*Dinosaurs And Jesus Walked The Planet At Same Time: Pre-Flood*

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But I want to bring up this *Classic CWN* argument.
2. Its one of my fav's!
3. I just love arguing this stuff.
4. I say Dino's and Humans walked together on Earth at the same time.
5. And of course I have proof.
6. Which I will post from, time to time.
7. Also Noah is a *Real Person*.
8. And had several ships and the one main one, yeah, there's proof for that too.
9. Anyway, what do you Neoliberals think?
10 Are you for or against *Humans Walking With Dino's*?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Hagbard Celine]

I'm for it. There is also a secret society of wizards and Harry Potter is their leader.

[darin]

Jesus was post-flood. ;)

[retiredman]

so...you are saying that Noah who is mentioned in the book of Genesis - part of the hebrew Pentatuch - i.e. The Law of Moses, which is referred to in the New testament by Jesus himself.... somehow happened contemporaneously with Jesus?

[mrg666]

the bible is worse than wikipedia for accuracy well over 19 centuries for it to become distorted

[Abbey Marie]

the bible is worse than wikipedia for accuracy well over 19 centuries for it to become distorted

Can you tell me, is Christianity in Europe as out-of-favor as it appears from the outside? Is church-going now relegated to no more than a quaint old fashioned hobby?

[mrg666]

Can you tell me, is Chritistianity in Europe as out-of-favor as it appears from the outside? Is church-going now relegated to no more than a quaint old fashioned hobby?

as a matter of fact it is .
a recent study told us that in the next 10 years the largest practiced faith (in europe , the vatican is in italy ) will be muslim

[darin]

the bible is worse than wikipedia for accuracy well over 19 centuries for it to become distorted

That's interesting. Can you elaborate on these 'distortions'?

[hjmick]

as a matter of fact it is .
a recent study told us that in the next 10 years the largest practiced faith (in europe , the vatican is in italy ) will be muslim

Which tells us that the population will probably be primarily Muslim. Not since the Arab invasion of Spain has the Muslim/Islamic influence been felt so strongly in Europe.

mrg, are you prepared to accept Allah and live under Sharia rule?

[Abbey Marie]

as a matter of fact it is .
a recent study told us that in the next 10 years the largest practiced faith (in europe , the vatican is in italy ) will be muslim

Thanks for the reply. It's kind of ironic, isn't it, in a place where so many have died for their faith over the centuries?

I would guess that the largest practiced "faith" in Europe will be secular humanism.

[-Cp]

Sorry bout that,

1. But I want to bring up this *Classic CWN* argument.
2. Its one of my fav's!
3. I just love arguing this stuff.
4. I say Dino's and Humans walked together on Earth at the same time.
5. And of course I have proof.
6. Which I will post from, time to time.
7. Also Noah is a *Real Person*.
8. And had several ships and the one main one, yeah, there's proof for that too.
9. Anyway, what do you Neoliberals think?
10 Are you for or against *Humans Walking With Dino's*?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


Sorry about that,

1. You don't have "proof".
2. You may have "Evidence" but not proof.
3. Jesus was a few thousand years after Noah.
4. You're right, Mankind did live at the same time as Dino's (lots of evidence for that).
5. Your numerical style of posting is still retarded.

Regards,
SirtiredofnumericalpostingofWA

[Abbey Marie]

Maybe I'm off my game today, but where did CWN say that Jesus and dinosaurs were contemporaneous?

Never mind. It's in the title of the post.

[mrg666]

Which tells us that the population will probably be primarily Muslim. Not since the Arab invasion of Spain has the Muslim/Islamic influence been felt so strongly in Europe.

mrg, are you prepared to accept Allah and live under Sharia rule?

with a double barrel in my hands
:laugh2:

[Hagbard Celine]

Sorry bout that,

1. But I want to bring up this *Classic CWN* argument.
2. Its one of my fav's!
3. I just love arguing this stuff.
4. I say Dino's and Humans walked together on Earth at the same time.
5. And of course I have proof.
6. Which I will post from, time to time.
7. Also Noah is a *Real Person*.
8. And had several ships and the one main one, yeah, there's proof for that too.
9. Anyway, what do you Neoliberals think?
10 Are you for or against *Humans Walking With Dino's*?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
Most of what you've posted here is supremely inaccurate.
First, dinosaurs pre-date homo sapiens by approximately 65 MILLION years. The notion that humans and dinosaurs ever co-habited this planet is preposterous.
Second, the person we know as "Noah," "Gilgamesh," "Xisuthrus," "Yima," etc., probably is based on a real person who rode-out a flood with a few animals at some point in history.

[-Cp]

Most of what you've posted here is supremely inaccurate.
First, dinosaurs pre-date homo sapiens by approximately 65 MILLION years. The notion that humans and dinosaurs ever co-habited this planet is preposterous.
Second, the person we know as "Noah," "Gilgamesh," "Xisuthrus," "Yima," etc., probably is based on a real person who rode-out a flood with a few animals at some point in history.

Can you say that Science knows "factually" that Dino's date back that long?

Do you know there's more evidence pointing to a young earth than an old one?

Here's a bit for you to chew on:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-radiometric-dating-prove

[darin]

dude...-Cp....HB won't care about any of that. Instead of debating what he reads there, he'll bitch about the source.

[Hagbard Celine]

Can you say that Science knows "factually" that Dino's date back that long?

Do you know there's more evidence pointing to a young earth than an old one?

Here's a bit for you to chew on:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-radiometric-dating-prove

For future reference, "science" doesn't "know" anything. It isn't an entity, a group of people or a god. It IS knowledge. That what the word "science" means.
With that out of the way, yes. Using the science of geology, it is clear that zero dinosaur fossils appear in the Earth's crust above the layer of strata which marks approximately 65 million years before the present.

No there isn't. Ken Ham is school teacher with a bachelor's degree in applied science who was excommunicated from his church for accusing another member of witchcraft. Hardly a voice of reason or an authority on radio-carbon dating.

[hjmick]

Can you say that Science knows "factually" that Dino's date back that long?

Do you know there's more evidence pointing to a young earth than an old one?

Here's a bit for you to chew on:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-radiometric-dating-prove

Personally, I prefer this site: http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/index.htm

I believe they even mention AiG on their website somewhere.

This is one of those debates I try not to get involved in. I have never seen a debate on this topic change the mind of either party involved and who am I to question your Faith?

[darin]

For future reference, "science" doesn't "know" anything. It isn't an entity, a group of people or a god. It IS knowledge. That what the word "science" means.
With that out of the way, yes. Using the science of geology, it is clear that zero dinosaur fossils appear in the Earth's crust above the layer of strata which marks approximately 65 million years before the present.

No there isn't. Ken Ham is school teacher with a bachelor's degree in applied science who was excommunicated from his church for accusing another member of witchcraft. Hardly a voice of reason or an authority on radio-carbon dating.

Anything he wrote, wrong?

[Abbey Marie]

Personally, I prefer this site: http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/index.htm

I believe they even mention AiG on their website somewhere.

