Mankind and dinosaur side by side ? ?

H-J Zillmer
O dear o dear. Not a good start to the link collection. The english translation is appalling, but it at least saves one from the excruciating logic of the original. Brad, however, will feel right at home ...Makes no archeologist or paleontologist actually thoughts on this, that to himself layer doesn't ground her under meter depths and rock must a little badly be at this theory?All in all it is just a rehash of the useless Paluxy River "evidence."Richard Paley
I hadn't come across him before. Very very poor science and, sadder still, very poor biblical scholarship. His article on Behemoths was quite shockingly bad. But I do love the way he brings in the chupacabra (a velociraptor wouldn't you know it?), Nessie and the Mokele-Mbembe as evidence! Read what he has to say about dinosaurs and the Tower of Babel:Scholars theorize that some of these descendents of Noah's ark were used to aid Noah's progeny in building the Tower of Babel. After that fiasco, the Lord felt that man was clearly not worthy of associating with His most powerful creation anymore and ever since dinosaurs have been hidden from us.This is nothing more than a simplistic fantasy with no biblical support whatever.However, TC should visit this site - it includes a "close down Landover Baptist" page that would be an eye-opener for him.The Canadian site is just another rehash of the Paluxy River stuff.Sorry Dan, a very disappointing collection of links. Rather than posting just the links, why not take some of the points that are made therein and tell us why you find them convincing. That way we can engage in some discussion rather than just browsing your collection of links.Oh but you did post one cool link - your video for "Things of the world" is really quite cool and the tune is damned catchy. My son is still singing it! Nice one.

​

[This message has been edited by Mister Pamboli, 04-06-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by techristian:
Mister Pamboli How old is your son?

---

15 - very into video at the moment. I have to confess I thought it was quite fun, too![b] [QUOTE]Anyways I heard about the man with dinosaur tracks years ago. I probably didn't find you the best link.[/b][/QUOTE]You know, one thing I would like to find, is an excavation report for these tracks. The researches must be written up technically somewhere?

quote:

---

Originally posted by techristian:
As to a spear in a dinosaur , try to catch one, on foot, running 30-70 miles per hour.

---

You think brontosaurus or ultrasaurus ran 30-70 miles an hour!? Now that would have been something to see!
[b] [QUOTE]Now I have a few questions for you. Where are your transitional species ?[/b][/QUOTE]I did a quick search for Lerista lizards - beautiful Australian reptiles with a wide range of limb reduction - and I came across this paper which is fascinating. http://www.bio.usyd.edu.au/Shinelab/rickspages/reprints/188.pdfThese lizards rock! http://www.kingsnake.com/oz/lizards/skinks/lxanthura.htm
http://www.kingsnake.com/oz/lizards/skinks/ldeserto.htm
http://www.kingsnake.com/oz/lizards/skinks/lfragilis.html[b] [QUOTE]Why are there still certain life forms unchanged when compared to fossils "millions of years old" ?[/b][/QUOTE]Why not? If they are well adapted to an environment which is still more or less as it was, there would be little or no selective pressure.[b] [QUOTE]When a new SPECIES is supposedly evolved, it must only mate within the species. WHO DOES THE FIRST ONE OF A SPECIES MATE WITH ?[/b][/QUOTE]I tried this one out on my Biology teacher - I guess as a teenager I was obsessed with mating!Anyway, as I am pressed for time, here's a quick answer for one form of speciation, allopatric:A species develops gradually because it is isolated from other populations. The changes in each generation will not be enough to prevent successful mating, but the cumulative effect of the changes is eventually such that they cannot mate with the ancestor species or other species which may have evolved from it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:
Now, now, let's not get into gender stereotyping, please.

​

Some of the most scheming and political people I have ever known have been men, and that kind of activity definitely requires more than a little attention to personalities and motivations.

---

Now, now, let's not get into gender stereotyping, please.
Some of the best knitters I have ever known have been men, including my father (who knitted me a wonderful Guernsey when I was at university), and, of course, Kaffe Fassett.

quote:

---

Originally posted by edge:
Actually, Terry just banned three more people including myself earlier today. It was really pretty comical. He had posted, "No one will say that Creation science is without scientific foundation either."

​

There were just too many of us that couldn't resist... It made an otherwise bad day quite bearable.

---

My doppelposter Senyor Llagosta lasted only three days and is absolutely baffled at being described as someone incapable of civil conversation. All he said was that those who respect the integrity of science should perhaps best describe creation "science" as "bad science."He got into the issue, because Terry did not seem to object to someone describing cosmology as only "science" in quotes and really speculation and philosophy.Terry seems determined to stifle any criticism of creation "science" under the guise of maintaining civility.The guy may well be intelligent, charming and committed to free and open debate (!), but sometimes he seems to want to be an avuncular parabolist, whose stories gently tease scientists into recognising their own failings; at other times he reminds me of those ineffectual teachers we all had whose need to maintain discipline was in inverse proportion to their ability to command respect.Either way, I certainly won't miss his forum!