Dinosaurs living with humans?

Where there is smoke there is usually a fire. How do people all over the world have stories, legends, drawings, sculptures of things they never saw? And don't try to say that these things are merely lizards. Many drawings or sculptures show these "lizards" towering over people and large animals and sometimes eating them.And yes I do believe to some extent the thousands and thousands of people who have had UFO encounters, but I do not think they are bodies from other planets, rather they are probably some kind of demonic activity (research the nephilim). Many people who have had "UFO close encounters of the third kind" have also been dabbling in the occult or channeling. I don't recall ever hearing of a Christian who was abducted... but that is another topic... we are talking about dinosaurs.
The evidence from glenrose TX and Dinosaur National Monument Utah has never been refuted. Those who attempt to explain these away as being dubious dinosaur tracks or dubious human prints or bones of dubious origin obviously have not seen the evidence themselves.

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

Redwolf touched on the Glenrose site, but I'll try to go into a little more detail.
I recently heard a paleontolgist give a presentation on the site and so I will try to recall as best I can what he presented.
143 clearly defined dinosaur prints have been found uncovered by a nearby river. The dinosaur had a consistent gait of 6 feet. Each left is immediately followed by a right print. Cross sections of the prints reveal disturbed sediments beneath ruling out the possibility that they were carved or faked. No one will deny that these are dinosaur prints. A trail of over 14 or so human prints intersects the dinosaur path. These are unmistakably human size 11-11.5 prints. Many have five clearly defined toes. These also follow a clear left right pattern with a consistent gait. These have been cross-sectioned and also found to be bonafide. To make sure that someone had not somehow faked them, the trail was followed back under the river bed. The overlying material was removed to find six more human prints. Two prints are clearly inside the dinosaur prints. These have also been cross sectioned. There is absolutely no doubt as to the origin of these prints. One evolutionist who saw it became so upset he came back with a hammer and destroyed one of the prints (pictures, casts, etc. still exist). The best evolutionists can come up with (those who have seen the evidence themseleves and still believe in evolution) is that they were made by human-like aliens. (what would aliens be barefoot for?)At Dinosaur National Monument 10 human skeletons (men women and children) have been recovered from the same rock as many dinosaurs 50 feet below the surface. The fossilized bones were discovered in 1970 when miners uncovered them. The overlying rock was so hard that the mine was abandoned in 1930 because it was tearing up their equipment, so there is no chance this was a burial ground. There is no evidence of a fissure or crack that they might have fallen into. This has also never been successfully refuted by evoltionists.

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Have you actually seen the evidence or did you simply read this second hand site which quotes evolutionists who would probably make up anything to explain away this evidence?
Much of this site contains flat out lies, such as "human prints had claws" "3 toes instead of 5" etc. These are simply lies.I have seen very clear good pictures of this well documented site, and listened to a two hour presentation from a man who has worked on the site, Ph.D. Don R. Patton. He has worked on sites all over the world and only became convinced of the validity of the creationist model after examining much evidence.There is no doubt as to the fact that these are human prints.

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

It is not a HOAX. I've read the article on Talk.Origins and it is trying to deny the evidence by simply denying the facts. It says these bones were from an indian burial ground buried 15 feet deep in soft sediments, which is simply a lie.

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

Ph.D. Don R. Patton. He spoke a couple of weeks ago in Longview, TX.

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

After this little debate, I've realized that it all comes down to pitting one person's word against another. Anyone will choose to believe what he wants to regardless of the facts and there will always be some "credible" website or person who will support any predetermined viewpoint. I'm sure you can find plenty of people who say the holocaust never happened and Jesus Christ never lived despite that evidence as well.In fact if a person has enough faith in the flood or in evolution one can see whatever the hell one likes from any print or fossil despite what might actually be there.All I can say is that I've seen many pictures of the evidence and there is no doubt in my mind nor can there be any doubt in any sane person's mind who has seen the same that these are human and dinosaur prints.
There is a truth to every matter and anyone who objectively searches for it will find it.

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

He also spent 4 years studying geology at Peay State University TN and Indiana University/Purdue University, Indianapolis IN
He worked as a geologist in the US, Canada, Australia, England, Mexico, Peru, and Bolivia. He participated in dinosaur excavations in Colorado, Texas, Utah, Wyoming, and Canada. He was a member of the Geological Society of America and was a speaker at their '97 annual convention Salt Lake City. He has lectured at seven universities as well has numerous public debates. He is presently a consulting geologist and partner in Mazada Corp. Dallas Tx, staff geologist at a museum at Glenn Rose, TX, Chairman of Metroplex Insititue of Origiin Science.

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

Hmm these are not the same photos I saw at Patton's presentation. The two arguments are totally contradictory... again its simply one person's word over another.

You claim to have seen these prints at Glenrose yet still refuse to believe they are human. That to me is also amazing.

To believe in evolution requires an act of pure faith. The probabilities of life forming by chance and then evolving are so small that they become impossible even with the allotted billions of years of time. They are refuted by the cambrian explosion, lack of intermediary fossils, and out of place fossils (such as the human footprints at Glenrose). I've done a very little fossil hunting in West Texas and found lots of shells and coral. From what I understand 95 % of all fossils found thus far are marine and only .0125% are vertebrates and these from a hodge podge of different sites. One does not go to the grand canyon and see bacteria turning into mammals as one walks the trail up the wall, nor does one take a core sample of the roughly two miles of sedimentary layers around the earth and find this occuring.I once believed in evolution because thats what I was taught in school. I thought it didn't really make complete sense, but I could imagine it happening. Thats all evolutionists can do, really, is imagine chemicals forming handed amino acid chains and imagine these chains forming protiens and imagine these protiens somehow forming a living replicating cell many times more complex than the space shuttle, and then imagine this cell increasing its complexity making huge leaps and bounds. This is statistically impossible and yet amazingly we exist in all our splendor along with a certain number of phyla of animals (which are becoming extinct much faster than are being created), so this must mean beyond all probability that evolution occured.
Doesn't this strike anyone else as oddly unscientific? I mean I realized I'm outclassed and out-gunned by people who have done a lot more of this debating than I have, but come on!Evolutionists like to dignify their theory by saying it is supported by mountains of evidence all the while refusing to admit that in the end their theory boils down to a simple act of faith.I spose i've opened up a whole new can of worms; however I still would like for someone to go to Glenrose and place their feet in the footprints and come back believing they aren't human footprints.This message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 05-31-2004 12:59 AMThis message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 05-31-2004 01:01 AM