This is one of those debates I try not to get involved in. I have never seen a debate on this topic change the mind of either party involved and who am I to question your Faith?

I hear you. But you never know when a seed is planted that will bloom later. :)

[-Cp]

For future reference, "science" doesn't "know" anything. It isn't an entity, a group of people or a god. It IS knowledge. That what the word "science" means.
With that out of the way, yes. Using the science of geology, it is clear that zero dinosaur fossils appear in the Earth's crust above the layer of strata which marks approximately 65 million years before the present.

No there isn't. Ken Ham is school teacher with a bachelor's degree in applied science who was excommunicated from his church for accusing another member of witchcraft. Hardly a voice of reason or an authority on radio-carbon dating.

Ken Ham didn't author that article..

[Hagbard Celine]

Ken Ham didn't author that article..

Ok, you're right. Let's try this again: Mike Riddle. A motivational speaker/preacher with a degree in education. Is NOT an authority on radio carbon dating. IS a Christian fundamentalist who believes humans put saddles on Triceratops in the garden of eden.

[darin]

Ok, you're right. Let's try this again: Mike Riddle. A motivational speaker/preacher with a degree in education. Is NOT an authority on radio carbon dating. IS a Christian fundamentalist who believes humans put saddles on Triceratops in the garden of eden.

Is anything he wrote about Carbon dating wrong?

[Hagbard Celine]

Is anything he wrote about Carbon dating wrong?

These guys are the guys responsible for building the creation museum in Kentucky that has displays alleging that humans used dinosaurs to plow their fields and that Adam didn't have a penis. I don't have to read the article to know it's pseudoscience. When you get an email from Nigerian royalty saying that if you send them $1,000 they'll pay you 35 grand in return, you don't have to check their references to know they're full of sh*t.

[darin]

These guys are the guys responsible for building the creation museum in Kentucky that has displays alleging that humans used dinosaurs to plow their fields and that Adam didn't have a penis. I don't have to read the article to know it's pseudoscience. When you get an email from Nigerian royalty saying that if you send them $1,000 they'll pay you 35 grand in return, you don't have to check their references to know they're full of sh*t.

Anything he said about Carbon Dating wrong?

[Hagbard Celine]

Anything he said about Carbon Dating wrong?

Like I said, once a scam artist, always a scam artist. If I want to read fiction, I'll buy a Harry Potter novel.

[-Cp]

Ok, you're right. Let's try this again: Mike Riddle. A motivational speaker/preacher with a degree in education. Is NOT an authority on radio carbon dating. IS a Christian fundamentalist who believes humans put saddles on Triceratops in the garden of eden.

I know you didn't bother reading his expose on it so therefore you're ignorant of the fact of the sources he listed. Are the sources he cites "not qualified" either?

Science teachers in school also hold a degree in education - does that mean we should discount everything they say as well?

Fyi.. Mike holds a degree in mathematics and a graduate degree in education.

How many degree's do you hold?

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,

1. But I want to bring up this *Classic CWN* argument.
2. Its one of my fav's!
3. I just love arguing this stuff.
4. I say Dino's and Humans walked together on Earth at the same time.
5. And of course I have proof.
6. Which I will post from, time to time.
7. Also Noah is a *Real Person*.
8. And had several ships and the one main one, yeah, there's proof for that too.
9. Anyway, what do you Neoliberals think?
10 Are you for or against *Humans Walking With Dino's*?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Can you tell me when man first stood erect?

[-Cp]

Ok, you're right. Let's try this again: Mike Riddle. A motivational speaker/preacher with a degree in education. Is NOT an authority on radio carbon dating. IS a Christian fundamentalist who believes humans put saddles on Triceratops in the garden of eden.

Hmm.. .what about someone who holds the following?

Education
B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry (with condensed matter and nuclear physics papers substituted)
Ph.D. in Spectroscopy (Physical Chemistry)

Radiocarbon in diamonds: enemy of billions of years
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4650/

Here, I'll post it cause I know you're too lazy and stubborn to click on the above link.

Carbon
What do hard sparkling diamonds and dull soft pencil ‘lead’ have in common? They are both forms (allotropes) of carbon. Most carbon atoms are 12 times heavier than hydrogen (12C), about one in 100 is 13 times heavier (13C), and one in a trillion (1012) is 14 times heavier (14C). Of these different types (isotopes) of carbon, 14C is called radiocarbon, because it is radioactive—it breaks down over time.

Radiocarbon dating

Some try to measure age by how much 14C has decayed. Many people think that radiocarbon dating proves billions of years.1 But evolutionists know it can’t, because 14C decays too fast. Its half-life (t½) is only 5,730 years—that is, every 5,730 years, half of it decays away. After two half lives, a quarter is left; after three half lives, only an eighth; after 10 half lives, less than a thousandth is left.2 In fact, a lump of 14C as massive as the earth would have all decayed in less than a million years.3

So if samples were really over a million years old, there would be no radiocarbon left. But is this not what we find, even with very sensitive 14C detectors.4

Diamonds
Diamond is the hardest substance known, so its interior should be very resistant to contamination. Diamond requires very high pressure to form—pressure found naturally on earth only deep below the surface. Thus they probably formed at a depth of 100–200 km. Geologists believe that the ones we find must have been transported supersonically5 to the surface, in extremely violent eruptions through volcanic pipes. Some are found in these pipes, such as kimberlites, while other diamonds were liberated by water erosion and deposited elsewhere (called alluvial diamonds). According to evolutionists, the diamonds formed about 1–3 billion years ago.5

Dating diamonds
Geophysicist Dr John Baumgardner, part of the RATE research group,6 investigated 14C in a number of diamonds.7 There should be no 14C at all if they really were over a billion years old, yet the radiocarbon lab reported that there was over 10 times the detection limit. Thus they had a radiocarbon ‘age’ far less than a million years! Dr Baumgardner repeated this with six more alluvial diamonds from Namibia, and these had even more radiocarbon.

The presence of radiocarbon in these diamonds where there should be none is thus sparkling evidence for a ‘young’ world, as the Bible records.



