/Winman/puff.jpg

Here is the caption that came with this photo:

On the right, one of the curious "dinosaur" petroglyphs near Middle Mesa at the Wypatki National Park, photographed by Chris Maier after a guided two day hike to the site. This particular petroglyph is called "Puff the Magic Dragon", and appears to be a depiction of a fire breathing dinosaur. It is not possible to date petroglyphs because the rocks from which they are made contain no organic materials.

"The ages of the petroglyphs on this panel and the ones we would later see are unknown. They are believed to be at least several hundred years old, but they may be as old as a thousand years or more."


There is no way to positively date this petroglyph, but it is thought to be at a minimum several hundred years old, well before dinosaurs were discovered.

It is also possible that these creatures spit a very caustic chemical. The venom of the spitting cobra is known to burn the skin. Very many creatures such as jellyfish have the ability to burn the skin. So perhaps the fire breathing dragons spit a very caustic venom that could burn a person to death. When you consider the numerous creatures that already have these abilities, it is really not so fantastic whatsoever.

The electic eel is known to produce an electric shock strong enough to stun a horse, so why is breathing fire so unusual? :)

There are also countless stories of huge sea monsters. Here is a report made by the captain of the German U-Boat U-28 in WWI

"On July 30, 1915, our U-28 torpedoed the British steamer Iberian, which was carrying a rich cargo across the North Atlantic. The steamer sank so swiftly that its bow stuck up almost vertically into the air. Moments later the hull of the Iberian disappeared. The wreckage remained beneath the water for approximately twenty-five seconds, at a depth that was clearly impossible to assess, when suddenly there was a violent explosion, which shot pieces of debris - among them a gigantic aquatic animal - out of the water to a height of approximately 80-feet.

"At that moment I had with me in the conning tower six of my officers of the watch, including the chief engineer, the navigator, and the helmsman. Simultaneously we all drew one another's attention to this wonder of the seas, which was writhing and struggling among the debris. We were unable to identify the creature, but all of us agreed that it resembled an aquatic crocodile, which was about 60-feet long, with four limbs resembling large webbed feet, a long, pointed tail and a head which also tapered to a point. Unfortunately we were not able to take a photograph, for the animal sank out of sight after ten or fifteen seconds."


This is a fascinating report because it was made by a military officer at a time of war, it would be hard to believe someone in this capacity would make up such an outrageous tale.

National Geographic reported the discovery of a sea monster dubbed the "T-Rex of the Ocean" a few years back. It was said to have teeth the size of cucumbers.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...-monsters.html

Great comments, thanks for that information! :thumb:

Well, I'm going to do some research on this topic, but for the knowledge I have at the moment, the Earth is roughly around 6,000 years old. So, I don't believe dinosaurs walking the Earth millions of years ago (according to science) is possible. The Bible is clear that Adam, the first man, lived only 6000 years ago. Adam was created on the sixth day of God's Creation Week, so the Earth must be only 6000 years old too. If there were dinosaurs, they are not millions of years old as science would have us believe.

(To elaborate some on my reasoning) Say for example in our times today. We have animals that are instinct, and some that will most likely become extinct. If the Earth were to last generations to come, these fossils of animals that have become extinct in our time, may appear to be somewhat of "dinosaurs" in the later generations of people. As I am sure that animals in the past appear to us. I am not sold on the whole carbon dating idea as a whole. It can be useful, but I don't believe it to be completely accurate. To my knowledge and understanding, the scientific idea of dinosaurs walking the Earth millions of years ago is a misguided fabrication. I would better believe the theory of strange animals unknown to us being wiped out by the flood of Noah's day.

Just to make myself clear, I am not saying dinosaurs did not exist, just that they could not have existed millions of years ago.

Thanks for your comments, brother. I can certainly respect your views, despite the arguments from the school of uniformitarianism and the old-earth geologists, there is actually plenty of real evidence for a young earth. More on that here:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...y-age-of-earth

As I stated in my opening post on this thread, those T-Rex blood cells and soft tissues don't look 70 million years old to me! :)

Yes, and I want to make it clear that I am definitely a young Earth creationist. I also believe the Earth to be only around 6,000 years old.

I also agree that well preserved dinosaurs that have been found in the last few years are tremendous evidence that dinosaurs lived very recently. I believe the countless stories of dragons that are common to many various civilizations over the centuries proves that man lived with dinosaurs.

Here are beautiful dinosaurs from the Mesopotamian Cylinder Seal that are dated approx. 3300 B.C.. The detail is stunning.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4.../dinosaurs.jpg

On the right is an artist's conception of the Apatasaurus, once called the Brontosaurus. The only difference is the head, but only one single fossil head for the Apatasaurus has ever been found, future discoveries may show this ancient artwork to be correct.

Here is some beautiful artwork showing three men going out to battle a dinosaur.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...alestrina1.jpg

This is called the Nile Mosiac of Palestrina. It is believed to be the work of Demetrius the Topographer, an artist from Alexandria. The work shows everyday life along the Nile. Skeptics have called this a distorted crocodile, which is ridiculous, because perfectly normal crocodiles appear in the artwork.

