And you had what in mind? Don't rebut without offering something.Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
Well, that's scientific.
And you had what in mind? Don't rebut without offering something.Well, that's scientific.
"My Soul, do not seek eternal life, but to exhaust the realm of possibility." -Pindar
I'm sorry, but that is not just creativity. I figured that you would just dismiss the evidence. It seems that any evidence that I could ever give would be dismissed as well. There are pictures (good pictures) of a triceratops and a small T-Rex, which could only have been drawn that accurately if one would have actually SEEN it. This is not just one case of chance. But it seems that evolutionists like the extremely high odds...or rather impossible odds. Don't lecture me on credibility. Evolutionists try to construct a complete skeletal modal based on sketchy parts. Let me see some of YOUR evidence.
Les Miserables,
Volume 1, Fifth Book, Chapter 3
Remember this, my friends: there are no such things as bad plants or bad men. There are only bad cultivators.
First one has to question the evidence - in this case what 'evidence' is there that they were drawn in the time of the dinosaurs, and not by a couple of pranksters last month or year (in recent history). Absolutely not one jot of evidence! I can count the evidence on the fingers of one foot - none, zero, zip and zilch! If they are badly drawn creatures (say mammals) that happened to look a little like dinosaurs, well I suggest everyone read Salvador Dali's Hidden Faces to avoid further confusion.
Jesus would be frowning from his burnt toast...
Rebut? Rebut what? This is what you said:
How am I supposed to rebut that? What is there to rebut? Here's my rebuttal. When a person dies, their spirit drifts through the air into the nearest animal, preferably a cat, and then that animal, in secret, portals itself into an ethereal alternate universe where the spirit is dropped off in a waiting room where it awaits an embryo to inhabit. That's my alternative. It seems just as likely.
What "good pictures"? I saw drawings and sculptures that looked on par with what kindergarteners do, just like all caveman drawings. That is absolutely NO proof that they saw a dinosaur. More likely they saw a lizard, maybe even a big one like a Komodo Dragon and either A. got *creative* or, (and just as likely) B. they were poor artists. You explain to me how that is credible proof.
You accuse me of dismissing your evidence off-hand without even considering it--a baseless assumption, especially since I watched and considered that whole video of yours. I can easily link troves and troves of evidence to suggest that dinosaurs indeed existed millions of years ago, and not with humans, but you'd dismiss it just as you accuse me of doing. Hell, you already dismissed it above before it was even posted!
Here's something I don't get. What does it matter? Are you a Bible literalist? Does the possibility of evolution and dinosaurs that lived millions of years ago somehow invalidate your faith? Isn't that what creationism was invented for, to give comfort to the religious as they are confronted with reality?
Last edited by Mutatis-Mutandis; 12-03-2011 at 01:12 AM.
Thanks, that's what I was looking for. Maybe you should read the rest of my posts in their entirety before responding. These loaded "religious" threads become encumbered with more banality than they can support simply because they attract people's emotions more than anything else.
"My Soul, do not seek eternal life, but to exhaust the realm of possibility." -Pindar
This looks like a good picture to me... better than Picasso's best.
You're the one that ridiculed me for thinking that man coexisted with dinosaurs. How did the Inca's know what a triceratops looked like? What does it matter? It matters that scientists and the education system has been lying to us, and that evidence like this has not been shown to people so that they can decide if the Inca's lived along with the triceratops, or not. This is NOT a Komodo dragon. You cannot offer any evidence that can disprove something that is obviously been proven. But be my guest....show us what you've got...
Les Miserables,
Volume 1, Fifth Book, Chapter 3
Remember this, my friends: there are no such things as bad plants or bad men. There are only bad cultivators.
It wasn't intended to be. Read the posts at which it was directed. I'm not going to baby-sit your lack of sarcasm detection on a literary forum. Read the context. I'm sorry, this response originally confused me because I assumed you understood that I was making an argument for materialism. I didn't know where you were coming from.Well, that's scientific.
Those particular burial stones are a hoax. Deinonychus skeletons are not, however. Dinosaurs are birds now.
This looks like a good picture to me... better than Picasso's best.
You're the one that ridiculed me for thinking that man coexisted with dinosaurs. How did the Inca's know what a triceratops looked like? What does it matter? It matters that scientists and the education system has been lying to us, and that evidence like this has not been shown to people so that they can decide if the Inca's lived along with the triceratops, or not. This is NOT a Komodo dragon. You cannot offer any evidence that can disprove something that is obviously been proven. But be my guest....show us what you've got...
Not that it matters in the slightest. If there was a god, I doubt it would disregard its own methods of creation.
I thought the purpose of this thread was whether or not a supreme being exists, I don't think creation by magic supports any argument.