Objections (technical) and answers
The 14C readings in the diamonds are the result of background radiation in the detector. This shows that the objector doesn’t even understand the method. AMS doesn’t measure radiation but counts atoms. It was the obsolete scintillation method that counted only decaying atoms, so was far less sensitive. In any case, the mean of the 14C/C ratios in Dr Baumgardner’s diamonds was close to 0.12±0.01 pMC, well above that of the lab’s background of purified natural gas (0.08 pMC).
The 14C was produced by U-fission (this was an excuse proposed for 14C in coal, also analysed in Dr Baumgardner’s paper, but not possible for diamonds). But to explain the observed 14C, then the coal would have to contain 99% uranium, so colloquial parlance would term the sample ‘uranium’ rather than ‘coal’.1
The 14C was produced by neutron capture by 14N impurities in the diamonds. But this would generate less than one ten-thousandth of the measured amount even in best case scenarios of normal decay. In any case, if it were significant, then we should observe wide ranges in radiocarbon dates with different nitrogen contents, which would render the method useless. And if atmospheric contamination were responsible, the entire carbon content would have to be exchanged every million years or so. But if this were occurring, we would expect huge variations in radiocarbon dates with porosity and thickness, which would also render the method useless.1 Dr Baumgardner thus first thought that the 14C must have been there right from the beginning. But if nuclear decay were accelerated, say a recent episode of 500 million years worth, it could explain some of the observed amounts. Indeed, his RATE colleagues have shown good evidence for accelerated decay in the past, which would invalidate radiometric dating.
The 14C ‘dates’ for the diamonds of 55,700 years were still much older than the biblical timescale. This misses the point: we are not claiming that this ‘date’ is the actual age; rather, if the earth were just a million years old, let alone 4.6 billion years old, there should be no 14C at all! Another point is that the 55,700 years is based on an assumed 14C level in the atmosphere. Since no one, creationist or evolutionist, thinks there has been an exchange of carbon in the diamond with the atmosphere, using the standard formula for 14C dating to work out the age of a diamond is meaningless. Also, 14C dating assumes that the 14C/C ratio has been constant. But the Flood must have buried huge numbers of carbon-containing living creatures, and some of them likely formed today’s coal, oil, natural gas and some of today’s fossil-containing limestone. Studies of the ancient biosphere indicate that there was several hundred times as much carbon in the past, so the 14C/C ratio would have been several hundred times smaller. This would explain the observed small amounts of 14C found in ‘old’ samples that were likely buried in the Flood.
Reference
Rotta, R.B., Evolutionary explanations for anomalous radiocarbon in coal? Creation Research Society Quarterly 41(2):104–112, September 2004. Return to text.


References and notes
For example, the ‘Rev.’ Barry Lynn, leader of the anti-Christian group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, proclaimed in a nationally televised debate, ‘Carbon dating, that shows the earth is billions of years old!’ (Firing Line, PBS, 19 December 1997). Return to text.
The time t since radioactive decay commenced can be given by N/N0 = e–λt, where N is the number of atoms measured in the present; N0 is the initial number; λ, the decay constant, which is related to the half life t½ by λ = ln2/t½. This presupposes that the system is closed, so that the loss of atoms is solely by decay, and that the decay rate is constant. See also Sarfati, J., Refuting Compromise, ch. 12, Master Books, Arkansas, USA, 2004. Return to text.
The earth’s mass is 6x1027 g; equivalent to 4.3x1026 moles of 14C. Each mole contains Avogadro’s number (NA = 6.022x1023) of atoms. It takes only 167 halvings to get down to a single atom (log2(4.3x1026 mol x 6.022x1023 mol–1) = log10(2.58x1050) / log102), and 167 half-lives is well under a million years. Return to text.
AMS (accelerator mass spectrometry) counts the atoms themselves, and can detect one 14C in more than 1016 atoms, or measure a 14C/C ratio of <10–16 or 0.01% of the modern ratio (0.01 pMC, percent modern carbon). Return to text.
Otherwise the diamond would anneal into graphite, so-called pencil ‘lead’. See Snelling, A., Diamonds—evidence of explosive geological processes, Creation 16(1):42–45, 1993; cf. Diamond Science, <www.diamondwholesalecorporation.com/DiamondScience.html>, accessed 22 May 2006. Return to text.
Vardiman, L., Snelling, A. and Chaffin, E., Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, Vol. II, ch. 8, Institute for Creation Research, California, USA, 2005. Dr Baumgardner also investigated many coal samples, and they also turned out to have 14C. Return to text.
Baumgardner, J., 14C evidence for a recent global flood and a young earth; in ref. 6, ch. 8. See also his paper Measurable 14C in fossilized organic materials: confirming the young earth creation-flood model, 5th International Conference on Creationism, 2003. Return to text.

[diuretic]

I'd like to see this bloke defend his thesis in a discussion with another scientist who is an expert in this field. Quoting someone's work without it being tested is worthless.

[Missileman]

Can you tell me when man first stood erect?

Heh...that's a no-brainer! Man first stood erect when he first saw woman nekkid! :laugh2:

[darin]

Like I said, once a scam artist, always a scam artist. If I want to read fiction, I'll buy a Harry Potter novel.

Translation - I'll assume what he wrote is bad, or false because I don't like him.

Logical Fallacy.

[Missileman]

Translation - I'll assume what he wrote is bad, or false because I don't like him.

Logical Fallacy.

I assume that Hilary is about to spout a pile of nonsense when she opens her mouth because she's a liberal. I can safely make the same assumptions about creationists because if they could ACTUALLY back up any of their pseudo-scientific crapola with REAL science, it would be accepted by REAL scientists.

[-Cp]

I assume that Hilary is about to spout a pile of nonsense when she opens her mouth because she's a liberal. I can safely make the same assumptions about creationists because if they could ACTUALLY back up any of their pseudo-scientific crapola with REAL science, it would be accepted by REAL scientists.

What defines a "real" scientist?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But here's *Part* of what happened.
2. The Dino's were killed during the flood, Jesus is Gawd and was on Earth before he was born to Mother Mary, Mother of Gawd.
3. The Dino's were here before the flood, and were in areas where man usually wasn't.
4. They had special needs, and their food stayed in certain areas, and people as it were, were in the *Garden of Eden* at the time.
5. Which was protected from Dino's.
6. There were Gawd given protectors, all around, *The Garden of Eden*.
7. Later on after man populated the world, from Eve's womb.
8. You know the story, man was corrupted, and needed to be drowned out.
9. At this time the Dino's were not offered a place on-board *The Ark*, or spoken to by Gawd to follow Noah.
10. Who Noah being a faithful man built *The Ark*, even though it had never rained yet on the face of the Earth, Gawd told Noah that it was going to rain and flood the Earth.
11. Which up till now, it would only make dew on the Earth, and this is how everything got its water.
12. And man drew his water from springs.
13. Also at the time, this is very interesting, there was no mountains, just high hills.
14. When *The Great Flood*, came, and washed everything on the surface to their deaths.
15. At the same time, the mountains were formed.
16. The waters from the deep fractured the land, all over the planet, and all the waters weight pushing down on these fractures created the mountains.
17. Before *The Great Flood*, Oceans were more or less large lakes, smooth as glass, there wasn't even that many rivers.
18. The rivers that were, were formed from springs, not rain.
19. It wasn't till, *The Great Flood* that mountains, rivers as we know them, and rain came into existence.
20. This Earth isn't anywhere as old as *The Scientists* think it is.
21. *The Great CWN* would estimate this Earth is no older than 5~6,000 years old.
22. Some animals and insects survived during the flood by clinging to tree stumps.
23. Most Dinosaurs were washed into the Oceans, unless they got snagged behind a rock or huge tree.
24. As the Oceans were churned up, the Ocean fish who are used to salt water submerged some 300 feet to maintain normal salt levels.
25. While fresh water fish remained on the top, and when the land popped up through the new Ocean levels, the fresh water fish pooled on land and in lakes on the new land masses.
26. While the salt water fish etc. stayed in deep waters where it was salty.
27. There is more much more, this is my first installment.
28. I know you can't wait for my next.:dance:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Missileman]

What defines a "real" scientist?