Well I'm trying to get pictures to paste into here but I can't figure out how. Go to Dinosaur and Human Co-existence: FOOTPRINTS for pictures or The Great Dinosaur Mistake 15
Fossil Footprints | Genesis Park Yes, these are all creationist sites, so you will probably not give them a second glance, but the evidence is real. Even evolutionists who have placed their feet in them said they must have been made by some organism with human feet. There is no reason to believe that these are simply washed out dinosaur or duck prints.The simplest conceivable form of single-celled life should have at least 600 different protein molecules. The probability that only one protein molecule could form by chance arrangements of amino acid sequences is less than 1 in 10^450. The visible universe is only 10^28 inches wide.Suppose we packed the universe with a simple bacteria, broke all of the chemical bonds, mixed all the atoms and let them form new bonds. Suppose we did this a billion times a second for 20 billion years under favorable temperature and pressure throughout the visible universe, the odds of one bacterium reemerging are 1 in 10^99,999,999,873.Yes, chemists have taken the basic elements of amino acids, mixed them together, sparked them, trapped the products so that they are not destroyed by the next spark and found a small percentage of amino acids formed. Some how this is proof of evolution. These were 50/50 left and right amino acids. Proteins are made up of long amino acid chains (only right-handed in living organisms). Proteins break down much more easily than they are created. Energy tends to break the bonds down much more often than it creates them. And the entire process could not happen if oxygen were present. It would be like having 20 sets of encyclopedias all with different color letters and mixing all the letters off of all the pages into a big alphabets soup and then randomly placing the letters back into the books and expecting to get your 20 sets of encyclopedia's back all with the right colored letters.Any evolutionist who does not understand the unfathomable improbability of life forming by chance has not understood thier own theory. Talk Origins admits this saying: well we can't explain that and that is not our objective. We don't really need to understand that anyways becuase we know it must of happened this way because no other theory exists (of course they ignore creation because it can't be currently tested or explained by currently observable means, but neither can they test, reproduce, and prove atoms randomly came together to form life).This message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 05-31-2004 02:06 PMThis message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 05-31-2004 02:08 PM

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

Wow is that logic messed up. Crash frog, I really had some respect for you for some good arguments you put up on this site , but this one is just dumb.The odds that the sperm containing half of MY specific genetic material are 1 in 40 million.The odds that my mother would get pregnant therefore introducing life into the world are far better than that. If the odds of simply getting pregnant were 1 in 40 million then on average couples would have to have sex at least 40 million times before conceiving!We are talking about the odds of life simply forming at all, not the odds of it having blonde hair, blue eyes, and a devastatingly handsome appearance!

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

Sigh... your bias is stifling.The prints have not been debunked (only by critics such as yourself who would die before accepting and admitting the truth).I notice you only select the quote that you like. The very next statement from that site is this:"Another observer said that since they definitely looked like human footprints, they must have been made by an animal now extinct which had man-like feet. These scientists could not acknowledge human footprints with dinosaur prints because of their premise that dinosaurs and humans did not live together: remember, they claim that dinosaurs died out 70 million years ago."There are several sets of tracks made by different organisms with manlike-feet (I think any objective person may as well say humans or humanoids).Some prints are size 11.5, and yes in this site you will find a 20" long print with clearly defined toes (5). The fact that it is 20" long does not make it somehow vanish (except from the thoughts of the close-minded).
If you look at the wide variation in dogs we have today, we have chihuauas and great danes. A full grown great dane is what? 20 times the size of a chihuaua. Is there any reason to assume that this wide range of sizes permitted by dog genes does not also exist in humans? (this does not even take into account the nephilim).
but anyways...As for the third site... I actually only read enough to know what it was generally about. Sorry if it is incorrect.Well, If I were quoting this poor misguided evolutionist I wouldn't want to embarrass him by putting his name with it especially since the site is more of a public friendly way to get the word out about this and not a thesis. Who knows? Maybe he didn't give them permission to state his name. Would you as an evolutionist want to be quoted saying something that might be used against your own credibility in the evolutionist world?Anyways... I think enough's been said on this credibility issue now... people will believe what they want to regardless of whats been said here.

This is all very off topic, but I will post once more on this and then I am through.
I understand what crashfrog was trying to say: The odds that I am the way I am and have the specific genetic material that I do are 1 in 40 million. While there are possible 40 million different me's, the odds of one of those me's coming into existence are pretty good while the odds of that me being me is slim.My argument however was about life forming at all, not what kind of life might form.
Crashfrog's argument is in no way is comparable to the odds of life simply forming in the wild primordial soup.Come now atheists! You people by sheer awesome power of your own logic have deduced that there is no God and that you evoloved from a puddle, yet you cannot see the fallacy in this argument? I'm seriously starting to lose respect for you powers of thought here.

---

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

Thanks for the referral to your post. I was not aware that any organic materials other than amino acids had been formed by Miller's experiment. As to the rest... RNA lipids and amines forming on the side walk? is that really true?I will investigate this. Can you point me to any good websites about these experiments?