"My Soul, do not seek eternal life, but to exhaust the realm of possibility." -Pindar
That sure does closely resemble a triceratops. I understand why you would use it to confirm your beliefs. But really, do you think this resemblence, which could be attibuted to some combination of imagination and chance, should be sufficient cause to outright do away with all the science which indicates, if not entirely proves, that dinosaurs existed tens of millions of years before humans ever appeared on this earth? Scientists are after the truth. They come from many different backgrounds, atheist and religious. Here or there a scientist may have a hidden agenda, but, as a whole, science is an "objective" pursuit of the truth. Science itself is not inherently anti-Biblical, anti-religous. Its the facts which are.
This looks like a good picture to me... better than Picasso's best.
You're the one that ridiculed me for thinking that man coexisted with dinosaurs. How did the Inca's know what a triceratops looked like? What does it matter? It matters that scientists and the education system has been lying to us, and that evidence like this has not been shown to people so that they can decide if the Inca's lived along with the triceratops, or not. This is NOT a Komodo dragon. You cannot offer any evidence that can disprove something that is obviously been proven. But be my guest....show us what you've got...
Edit: After doing a little digging it seems that those stones are a hoax. They cannot be carbon-dated. The guy who found them has confessed to decorating them himself. Others show pictures of ancient astronauts. Not legitimate.
Last edited by Darcy88; 12-03-2011 at 02:01 AM.
Even if the stones were not a hoax, it requires quite a leap of the imagination to conclude they represent real animals. First of all, they would be a rather bad depiction of a triceratops since the horns are in the wrong place, and they didn't have back spines. Secondly, if we say this represented something Incans actually lived alongside, you'd have to agree that Greeks really did live alongside gorgons, hydras, and sphinxes. Moreover, given the tremendous amount of evidence about the age of dinosaurs, if we assumed these depicted things the Incans had seen, it would be more reasonable (but still ridiculous) to say they came across fossils and imagined them as alive. To say they actually lived alongside triceratops requires massive delusions about the amount of evidence out there.
But, of course, they have been admitted by the artist who created them that they are a hoax. Their veracity has been promoted by a man who has made quite a lot of money off of operating a tourist site based around them.
"If the national mental illness of the United States is megalomania, that of Canada is paranoid schizophrenia."
- Margaret Atwood
That's interesting - I'd want to check that date first though (and it may still be a forgery).
But given the benefit of the doubt, most of Inca culture was wiped out when Cortez arrived around 1500, and why they couldn't have had a dragon belief when China and Europe both had one - all stable and ancient civilisations each - well, they may well have...
1500 to 500 hundred years ago (supposedly) is well within the timeframe that humans have been mining and finding fossil skeletons though. If that's a triceratops and not an extinct relative of an armadillo (Dodoes became suddenly extinct too - though because they and their eggs were tasty, perhaps these met a similar fate) I'd be surprised.
Third possibility is still that the artist simply imagined a beast that happened to resemble very much a particular dinosaur. And also the oral tradition for established tribes with limited written language is very powerful. I hope their ancestors were around at the time of the big lizards; that would truly be something incredible.
Still a bit Chariots of the Gods to me however
Last edited by MystyrMystyry; 12-03-2011 at 02:11 AM.
Apparently biblical literalists are also forced to believe that Noah brought dinosaurs onto his ark.
When I said, "Well, that's scientific." I was just kidding around. Chill out. As to the purpose of this thread, deryk, read the idiotic OP. The purpose of this thread was a dumb joke. I can't believe it made it to a second page, much less spawned the discussion it did.
As for the triceratops picture from Bien, others have done the work for me by pointing out that the picture is a forgery. Try again.
Last edited by Mutatis-Mutandis; 12-03-2011 at 02:28 AM.
The "artist" who admitted to creating the pottery was a paid leftist puppet, and carbon dating is invaild.
(this Biblical literalism stuff is easy)
Also, he managed to round up two of every individual non-flying insect on every continent of earth. I can't decide which sounds most unlikely.
Last edited by JuniperWoolf; 12-03-2011 at 08:27 AM.
__________________
"Personal note: When I was a little kid my mother told me not to stare into the sun. So once when I was six, I did. At first the brightness was overwhelming, but I had seen that before. I kept looking, forcing myself not to blink, and then the brightness began to dissolve. My pupils shrunk to pinholes and everything came into focus and for a moment I understood. The doctors didn't know if my eyes would ever heal."
-Pi
Triceratops skeleton 1898 ^ Still a fantastic looking head.
That 'Inca artist' really was quite creative.
Oh, was there someone on here who thought the earth is flat?I guess the late member Musicology was before your time.
Posting Permissions