One who subscribes to scientific method.

[-Cp]

One who subscribes to scientific method.

The PHD's who write many of the Creationist views DO subscribe to Scientific methods...

[darin]

I assume that Hilary is about to spout a pile of nonsense when she opens her mouth because she's a liberal. I can safely make the same assumptions about creationists because if they could ACTUALLY back up any of their pseudo-scientific crapola with REAL science, it would be accepted by REAL scientists.

That's beside the point. Not liking the messenger doesn't make the message invalid.


One who subscribes to scientific method.

Macro evolution doesn't stand up to the scientific method. :)

[PostmodernProphet]

Second, the person we know as "Noah," "Gilgamesh," "Xisuthrus," "Yima," etc., probably is based on a real person who rode-out a flood with a few animals at some point in history.


well, that's certainly what Genesis says....so we're on the same track....

by the way, I have often heard the argument that Gilgamesh predates the Genesis account of Noah and that therefore the Hebrews borrowed the tale.....however, early copies of the Gilgamesh saga have been discovered which do not contain the details that the story shares with Genesis.....details which suddenly appear in copies generated AFTER the Babylonian captivity of Israel....

interestingly then, it appears that the Gilgamesh story, at least the parts which parallel Genesis, is actually a copy of the Noah story.......

[Missileman]

The PHD's who write many of the Creationist views DO subscribe to Scientific methods...

The entire premise of creationism is unscientific, so any creationists who claim that they are following scientific method are lying about one or the other.

[-Cp]

The entire premise of creationism is unscientific, so any creationists who claim that they are following scientific method are lying about one or the other.

If you would actually READ what they write - you'd see what they're doing is NOT saying that the story of Creation is Science, however, they're providing STRONG evidence of how Science backs up the Creation account..

[Missileman]

That's beside the point. Not liking the messenger doesn't make the message invalid.

It's got nothing to do with liking or disliking the messenger. If it's been proven time and again that liberals come up with screwed up ideas, assuming that a liberal is going to propose one makes sense. Same with creationists.




Macro evolution doesn't stand up to the scientific method. :)

According to who?

[Missileman]

If you would actually READ what they write - you'd see what they're doing is NOT saying that the story of Creation is Science, however, they're providing STRONG evidence of how Science backs up the Creation account..

You see, I actually did READ what they write and consider the following:


The best way to learn about history and the age of the earth is to consult the history book of the universe—the Bible. Many scientists and theologians accept a straightforward reading of Scripture and agree that the earth is about 6,000 years old. It is better to use the infallible Word of God for our scientific assumptions than to change His Word in order to compromise with “science” that is based upon man’s fallible assumptions. True science will always support God’s Word.

This is a pile of steaming, unscientific, bullshit.

[-Cp]

You see, I actually did READ what they write and consider the following:



This is a pile of steaming, unscientific, bullshit.

If you don't like the answers - keep downplaying it.. that's what liberals do..

Anywho.. if you don't like how he framed that one, try this one:

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=133881&postcount=29

[PostmodernProphet]

The entire premise of creationism is unscientific, so any creationists who claim that they are following scientific method are lying about one or the other.

I think I understand what you are saying....since Creation cannot be tested by the scientific method, then the premise of creationsim is unscientific.....

then, using that same approach, the spontaneous origin of the universe and, for that matter, the spontaneous origin of life, since they cannot be tested by the scientific method, are both also unscientific.....

[diuretic]

This is a pile of steaming, unscientific, bullshit.

Verrily it is.

[PostmodernProphet]

Many scientists and theologians accept a straightforward reading of Scripture and agree that the earth is about 6,000 years old.

I find that odd, since there is no part of scripture that, through straightforward reading, states the earth is about 6000 years old.....that number comes from the calculations of a mid 19th century theologian who relied on many factors other than scriptures and who messed things up, horribly.....

In light of the fact that the Sumerian civilization was already in existance more than 6000 years ago, it would seem wise that if you expect Christianity to taken seriously, you need to get rid of the more ridiculous claims that have been made in its behalf.....

[Missileman]

If you don't like the answers - keep downplaying it.. that's what liberals do..

Anywho.. if you don't like how he framed that one, try this one:

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=133881&postcount=29

The paragraph I quoted is more than enough reason to summarily dismiss anything he or any of his like-minded, pseudo-scientists have to say.

[PostmodernProphet]

here is something for young earth creationists to consider.....re-read Genesis 1-3....now tell me, using a literal understanding of scripture.....how many years did Adam and Eve spend in the Garden of Eden.....

[PostmodernProphet]

here is another question to ponder
Genesis 3
16 To the woman he said,
"I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
with pain you will give birth to children.

how many children did Eve have before the fall? Is it not obvious that prior to Genesis 3 she had many painless birthings?

You could follow a totally literal understanding of Genesis 1-2 and still state that the earth was 10 billion years old at the time of the events of Genesis 3

[darin]

According to who?


uh...to anyone who knows what the Scientific Method is. :)

[Missileman]

uh...to anyone who knows what the Scientific Method is. :)

Then it should be a breeze for you to post a few links that the majority of scientists think the theory of macro-evolution is unscientific. I eagerly await said links. I tell you what...to save you some time, I'll settle for ONE, credible link that purports the majority of scientists think the theory of macro-evolution is unscientific.

[mrg666]

That's interesting. Can you elaborate on these 'distortions'?

lets say i tell abbey that you fell down the stairs and abbey tells man from maine you fell down etc and hurt yourself , then man from main tells sir evil that you fell down the stairs and there was blood every where all this could happen in a day or two ( you know thats true )
now imagine stories in the bible (no disputing true or false ) have gone on for hundreds and hundreds of years never mind the translations no one will ever tell me there as been no distortion over the centuries. now i know i slightly exagerated the stairs thing but theres the point again

[diuretic]

How can a theory be "unscientific"? Isn't it more accurate to accuse it of being just wrong? I would have thought that the term "scientific" or "un" would have referred to the process of arriving at the theory.

Just a question from your friendly forum pedant. :cheers2:

[PostmodernProphet]

now imagine stories in the bible (no disputing true or false ) have gone on for hundreds and hundreds of years never mind the translations no one will ever tell me there as been no distortion over the centuries

however, when we compare copies that are printed today with copies fom the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example, we find there has been no distortion.....how is that?

[Abbey Marie]

Verrily it is.

Disregarding content or any potentially blasphemous overtones, that was funny. :laugh2:

[-Cp]

The paragraph I quoted is more than enough reason to summarily dismiss anything he or any of his like-minded, pseudo-scientists have to say.

You really must like your self-imposed ignorance, don't you?

If you actually would read the 2nd article, you'd find iit's from an entirely DIFFERENT publication by an unrelated author....

You're the kind of ninny someone could post hundereds of links to and you'd stil keep your head buried in the sand on this issues until 1 you found agreed with your disbelief of God.

