Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did dinosaurs and man coexist?
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 16 of 60 (29607)
01-19-2003 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by edge
01-19-2003 11:30 AM


Dear Edge,
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by peter borger:
I don't know. I wasn't there.
Best wishes,
Peter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edge: LOL! I guess you don't believe in the concept of evidence and its usefulness. My guess is that there is a boatload of defense attorneys who want your number, Peter!
PB: My guess is that there are a boatload of innocent people in the deathrow based on socalled 'evidence'.
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by edge, posted 01-19-2003 11:30 AM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by mark24, posted 01-20-2003 7:09 PM peter borger has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 17 of 60 (29700)
01-20-2003 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by peter borger
01-19-2003 8:17 PM


But that would be a guess....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by peter borger, posted 01-19-2003 8:17 PM peter borger has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 18 of 60 (30538)
01-29-2003 6:04 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by peter borger
01-17-2003 7:44 AM


Well you failed.
The question to most readers conveyed the question::
'Were man and dinosuars alive at the same time?'
Prooving, rather, that information is context specific
and created within the receiver rather than encoded by
the sender.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by peter borger, posted 01-17-2003 7:44 AM peter borger has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 19 of 60 (30539)
01-29-2003 6:08 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by peter borger
01-17-2003 9:46 PM


Then you have nothing useful to add to this topic,
which tends to make me feel you WERE just being
obtuse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by peter borger, posted 01-17-2003 9:46 PM peter borger has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 20 of 60 (30540)
01-29-2003 6:16 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by iconoclast2440
01-17-2003 6:15 AM


Based upon reported observations I would have to say that
man and dinosaurs did not share the same habitats.
In the fossil record there are no human artifacts or remains
in the same levels as dinosaur remains.
There are no dinosaurs depicted in cave paintings attributed to
early humans.
No dinosaur bones were used in early human weaponry or
adornments. Given the size and nature of some dino. teeth
one would expect that they might be used as spear tips. No
such objects have been found in early human settlements.
There may have been some straggling dino. relatives which lead to
dragon legends, but this might equally have stemmed from
large modern reptiles that are now extinct due to human hunting.
Since it seems unlikely that man and dinos. shared any habitats
one must ask are dino remains found in areas deep below those
where early human remains are found? I believe that the
answer to this question is yes (but please feel free to show
otherwise).
If dino. remains and early human remains are found in different
layers of the same general locations, then it seems certain that
they did not co-exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by iconoclast2440, posted 01-17-2003 6:15 AM iconoclast2440 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by iconoclast2440, posted 01-29-2003 1:30 PM Peter has replied

  
iconoclast2440
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 60 (30575)
01-29-2003 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Peter
01-29-2003 6:16 AM


here is another stance i do not understand: the assumption that mythology of Gods or Titans are based on some form of reality that was observable.
Take for instance the eight headed dragon Orochi. Is there an animal observable in nature that fits its discription in ANYWAY? Hell no. Assuming Orochi was some how based on large lizards native to Japan seems ludicrous to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Peter, posted 01-29-2003 6:16 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Peter, posted 01-30-2003 2:21 AM iconoclast2440 has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 22 of 60 (30645)
01-30-2003 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by iconoclast2440
01-29-2003 1:30 PM


Not gods or titans or hydra etc., but dragon legends
are more or less global, and the descriptions are fairly
consistent with some type of large lizard (maybe they be
just big crocs or something).
I mentioned it here only to cover the issue since it bears
relevence to the question of dino & human co-existance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by iconoclast2440, posted 01-29-2003 1:30 PM iconoclast2440 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by John, posted 01-30-2003 9:48 AM Peter has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 60 (30696)
01-30-2003 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Peter
01-30-2003 2:21 AM


quote:
Not gods or titans or hydra etc., but dragon legends
are more or less global, and the descriptions are fairly
consistent with some type of large lizard

Chinese dragons strike me as being more based upon wisps of smoke. If you consider the prominence of incense in the culture it starts to make sense. Such a characterization also meshes pretty well with the themes of eastern religion, such as the Tao and with ideas such as chi.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Peter, posted 01-30-2003 2:21 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Chavalon, posted 01-30-2003 2:42 PM John has replied
 Message 27 by Peter, posted 02-12-2003 3:03 AM John has not replied

  
Chavalon
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 60 (30745)
01-30-2003 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by John
01-30-2003 9:48 AM


Freshwater crocs/alligators (?) which hibernate in partially frozen pools are known as ice dragons in China.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by John, posted 01-30-2003 9:48 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by John, posted 01-30-2003 6:54 PM Chavalon has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 60 (30765)
01-30-2003 6:54 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Chavalon
01-30-2003 2:42 PM


Interesting. That's good to know.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Chavalon, posted 01-30-2003 2:42 PM Chavalon has not replied

  
MRC_Hans
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 60 (31208)
02-04-2003 2:25 AM


We have to be a little careful about dragon legends: Most modern depictions of dragons are rather dinosaur-like, but these are post-rationalizations in an age where we know about dinosaurs. Traditonal dragon pictures are much more serpent like. They could, however, be inspired by findings of dinosaur skeletons. Such findings have of course happened all through the ages.
About coexistence of humans and dinosaurs: The basic question is really if you believe in Genesis or Science. From a scientific POV, the idea is absurd. We are not talking about little imprecisions in dating methods here, we are talking about 60 million years.
Hans

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 27 of 60 (32013)
02-12-2003 3:03 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by John
01-30-2003 9:48 AM


The chinese aren't the only culture with dragon legends
however ... St. George springs to mind as a medieval
example ... maybe totally made up .. may be based on some
real event ... unknowable ... but like I say, only brought
up to cover all the bases.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by John, posted 01-30-2003 9:48 AM John has not replied

  
Madelaine
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 60 (32967)
02-23-2003 7:17 PM


Despite what most people have said, there is fossil evidence of men and dinosaurs co-existing. I've seen fossils (like actually SEEN, not just in pictures) of a dino- foot print and a human foot print. This evidence should work for the the strickly science type of people. As far as the whole dragon thing goes, it is a -type- of evidence because how likely is it that during a time with limited international communication, 2 people from vastly different places could describe nearly the same thing? It only makes sense that men and dinosaurs co-existed.

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by John, posted 02-23-2003 7:28 PM Madelaine has not replied
 Message 30 by Admin, posted 02-23-2003 8:46 PM Madelaine has not replied
 Message 42 by The Arachnophile, posted 02-26-2003 5:46 AM Madelaine has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 60 (32968)
02-23-2003 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Madelaine
02-23-2003 7:17 PM


quote:
I've seen fossils (like actually SEEN, not just in pictures) of a dino- foot print and a human foot print.
Where is this evidence? And are you knowledgeable enough to know what you were looking at?
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Madelaine, posted 02-23-2003 7:17 PM Madelaine has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 30 of 60 (32976)
02-23-2003 8:46 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Madelaine
02-23-2003 7:17 PM


Hi Madelaine,
The man/dinosaur footprint claim is an old and extremely doubtful one - you're probably thinking of the Paluxy River prints in Glen Rose, Texas, which even the Creation Research Society and the Institute for Creation Research now disavow. Rather than rehashing this issue, perhaps you could look into this a little more (there's plenty of material on the Internet) and explain why it's deserving of further attention at this time.
------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Madelaine, posted 02-23-2003 7:17 PM Madelaine has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024