Thread: Dinosaurs
View Single Post
  #20  
Old 12-31-2008, 12:07 PM
Winman Winman is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 464
Default

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.

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.

Last edited by Winman; 12-31-2008 at 12:22 PM.