You want to talk about Faith? WOW - I have TONS of respect for your HUGE leaps of faith it takes to think this world, how perfectly it's created (distance fromt he sun, its atmosphere which shields us from a violent space, the perfect amount of oxygen to substain life etc etc.) - to think that it all happened by random chance! Now THAT is FAITH brutha! Wow....

[Gaffer]

Sorry bout that,

1. But here's *Part* of what happened.
2. The Dino's were killed during the flood, Jesus is Gawd and was on Earth before he was born to Mother Mary, Mother of Gawd.
3. The Dino's were here before the flood, and were in areas where man usually wasn't.
4. They had special needs, and their food stayed in certain areas, and people as it were, were in the *Garden of Eden* at the time.
5. Which was protected from Dino's.
6. There were Gawd given protectors, all around, *The Garden of Eden*.
7. Later on after man populated the world, from Eve's womb.
8. You know the story, man was corrupted, and needed to be drowned out.
9. At this time the Dino's were not offered a place on-board *The Ark*, or spoken to by Gawd to follow Noah.
10. Who Noah being a faithful man built *The Ark*, even though it had never rained yet on the face of the Earth, Gawd told Noah that it was going to rain and flood the Earth.
11. Which up till now, it would only make dew on the Earth, and this is how everything got its water.
12. And man drew his water from springs.
13. Also at the time, this is very interesting, there was no mountains, just high hills.
14. When *The Great Flood*, came, and washed everything on the surface to their deaths.
15. At the same time, the mountains were formed.
16. The waters from the deep fractured the land, all over the planet, and all the waters weight pushing down on these fractures created the mountains.
17. Before *The Great Flood*, Oceans were more or less large lakes, smooth as glass, there wasn't even that many rivers.
18. The rivers that were, were formed from springs, not rain.
19. It wasn't till, *The Great Flood* that mountains, rivers as we know them, and rain came into existence.
20. This Earth isn't anywhere as old as *The Scientists* think it is.
21. *The Great CWN* would estimate this Earth is no older than 5~6,000 years old.
22. Some animals and insects survived during the flood by clinging to tree stumps.
23. Most Dinosaurs were washed into the Oceans, unless they got snagged behind a rock or huge tree.
24. As the Oceans were churned up, the Ocean fish who are used to salt water submerged some 300 feet to maintain normal salt levels.
25. While fresh water fish remained on the top, and when the land popped up through the new Ocean levels, the fresh water fish pooled on land and in lakes on the new land masses.
26. While the salt water fish etc. stayed in deep waters where it was salty.
27. There is more much more, this is my first installment.
28. I know you can't wait for my next.:dance:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

And your source for all of this is...?
This is almost as good as Lord of the Rings. I'm awaiting the second installment. :laugh2:

[Missileman]

You really must like your self-imposed ignorance, don't you?

If you actually would read the 2nd article, you'd find iit's from an entirely DIFFERENT publication by an unrelated author....

You're the kind of ninny someone could post hundereds of links to and you'd stil keep your head buried in the sand on this issues until 1 you found agreed with your disbelief of God.

You want to talk about Faith? WOW - I have TONS of respect for your HUGE leaps of faith it takes to think this world, how perfectly it's created (distance fromt he sun, its atmosphere which shields us from a violent space, the perfect amount of oxygen to substain life etc etc.) - to think that it all happened by random chance! Now THAT is FAITH brutha! Wow....

And you're too busy bleating to consider that ALL of these creation proponents are coming from exactly that place. It amazes me to this day that an intelligent person could believe that ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, Babylonians, et al, were full of shit theologically, but the ancient Jews weren't.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Well, well,.....some proof of my view on how things came about are in fact proven in a small city here in Texas.
2. If you ever come to these parts of the world, you will find in Glen Rose, Texas, human footprints in the very same layer of sedimate of *The Paluxy River, with Dinosaurs tracks, side by side, within a few feet of each other, even some human footprints within Dino tracks.
3. You can't de~solidify rock and then millions of years later have humans imprinting this very same layer of sedimate.
4. I will provide a link is asked.
5. But anyone can google it themselves and find the information.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Missileman]

Sorry bout that,

1. Well, well,.....some proof of my view on how things came about are in fact proven in a small city here in Texas.
2. If you ever come to these parts of the world, you will find in Glen Rose, Texas, human footprints in the very same layer of sedimate of *The Paluxy River, with Dinosaurs tracks, side by side, within a few feet of each other, even some human footprints within Dino tracks.
3. You can't de~solidify rock and then millions of years later have humans imprinting this very same layer of sedimate.
4. I will provide a link is asked.
5. But anyone can google it themselves and find the information.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html


However, the "man track" claims have not stood up to close scientific scrutiny, and have been abandoned even by most creationists. The supposed human tracks have involved a variety of phenomena, including forms of elongate (metatarsal) dinosaur tracks, erosional features, indistinct markings of uncertain origin, and some doctored and carved specimens (most of the latter on loose blocks of rock).

Have anything else or does your argument hinge on this laughably weak evidence?

[Gaffer]

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html



Have anything else or does your argument hinge on this laughably weak evidence?

I'm also waiting to hear why god hated dinosaurs, since they didn't get an invite to the ark. Seems kinda racists to me.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But a bit of a side note.
2. I happen to know some folks from Glen Rose, when these tracks and footprints were discovered.
3. Even know of some people who knew Bull Adams.
4. Now Bull Adams was one heck of a man.
5. He is unlike anyone you have ever known.
6. He went to University in Baylor, then in the 1930's went to Oxford England as a Rhodes Scholar.

Read this:
http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/creationism_footprints.HTM
"History 1

In 1908 a violent flood ripped through the Paluxy River Valley, near Glen Rose, Texas. The next summer, a local teenager named Ernest "Bull" Adams was wandering in a tributary of the Paluxy called Wheeler Branch, when he came upon a series of large, three-toed footprints in the limestone floor of the creek."






7. Came back to Texas after graduating top of the class, and practiced law in Dallas.
8. Got tired of Dallas Law, and moved back to Glen Rose.
9. He dug a cave hole in the side of a cliff on *The Paluxy River*.
10. Where he lived and his wife soon joined him there.
11. If some one asked him to represent him, he would say, okay I will if he decided the person was innocent.
12. Most the time he was scruffy, and looked more or less a homeless person, but if he had to go to court, he would put on his one suit, which wasn't very nice, and go into court and never lost a case.
13. He was said to be a great artist, and could carve anything out of stone.
14. Where he would make art work for simple chump change, with anyone who would buy them.
15. Everyone respected him, in his little town, which it was at the time.
16. Even thou he lived in a cave.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Gaffer]

Sorry bout that,

1. But a bit of a side note.
2. I happen to know some folks from Glen Rose, when these tracks and footprints were discovered.
3. Even know of some people who knew Bull Adams.
4. Now Bull Adams was one heck of a man.
5. He is unlike anyone you have ever known.
6. He went to University in Baylor, then in the 1930's went to Oxford England as a Rhodes Scholar.