Here is a detailed article on this art with much better photos.

http://s8int.com/phile/dinolit56.html

Evolutionists try very hard to discredit art like this, but the overwhelming evidence is that man lived side-by-side with dinosaurs.

I also personally believe that Genesis 6:4 is not merely speaking of men, but speaking of all life on the Earth generally.

Gen 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Now, this verse may be talking about men only, but I believe it is talking about all life. Everything was huge in those days, gigantic dragonflies have been found, crocodiles nearly 50 feet long...

Not sure if this is real, but it's at least worth a laugh.

http://www.burlingtonnews.net/Pteradactyl3.jpg

Peace and Love,
Stephen

LOL, Pterosaur meets the Civil War... unfortunately I think that one is hoax, but you're right, it's pretty funny! Come on we all know there is no such thing as a living fossil... (OOPS apologies to all the evolutionists, please ignore the link below)...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...oelacanth.html

Just out of curiosity, I researched the Hebrew calendar, which is now on year 5700+. It is said to have a start date, 1 year before creation??. And every 231 years they loose 1 day, as compared to our calendar.

There are a few other days error, I don't remember exactly what they were. But considering all, about a 6000 year Earth age; is also evidenced by the Hebrew Calendar. :)

Probably because nobody called the dumb thing a coelacanth until some idiot found the skeleton of one and deemed it to be an ancient fish that lived millions of years ago. What a joke.

:pound::pound::pound:

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2...lodon_jaws.jpg

I have often wondered why the Megalodon Shark would have went extinct (if it is).
Some theories suggest that climate change was to blame or maybe competition for food, but I'm really not sure how the whole "ice age" concept fits in with the Biblical creation model, and it seems to me that the prey items of this 60 foot long beast are still around today (whales). Perhaps the flood of Noah's day created massive changes in ocean temperatures and salinity, which did not impact the whales but killed other fish like the mighty Megalodon. Food for thought...

I find giants to be very interesting, and there is much evidence that true giants lived in the past. There are many stories of finding human skeletons anywhere from 9 feet tall to an unbelieveable 25 feet tall!

Now it is true there have been hoaxes, but their have been documented cases by educated and learned scholars.

There are many giants shown in ancient art such as these:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...an/giants2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...man/giants.jpg

The Bible clearly states that there were giants in the days of Noah. And the Bible mentions giants after Noah's time as well. So I do not think it unusual for ancient art to show giant men.

I'm no scientist, but I would have to agree that it makes more sense that the flood would have created some desalinization of the Earths waters. I mean think about it. It rained for 40 days and 40 nights! Thats a massive amount of non-salinated water being dumped into the Earths oceans. I'm no expert, but I definately think that is a very plausible theory.

Not only that but after the flood the waters would have been more salinated than before. The salt that is in the seas comes from the land, and water on-top of entire earth would certainly have brought more salt into the waters.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Nothing says that the oceans, if the earth even had oceans, were salty before the flood. Look at the earth as it is today: there's MAYBE 15% habitable land. 70% oceans, ginormous mountain ranges, expansive deserts, tundra, permafrost...do you think God created the earth the way it is now to be inhabited? (Is. 45:18)

I don't think the pre-flood earth was anything like it is today; for one thing, there is no way it could rain enough rain to cover Mt. Everest: there's no place for that water to go if the oceans already existed!

Ok, that's a little off-topic; if you want a good, plausible explanation, check out Dr. Hovind's seminar series and check out the tape called "The Hovind Theory."

The Earth absolutely changed after Noah's flood, you can see lifespans decrease rapidly after that.

So the environment changed drastically, and lifespan decreased rapidly after the flood.

And animal size probably decreased as well. Reptiles will generally keep growing as long as they live, so perhaps the early dinosaurs lived very long lifespans and this accounts for their giant size.

I do believe there were dinos after the flood as evidenced by the countless legends of dragons from many civilizations over the centuries. Some ancient art shows dinos that were not quite as large as we know today, perhaps because their lifespans were also shortened after the flood.

But the flood is not the only major global cataclysm. The Bible says the Earth was divided in the days of Peleg.

Gen 10:25 And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.

Some believe that the Earth was undergoing violent change for hundreds of years after the flood. When the continents divided in Peleg's time there would have been tremendous earthquakes, volcanoes, and perhaps an ice age. There are some references to this in the book of Job.

Job 9:5 Which removeth the mountains, and they know not: which overturneth them in his anger.
Job 9:6 Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.

Job 28:9 He putteth forth his hand upon the rock; he overturneth the mountains by the roots.

Job 12:15 Behold, he withholdeth the waters, and they dry up: also he sendeth them out, and they overturn the earth.

Job 38:29 Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?
Job 38:30 The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.

These are just some of the many verses in Job that may indicate the world was undergoing violent changes in his day.

As far as Mt. Everest being covered by water, the Bible is clear that all the mountains were covered in Noah's flood. But that doesn't mean Mt. Everest was covered, it may not have existed until the Earth was divided in Peleg's day. The continents dividing and shifting caused huge mountain ranges to be pushed up.

Like I said, I'm no scientist, but to say there is "no way" it could rain enough rain to cover Mt. Everest is dangerously underestimating what God can do. I dont think any of us could possibly fathom the power of God. Nor would I want to place myself into a position to assume such.