Read this:
http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/creationism_footprints.HTM
"History 1

In 1908 a violent flood ripped through the Paluxy River Valley, near Glen Rose, Texas. The next summer, a local teenager named Ernest "Bull" Adams was wandering in a tributary of the Paluxy called Wheeler Branch, when he came upon a series of large, three-toed footprints in the limestone floor of the creek."






7. Came back to Texas after graduating top of the class, and practiced law in Dallas.
8. Got tired of Dallas Law, and moved back to Glen Rose.
9. He dug a cave hole in the side of a cliff on *The Paluxy River*.
10. Where he lived and his wife soon joined him there.
11. If some one asked him to represent him, he would say, okay I will if he decided the person was innocent.
12. Most the time he was scruffy, and looked more or less a homeless person, but if he had to go to court, he would put on his one suit, which wasn't very nice, and go into court and never lost a case.
13. He was said to be a great artist, and could carve anything out of stone.
14. Where he would make art work for simple chump change, with anyone who would buy them.
15. Everyone respected him, in his little town, which it was at the time.
16. Even thou he lived in a cave.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

And this has what to do with the discussion?

[Missileman]

Read this:
http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/creationism_footprints.HTM


I did, and it appears you really need to. It's one long debunking of any claim that man and dinosaurs walked side by side. Why are you putting forth evidence AGAINST your own argument.

[manu1959]

I did, and it appears you really need to. It's one long debunking of any claim that man and dinosaurs walked side by side. Why are you putting forth evidence AGAINST your own argument.

ever stop to think he may be Br'er Rabbit? and you are on the way to the briar patch?

[Missileman]

ever stop to think he may be Br'er Rabbit? and you are on the way to the briar patch?

I have considered the possibility that CWN is posting things he doesn't really believe. If this is indeed the case, then he and I are on the same side of the argument and any mines deployed will be harmless to me.

[PostmodernProphet]

Then it should be a breeze for you to post a few links that the majority of scientists think the theory of macro-evolution is unscientific. I eagerly await said links. I tell you what...to save you some time, I'll settle for ONE, credible link that purports the majority of scientists think the theory of macro-evolution is unscientific.

Likewise, I would love to see one tiny bit of scientific evidence that PROVES that macro-evolution is true......

[diuretic]

Likewise, I would love to see one tiny bit of scientific evidence that PROVES that macro-evolution is true......

You'd think that if the theory is abroad in the scientific community and doesn't seem to have been flayed by any real scientists that might mean it's probably not doing a bad job right now eh?

I mean, I don't know much about science but I do know the scientific community changes its mind pretty bloody quick about things when someone else comes along and says, "hang on, that's not right, let's have a look at it again....ahhh, that's what they got wrong, take a gander at this then..."

Paradigm shift. It's not just a weird sounding phrase :laugh2:

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,



And this has what to do with the discussion?

1. Well Bull Adams was rumored to carve human footprints in stone.
2. And this somewhat taints the evidence there in *The Paluxy River* for the so called scientists, who support this 65 million year gap between Dino's and humans..
3. To some people.
4. I think there may of been a chance he did carve some footprints in stone and sold them.
5. And I don't think it contaminates the real footprints I have found and seen with my own two eyes, in, *The Paluxy River*.
5.a) The perfect footprint ( I ), *The Great CWN* have seen, is a rather small footprint, about the size of a mans foot size 9, perfect in relation to narrow arch area that has heal a perfect width, with its depth perfectly deeper, and the toes some what worn due the pushing motion as the person walked, also water had washed away the mud between the toes, due to erosion.
6. From what I've seen of those footprints that were purchased and brought away from the *Paluxy River*. they were not very accurate specimens, kinda *Sasquatch* looking in size, and all around to perfect to be a real footprint.
7. I think here's what happened, Bull Adams, knew he had found some real footprints in the river bed, and wanted to stir up interest in them, so he started carving footprints in slabs of stone and selling them.
8. Bull Adams had money, he was at Rhodes Scholar of all things.
9. But he had those footprints nagging at his gut, and seeing he was one of the most intelligent people of the time he had to re~think every thing in his life, so he moved into a cave, as a sign of his humility.
10. He understood the ramifications of these footprints in the same sedimate as the Dino tracks.
11. And knew for a fact that indeed this is a *Young Earth*, and the Bible is in *Fact*, all true.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Immanuel]

with a double barrel in my hands
:laugh2:

Do you think a double barrel will be enough to protect you from all the suicide bombs? Better make it a few AK-47's

Immie

[Gaffer]

Sorry bout that,




1. Well Bull Adams was rumored to carve human footprints in stone.
2. And this somewhat taints the evidence there in *The Paluxy River* for the so called scientists, who support this 65 million year gap between Dino's and humans..
3. To some people.
4. I think there may of been a chance he did carve some footprints in stone and sold them.
5. And I don't think it contaminates the real footprints I have found and seen with my own two eyes, in, *The Paluxy River*.
5.a) The perfect footprint ( I ), *The Great CWN* have seen, is a rather small footprint, about the size of a mans foot size 9, perfect in relation to narrow arch area that has heal a perfect width, with its depth perfectly deeper, and the toes some what worn due the pushing motion as the person walked, also water had washed away the mud between the toes, due to erosion.
6. From what I've seen of those footprints that were purchased and brought away from the *Paluxy River*. they were not very accurate specimens, kinda *Sasquatch* looking in size, and all around to perfect to be a real footprint.
7. I think here's what happened, Bull Adams, knew he had found some real footprints in the river bed, and wanted to stir up interest in them, so he started carving footprints in slabs of stone and selling them.
8. Bull Adams had money, he was at Rhodes Scholar of all things.
9. But he had those footprints nagging at his gut, and seeing he was one of the most intelligent people of the time he had to re~think every thing in his life, so he moved into a cave, as a sign of his humility.
10. He understood the ramifications of these footprints in the same sedimate as the Dino tracks.
11. And knew for a fact that indeed this is a *Young Earth*, and the Bible is in *Fact*, all true.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

It doesn't enter into your mind that maybe mankind is older than presumed. Or maybe he carved the dinosaur tracks and the human tracks himself. The young earth theory is as wrong as a democrat offering to cut taxes.

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,

blah, blah, blah

4. They had special needs, and their food stayed in certain areas, and people as it were, were in the *Garden of Eden* at the time.

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

First off, it's God, not gawd.

Second, since they had special needs, did they ride around in a dinosaur short bus?

Regards,
SirAssofHole

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Why do some folks here want to start trash talk, in perfectly good threads?
2. I find it junior high school mentality in some folks responses.
3. If you don't want to respond with something other than attacks, then don't respond 82~89.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Immanuel]

First off, it's God, not gawd.

Second, since they had special needs, did they ride around in a dinosaur short bus?

Regards,
SirAssofHole

Well, technically, isn't it Yahweh or Jehovah or in the English translation, "I Am"? :laugh2:

Sorry, forgive me, but I just couldn't resist.

Second, yes they did, I saw it on The Flintstones. Isn't that proof enough? :D

Immie

[diuretic]

I did genealogy research. I found out I have an ancestor who was a dinosaur wrangler (only wrangled the herbivores, the weak bastard), so it must be true :laugh2:

[Missileman]

I did genealogy research. I found out I have an ancestor who was a dinosaur wrangler (only wrangled the herbivores, the weak bastard), so it must be true :laugh2:

Amazing! Do you suppose that he had 18-inch feet so he could walk on top of Dino-pies in a snowshoe type manner?

[Said1]

I did genealogy research. I found out I have an ancestor who was a dinosaur wrangler (only wrangled the herbivores, the weak bastard), so it must be true :laugh2:

Sure, pick on the weak vegans. :laugh2:

[diuretic]

Sure, pick on the weak vegans. :laugh2:

Well I was embarrassed, I was hoping for a T Rex wrangler, or at least a Raptor handler but what did I get? Bloody Brontosaurus handler. I know, I know, they were big and they had brains in their arses but really, a minimal amount of glamour. All they had to do was watch their feet and they were fine. But a T Rex, now that would have taken some skill to sort out. I don't know if I'll live it down. I'm just glad for the relative anonymity of the internet. :D

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But there are those real *Human*footprints along side of Dino tracks, in the river bed at Glen Rose, Texas.
2. Footprints, don't get there by accident.
3. Both the Dino's and Humans had to be on that river bed when it was still mud.
4. Case closed. drag out the squirrel~:pee:Evolution/Old Earth Theory

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[retiredman]

http://paleo.cc/paluxy/paluxy.htm

case re-opened. CWN's assinine argument debunked. case closed

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




http://paleo.cc/paluxy/paluxy.htm

case re-opened. CWN's assinine argument debunked. case closed

1. I checked out your website.
2. Seem it brings in more proof of what I'm saying rather than defends your side.
3. Case re~opened and shut again!

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Check out, *Noahs Ark*.
2. You can view it here:

http://www.arkdiscovery.com/noah's_ark.htm

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[retiredman]

Sorry bout that,





1. I checked out your website.
2. Seem it brings in more proof of what I'm saying rather than defends your side.
3. Case re~opened and shut again!

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

if you drink enough koolaid, any argument seems plausible

The supposed human tracks have involved a variety of phenomena, including forms of elongate, metatarsal dinosaur tracks, erosional features, indistinct markings of uncertain origin, and a smaller number of doctored and carved specimens (most of the latter occurring on loose blocks of rock). A few individuals continue to promote the Paluxy "man tracks" or alleged human tracks in pre-Tertiary rocks from other localities, but such claims are not considered credible by either mainstream scientists or major creationist groups.

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,

1. But there are those real *Human*footprints along side of Dino tracks, in the river bed at Glen Rose, Texas.
2. Footprints, don't get there by accident.
3. Both the Dino's and Humans had to be on that river bed when it was still mud.
4. Case closed. drag out the squirrel~:pee:Evolution/Old Earth Theory

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Eastward-dipping limestones, sandstones, and mudstones, deposited from approximately 113 million years ago along the shorelines of an ancient sea, form the geological setting for the park area. Over the last million years or so, these layered formations have been dissected and sculpted by the Paluxy River which, in many places, has cut down to resistant beds and planed off sizable exposures of rock in the river bottom. (http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/spdest/findadest/parks/dinosaur_valley/)

So man walked the earth 113,000,000 years ago?

[Yurt]

Most of what you've posted here is supremely inaccurate.
First, dinosaurs pre-date homo sapiens by approximately 65 MILLION years. The notion that humans and dinosaurs ever co-habited this planet is preposterous.
Second, the person we know as "Noah," "Gilgamesh," "Xisuthrus," "Yima," etc., probably is based on a real person who rode-out a flood with a few animals at some point in history.

;)

[gabosaurus]

The late great Bill Hicks knew this almost two decades ago. Such a prophet!

-------------------------
Fundamentalist Christianity - fascinating. These people actually believe that the the world is 12,000 years old. Swear to God. Based on what? I asked them.

"Well we looked at all the people in the Bible and we added 'em up all the way back to Adam and Eve, their ages: 12,000 years."

Well how fucking scientific, okay. I didn't know that you'd gone to so much trouble. That's good. You believe the world's 12,000 years old?

"That's right."

Okay, I got one word to ask you, a one word question, ready?

"Uh-huh."

Dinosaurs.

You know the world is 12,000 years old and dinosaurs existed, they existed in that time, you'd think it would have been mentioned in the fucking Bible at some point.

"And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus... with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big fucking lizard, Lord!' But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend.

"And Jesus sent him to Scotland where he lived in a loch for O so many years inviting thousands of American tourists to bring their fat fucking families and their fat dollar bills.

"And oh Scotland did praise the Lord. Thank you Lord, thank you Lord. Thank you Lord."

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But Jesus saw the Dino's pre~flood.
2. Also when Jesus was born in Bethlehem, some 2000 years ago, the Dino's were all dead because of *The Flood*, which happened hundred of years before.
3. There were no Dino's for Jesus to deal with when He came to Mary as her son.
4. Those real footprints in Glen Rose, along side of Dino tracks can't be denied, I have seen them myself.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[82Marine89]

4. Those real footprints in Glen Rose, along side of Dino tracks can't be denied, I have seen them myself.



According to the brochure (http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_br_p4502_0094.pdf) for that state park, there are no human footprints there. Do you have any proof that there is?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Not anymore, I used to have a picture of it, before I had a house fire which consumed it.
2. But I do know just where it is.
3. I can tell you within a few feet just how to go and see it.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[JackDaniels]

Sorry bout that,

1. But I want to bring up this *Classic CWN* argument.
2. Its one of my fav's!
3. I just love arguing this stuff.
4. I say Dino's and Humans walked together on Earth at the same time.
5. And of course I have proof.
6. Which I will post from, time to time.
7. Also Noah is a *Real Person*.
8. And had several ships and the one main one, yeah, there's proof for that too.
9. Anyway, what do you Neoliberals think?
10 Are you for or against *Humans Walking With Dino's*?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

You are either an incredibly uneducated fool, or your posts are a parody of an uneducated Conservative...either way :lame2:

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,

1. Not anymore, I used to have a picture of it, before I had a house fire which consumed it.
2. But I do know just where it is.
3. I can tell you within a few feet just how to go and see it.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

You make a statement without the ability to back it up? I call bullshit on this one.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,




You are either an incredibly uneducated fool, or your posts are a parody of an uneducated Conservative...either way :lame2:

1. Just like you got no candidate, to vote for President, your opinion means nothing in this thread.
2. Nice try.:laugh2:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,



You make a statement without the ability to back it up? I call bullshit on this one.

1. Call it what you want, I know what I saw.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,


You make a statement without the ability to back it up? I call bullshit on this one.


1. Call it what you want, I know what I saw.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Bullshit.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But I was checking out google Earth.
2. And there is a picture on it that has the exact area where the *Footprint* is.
3. If you want to go check it out, I will explain where it is.
4. There is a pic thats diagonal where you can see a small tree trunk in the lower right hand corner of the pic.
5. Under the picture is a word,(Picture), if you go straight up from there in the picture, thats where the *Footprint* is.
6. In that photo, there is a lot of water, I don't think water will be in it right now.
7. Go look, if you like.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[82Marine89]

If you can not provide proof, I will stand by my call. I don't want, "I know it's there but.." or "I had a picture but my dog ate it". I am asking for definitive proof.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But you would have to admit, if there were human footprints in the same river bed in the very same sedimate, that that would over turn all the *Scientists* mumbo jumbo about how Man and Dino's were separated by 65 million years.
2. It should be Earth shattering, you would think?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Gaffer]

Sorry bout that,

1. But you would have to admit, if there were human footprints in the same river bed in the very same sedimate, that that would over turn all the *Scientists* mumbo jumbo about how Man and Dino's were separated by 65 million years.
2. It should be Earth shattering, you would think?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

So if there were a human foot print next to a dinosaur foot print what's to say they aren't both 65 million years old?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Where are all the bones?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. All or at least a very large number of Dino and Human bones were deposited on the deepest of Ocean floors.
2. During the flood, everything was wiped off the lands, and were deposited into the Oceans.
3 And at the same time, were cover up by silt, mud etc.
4. Then these same Ocean floors were thrust up into the highest mountains, and thats why fossil evidence is up in the Himalayan Mountains, and all high mountains now.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Missileman]

Sorry bout that,

1. Where are all the bones?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Are there some missing?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Yes, billions of bones.
2. Where are they?
3. If Dino's were here form millions of years, millions of years ago, we wouldn't be able to sling a dead cat without uncovering some.
4. And it isn't Dino dung/leftovers, that we pump up out of the ground for oil.
5. Barely find any evidence that Dino's were even on the planet.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Missileman]

Sorry bout that,

1. Yes, billions of bones.
2. Where are they?
3. If Dino's were here form millions of years, millions of years ago, we wouldn't be able to sling a dead cat without uncovering some.
4. And it isn't Dino dung/leftovers, that we pump up out of the ground for oil.
5. Barely find any evidence that Dino's were even on the planet.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Why would you suppose that most animals died in a manner (drowning is one) that would facilitate the creation of a fossil? Millions, perhaps billions of deer have lived and died right here in the U.S over the last 200 years...how many deer skeletons are piled up in your yard?

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,

1. But you would have to admit, if there were human footprints in the same river bed in the very same sedimate, that that would over turn all the *Scientists* mumbo jumbo about how Man and Dino's were separated by 65 million years.
2. It should be Earth shattering, you would think?

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I don't have to admit anything. You need to put up or shut up.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. In reality, there never was that many Dino's.
2. That whole Dino Days thing didn't last long at all, maybe 300 years.
3. Then Gawd told Noah to build *The Ark*.
4. The rest is history.
5. This planet was under water, when *The Flood* happened.
6. The main reason why is that there wasn't any high mountains at the time, just high hills.
7. It wasn't a big deal to flood the planet then, then the Mountains forced their way up along with the land masses.
8. While the other flat land sunk down, so to contain the water.
9. Look all over the planet, Mountains are all over its coastal areas.
10. The mountains brought up the plains as well.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[82Marine89]

You eat paint chips as a kid?

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Hahahaha,.......:lol:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[JackDaniels]

You eat paint chips as a kid?

LOL, that guy is seriously retarded. Like badly.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But whats really retarded is people in the Libertarian Party thinking they are a viable voting block.
2. They got no viable candidate, but insist they have a voice,...Hehehehehe,........
3. Now thats retarded as hell,..Hehehehehehehe,.....

:dance:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[JackDaniels]

Sorry bout that,

1. But whats really retarded is people in the Libertarian Party thinking they are a viable voting block.
2. They got no viable candidate, but insist they have a voice,...Hehehehehe,........
3. Now thats retarded as hell,..Hehehehehehehe,.....

:dance:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I like how you avoid of the issue of your own lack of intelligence...

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. It just warms me heart when fellow posters want to make my threads all about, *The Great CWN*.
2. But most times I don't bother.
3. This isn't an exception.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But this is a good thread, thought I'd bring it back up.:clap:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[glockmail]

as a matter of fact it is .
a recent study told us that in the next 10 years the largest practiced faith (in europe , the vatican is in italy ) will be muslim Don't expect us to rescue y'all this time.

[Hagbard Celine]

Don't expect us to rescue y'all this time.

That doesn't mean Muslims will be the largest group in Europe. It means Europeans for the most part don't practice a faith. If I were in Europe though, I'd be worried that a bunch of ignorant religious nuts were moving in next to me.

[glockmail]

That doesn't mean Muslims will be the largest group in Europe. It means Europeans for the most part don't practice a faith. If I were in Europe though, I'd be worried that a bunch of ignorant religious nuts were moving in next to me. You ought be worried, as Islam has been trying to take over Europe since its inception.

I'll go on record here and now and say screw Europe. If they let Islam take them over, don't expect us Real Men across the pond to save your sorry asses a third time. Three stikes and your out!

[Hagbard Celine]

You ought be worried, as Islam has been trying to take over Europe since its inception.

I'll go on record here and now and say screw Europe. If they let Islam take them over, don't expect us Real Men across the pond to save your sorry asses a third time. Three stikes and your out!

Ah know mayne! Ever since they opened Europe them Islambics have been tryin' to get in! Hyuck!

[Hagbard Celine]

Sorry bout that,

1. In reality, there never was that many Dino's.
2. That whole Dino Days thing didn't last long at all, maybe 300 years.
3. Then Gawd told Noah to build *The Ark*.
4. The rest is history.
5. This planet was under water, when *The Flood* happened.
6. The main reason why is that there wasn't any high mountains at the time, just high hills.
7. It wasn't a big deal to flood the planet then, then the Mountains forced their way up along with the land masses.
8. While the other flat land sunk down, so to contain the water.
9. Look all over the planet, Mountains are all over its coastal areas.
10. The mountains brought up the plains as well.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

This is the most moronic thing I've ever seen.:lol:
http://www.huge-entity.com/blogger3/scanners-exploding-head-1.jpghttp://www.huge-entity.com/blogger3/scanners-exploding-head-2.jpg
http://www.huge-entity.com/blogger3/scanners-exploding-head-3.jpghttp://www.huge-entity.com/blogger3/scanners-exploding-head-4.jpg

[April15]

as a matter of fact it is .
a recent study told us that in the next 10 years the largest practiced faith (in europe , the vatican is in italy ) will be muslimNow that is scary! I can see the free world going back to feudal days. Not good.

[hjmick]

This is the most moronic thing I've ever seen.:lol:

Just wait, I'm sure he'll post again...somewhere...

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But where are all the bones?
2. Hundreds of millions of years of them being here, if it were true, we couldn't sling a dead cat with it landing on a pile of Dinosaur bones.
3. At times they are found right near the surface.
4. At times they are found on the mountain tops.
5. Between layers of granite.
6. Fact is the oil we pump from the ground is a by~product of the Earths core.
7. More or less flux.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas